Environment and migration
SOCIETY: environment and migration
Kees Terlouw, Leo Paul
Regional and Cultural Geography programme of the Urban and Regional research centre Utrecht,
Department of Human Geography & Planning, Utrecht University, Netherlands
(Terlouw@geo.uu.nl)
Environment and migration
Migration (V47, V53, V54, V266, V272, V273, V274, V275)
V47, Attitude to people from different race as a neighbour.
The southeast-northwest gradient suggests a relation with colonialism. Inhabitants of states which
were colonising powers and experienced migration from the former colonies after independence
gradually became less opposed to neighbours of a different race. The contact results more in
acceptance, while the fear of the unknown is generally regarded as an important explanation for
racism. Racism is the least prevalent in the population with frequent contacts with people from other
races. When people from other races are completely unknown, there is also little racism. It is
precisely in the intermediate category that racism is most widespread. In the former East bloc
countries people were not used to encounter people of a different race. Although the percentage of
non-western people is still much lower compared to Western Europe, their population tend to be
more negative about neighbours of a different race. Portugal is an obvious exception to this general
trend, which can perhaps be explained by the special characteristics of Portuguese colonialism.
V53, Attitudes towards Muslims
The pattern of anti-Islamic feelings can also be explained by the above discussed contact hypothesis.
But the spatial pattern is more complicated while the contact with Muslims is based on four different
sources. First of all the some former colonial states, like UK and France, have a large Muslim
population based on their old colonial relations with Muslim countries (Pakistan and Algeria).
Secondly, other states have more recent experiences with the arrival of Muslims labour migrants and
the migration based on family ties. This is especially the case in Germany, the Netherlands and
Scandinavia. Thirdly, there are states which have strong relations with neighbouring Muslim
countries. This for instance the case for Portugal and Spain which are locates opposite to the Muslim
countries of Northern Africa. Similarly Greece and Bulgaria are neighbours of Turkey. The relatively
strong anti-Islamic sentiments in Italy are probably linked to the very anti-Islamic rhetoric of the
Legia Nord which is an important political party in Northern Italy. This could also become visible
when the data would be plotted at the regional level, which probably reveal more anti-Islamic
sentiments in Northern Italy. However, inhabitants of Turkey are other neighbours Georgia and
Armenia have negative opinions about Muslims as neighbours. This is probably related to their
negative historic relationship with Turkey. This is certainly the case for Armenia based on the
Armenian genocide of 1915. The population of Bosnia-Hercegovina, which has a large Muslim
population, is quite positive towards having Muslim neighbour. It would be interesting to see the
differences within the country, especially in the Republika Srpska.
V54, Attitudes towards foreign workers
This distribution of anti-migrant workers feelings can also partly be explained by the above discussed
contact hypothesis. The countries where the population has the most positive attitude towards
foreign workers are mostly those countries which have a long history accommodating foreign
workers. This contact hypothesis can also explain the strong anti-migrant workers opinions which are
prevalent in Turkey. This variable differentiates in general however not so strong between the
different European countries. The strong anti-migrant worker opinion of Russia stands out. This can
be explained by the special relation between Russia and its migrant workers from the Caucasus.
Popular, academic, and policy groups inside and outside Russia all acknowledge that ethnic groups are a basic structural
unit of society and a self-evident social actor. The idea that ethnicity is a socially relevant characteristic of individuals and
groups still persists and manifests itself in various arenas. This basic concept coincides with and reinforces the belief that the
government should pursue some sort of diversity policy. The combination of all these factors justifies political and social
manipulations of ethnicity and selective approaches to people depending on their group affiliation. Overall, Russian society
remains highly fragmented and fragile, lacking a sense or tradition of civil solidarity. Instead, the idea of Russia’s multiethnic society and the widespread belief in government social engineering together presuppose that order of some sort will
be maintained in inter-ethnic relations, and this calls for manipulations of ethnicity and a taxonomy of ethnic groups. There
is still little room in Russia for issues of individual equality free of ethnic considerations. (Osipov 2010, p. 58)
Environment and migration
In Estonia public opinion is effected by large Russian-speaking minority and troublesome relation
with Russia.
