Dissemination of the results of the project
16 June 2010
This project is supported by the European Commission DG Justice,
Freedom and Security, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship
Programme (2007-2013)




Project Co-ordinator
◦ OBERAXE, the Spanish Monitoring Centre on Racism and
Xenophobia.
Participating countries
◦ Spain
◦ Portugal
◦ Finland
◦ The Netherlands
◦ Sweden
◦ Ireland
Statutory bodies, universities, NGOs

harmony and respect recognition of difference free from racism and xenophobia

See UNESCO Declaration of Principles on Tolerance

Focus
Groups
• Analyse and identify prejudices, stereotypes, fears
• How are racist attitudes generated and legitimised?
Best
Practice
• Compile best practice
• Identify strategies to fight racism and xenophobia
Expert
Forum
• Identify common principles and actions to address racism and xenophobia - Decalogue
• Audience – various social agents / experts
Network
• Develop transnational monitoring mechanism


Developed by Complutense University of
Madrid and Rotterdam University



Focus groups
Best practice reports
National expert forums

Focus groups

Finland, Sweden, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain

3 focus groups per country
FG1
• Upper middle social status
FG2
• Young middlemiddle social status - 18-25 yrs
FG3
• Lower middle social status

Drawback – funding constraints dictated the number of focus groups

Focus groups

Moderation style - conversational

3 phrases to stimulate discussion
◦ Skin colour is of great importance for living together
◦ Both immigrants and ethnic minorities get more (from the country they live in) than they give
◦ Both immigrants and ethnic minorities should maintain their identity and culture of origin

Key influences
Sociodemographic profiles social desirability bias positions on immigrants and ethnic minorities
Experience of living together
Feelings of competition jobs and public benefits

Pros and cons of immigration
Reflective arguments to neutralise cultural criticism
Class racism
General tolerance
Social context of economic crisis
Good and bad experiences impact attitudes
Social context of economic crisis
Feelings of competition and discrimination
Experiences of difficulties living together

Skin colour
• Matters in society (Sweden, Finland, Netherlands)
• More about socio-economic status (Portugal, Spain)
• Stereotyping – associate skin colour with cultural and religious values. Media plays a role in this context.
Get more than they give
• Give: economic, cultural and demographic contributions acknowledged
• Get: public subsidies, unemployment benefit, housing, jobs
Should keep identity and culture
• Greater cultural tolerance shown by young people and adults with higher education especially in
Sweden and Finland.

• Negative
Discourses
• Positive
Discourses e.g. invasion, damage labour, cultural imposition, anti-social behaviour, reverse discrimination e.g. immigration necessary, human rights, discrimination, cultural wealth contribution
• Negative
Arguments e.g. control immigration, abusive & unskilled, immigration, lazy e.g. Necessary immigration, equal rights, citizens, over-qualified, stereotyped
• Positive arguments

Country comparisons




Class racism more prevalent in Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands
More admissions of racism in Spain and
Portugal based on experiences and perceptions
Social desirability bias more prevalent across all focus groups in Sweden – less visible racism
Discourse of resentment present across all focus groups in Spain – possibly linked to collective memory pre-welfare state

Choosing best practice
1.
Demonstrable effects / tangible impacts
2.
Creative / innovative
3.
Sustainable
4.
Potential for replication

Must meet at least criteria 1 and 4 above

Based on UNESCO’s International Migration Best Practice Project

Choosing best practice – other criteria
Geographical Entity big city town rural public
Private
NGO other
Area education social service housing employment sport etc
Timescale completed by 2008
Project Type improving intercultural tolerance and dialogue


Area – education, sport, legal, employment, public administration etc.

Type – awareness raising, tackling racism, cultural mediation, youth, arts, living together, interculturalism and religion etc.

Website – http://livingtogether.oberaxe.es/livingtogether/


Purpose of expert forums - to provide a basis for the preparation of the Decalogue – i.e.
Identify common principles and actions to address racism and xenophobia


National expert forums responded to findings from focus groups
In the absence of focus groups Ireland’s national expert forum addressed the theme ‘tackling racism and the impact of racist stereotypes’.

National expert forums to include:








1 - capital city
2 - university / research centre
2 - NGOs
1 - national / regional public administration
1 - business sector
1 - media
1 - trade union
1 - opposition political party

Finland
• More recent change in negative public debate noted
Sweden
• Discourse of ‘individual tolerance’ explained by political correctness in
Swedish society
• Expert forum reflected on examples of racism and discrimination in
Sweden in practice
Ireland
• Focus on monitoring, media and best practice as tools to address racism
Spain
• Reflection on positive and negative arguments
• Context provided by economic crisis noted
Portugal
• Chinese identified as best integrated and
Roma the most discriminated

1. Identify principles on which best practices should be based
3. Document and monitor racism and xenophobia
5. Foster the mass media role in promoting respect for cultures and in recognising diversity
2. Name and recognise all forms of racism and xenophobia as problems
4. Identify effective legal remedies, policy actions, educational programmes and best practice

6. Recognise immigrants’ economic, social and cultural contribution
8. Promote principles of respect and dialogue, perceiving cultural diversity as enriching
10. Perceive migration as a universal phenomenon and the reflective argument
7. Design public services taking into consideration the needs of society
9. Move from stereotypes to
‘Living
Together’







Warning system to monitor racism and xenophobia
Information will be communicated and managed by OBERAXE (Spain) via website
Aim – highlight racism and share information
Member organisations can provide information
– must identify themsevles
OBERAXE will verify information
Members can be public, private, NGO, media organisations who join the network

Website – http://livingtogether.oberaxe.es/livingtoget her/


In general?

In relation to the Decalogue?

In relation to the network to monitor racism and xenophobia?