V266, 1 The degree to which the population welcomes foreign workers
The degree to which the population welcomes foreign workers is linked to experience of ethnically
related foreign worker from neighbouring countries. Romanians welcome Moldovans (which are
ethnic Romanian) coming to Romania. Armenians welcome those foreign Armenians which are
coming from Armenian exclaves in Azerbaijan.
V272, The degree to which rising numbers of immigrants are seen as a threat to society
Again Russia stands out. Russia is on top of the hierarchy of anti-foreign sentiments. The Russian
situation was already discussed above by V54.
V273, Immigrants should adopt customs of the country
The adaptation of foreigners to customs of the country is less expected in those countries which
approximately belong to the European ‘tidal lands’ as identified by Gottman (1947; 1969). These tidal
lands are the result of the ebbing and flowing of Eastern and Western influence and domination over
the centuries on this intermediate area in between the more stable territorial states in the West and
Russia in the East. In the 'tidal lands' the borders are very changeable. These constant territorial
changes and inclusion and later exclusion of ethnic sub-groups create a kind of structural political
and cultural variability and instability. This absence of a continuous political history hinders the
development of established customs in these countries. The lack of established customs in a country
can partly why the inhabitants of these countries do not expects immigrants to adopt the custums of
the country.
V274, feel like a stranger in country due to large number of migrants
This pattern reflects mostly the number of migrants in a country. In most of the former East bloc
countries people are confronted with low number of immigrants. (Russia is again a special case as
discussed above)
V275 Too many immigrants
This patterns is very similar to that of V274. Again Russia stands out.
CONCLUSION MIGRATION
Different types of 'others' generate different responses among the inhabitants of different countries
based on different national histories. There is hardly a single underlying hierarchy, but more a mosaic
based on the specific historical development of a country. The dominant 'other' to which nations
define themselves in opposition is based on different experiences rooted in both historical
differences and different relations between neighbours.
Environment (V295 – V301)
These maps are based on the questions asked on the attitudes on the relation between mankind and
nature. A factor analysis revealed one dimension dominated by V300 and V299 and another
unrelated dimension dominated by V297 and V301. V300 measures the belief that human were
meant to rule over nature and V299 measures the belief that nature is strong enough to cope with
the impact of modern industrialised nations. Answers to these question appear to be related to the
industrialisation history of the different nations. People living in nations with a long industrial
tradition believe less in the strength of nature to cope with industrialisation and on the rightfulness
for humans to control nature. The maps reflect to some extent the core periphery differentiation in
Europe based on industrial production around the second world war.
Environment and migration
The other dimension of the factor analysis is unrelated to the first dimension and is
dominated by V301 and V297. V301 is based on the response to the statement that 'if things
continue on their present course we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe'. V297 is
based on the response to the statement 'when human intervene with nature it often produce
disastrous consequences'. The countries where the population disagrees the most with these
statements are countries in Eastern and Central Europe. This pattern could be related to the
differences in the conceptualisation of nature and ecology. The 'nature' in those countries are more
woodlands use for wood production. 'Nature' is then still used by the population as an economic
resource. In contrast in most of the more countries where the population has a more pessimistic
attitude on the relation between man and nature, there are more sparsely inhabited and
mountainous areas with a more pristine nature where the influence of mankind is much more
limited. (See for instance:
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_of_europe.shtml#density_population) Countries with large
sparkly populated areas with mountains are for instance France, Russia, Turkey and Greece. In
contrast the flat and densely populated Netherlands whose landscapes are agricultural landscapes,
which is generally regarded as having been 'created by the Dutch' don’t see an ecological catastrophe
as a real danger. Perhaps this relation becomes clearer when one would look at the regional
differentiation of these answers.
Other maps are more difficult to interpret. V295 shows for instance the willingness to give
money for nature is difficult to interpret because it relates to first of all the willingness to voluntary
give money, secondly to the importance people attach to nature, and thirdly to the belief in the
effectiveness of environmental policies.
REFERENCES
Osipov, Alexander (2010), Ethnicity, Discrimination, and Extremism in Russia. Problems of PostCommunism, 57, pp. 50-60.
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the
views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made
of the information contained therein.