Glossary

We need to pay attention to the demographics of migration in order to be able to understand migration statistics which are the foundation of official rhetoric on migration. When using national or international statistics on migration, it is important to refer to and include the official definition of the term migration in any analysis of the data. In demographic terms, the concept of migration has two dimensions: a temporal and a spatial one. Migration is usually defined as the movement of individuals, households, or other groups of people from one geographic area to another (spatial dimension) that results in a change of residence either immediately or over a period of time (temporal dimension). According to the first revision of the UN’s Recommendations on Statistics of International Migration (1998) “an international migrant is defined as any person who changes his or her place of usual residence. A person’s country of usual residence is that in which a person lives, that is to say, a country in which a person has a place to live where he or she spends the daily period of rest […]. Note that temporary travel abroad for the purposes of recreation, business, medical treatment, etc., does not entail a change in the country of usual residence.” (9, §32) The ‘change of residence’ criterion applies to both internal and international migration. In national censuses the place of usual residence is used to mean the geographical place where the enumerated person usually resides.

⇢ see also Data, Data mining, Migration

References and further reading:

United Nations. 1998. Recommendations on Statistics of International Migration – Revision 1. New York, NY: Department of Economic and Social Affairs – Statistics Division.

Category: A, D

Work Package: 2, 4, 5, 8

[MM]

 

Diaspora is a term whose initial usage dates back to the Greek translation of the Bible. In its classical usage diaspora refers to the dispersion of Jews throughout the world in the aftermath of slavery in ancient Egypt and the destruction of Solomon’s temple in the Mesopotamian Empire. This classical definition of diaspora has been used to describe communities that have moved and settled in other ‘lands’ in the aftermath of preceding traumatic events. The Armenian diaspora, the Irish diaspora and the ‘old’ African diaspora are examples of classical diasporas. Since the 1990s, the term diaspora has undergone a paradigmatic shift, that is, its meaning has transcended its classical usage. Constructivist approaches situate diaspora within discourses of multiculturalism, transnationalism and cosmopolitanism. Rather than attempt to confine diaspora to its classical definition, proponents of constructivism suggest a new operationalization of the term in light of increasingly mixed global flows of migration (see Cohen and Fischer 2020). Hence diaspora can be considered a theoretical concept that shares a semantic domain with related terms such as migrant, expatriate, refugee (see Brubaker 2005). In the age of cyberspace, diaspora can be re-created via memory through shared cultural artefacts and a shared imagination (see Cohen 1997, Georgiou 2010).

⇢ see also Expatriate, Migrant, Refugee

References and further reading:

Brubaker, Rogers. 2005. “The ‘Diaspora’ Diaspora.” In Ethnic and Racial Studies 28.1: 1–19.

Cohen, Robin. 1997. Global Diasporas: An Introduction. London: UCL Press.

Cohen, Robin, and Carolin Fischer. 2020. “Diaspora Studies: An Introduction.” In Routledge Handbook of Diaspora Studies. 1–19. London and New York, NY: Routledge.

Georgiou, Myria. 2010. “Identity, Space and the Media: Thinking through Diaspora.” In Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationales. 26.1: 17–35.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 5

[MMu]

 

Simply put, discourse is language in context. Linguists taking their cue from Ferdinand de Saussure’s seminal work have privileged the analysis of simplified or idealized linguistic expressions that are uncoupled from a specific communicative context. Discourse – that is, concrete instances of language use – was deemed too complex to be approached from the “structuralist” perspective pioneered by de Saussure. Discourse analysis refers to a wide range of methods in the humanities and social sciences that oppose this structuralist paradigm and aim to integrate context as a key focus for the study of language. Context should be understood broadly: in the analysis of oral discourse, it refers to the communicative situation in which language is embedded (who is speaking, to whom, and within what kind of practice); more generally, context involves the social practices and institutions, as well as the culturally transmitted values and views, that are referenced by the speaker or writer. Discourse analysis thus denotes the study of how meaning emerges as language users position themselves within (but also, potentially, distance themselves from) cultural assumptions and expectations that are informed by the communicative context. Identity, both personal and collective, is a typical focus of discourse analysis, and so is the political relevance of language use. Narrative analysis as the OPPORTUNITIES project practices it can be understood as a particular instance of discourse analysis applied to narrative texts or utterances.

⇢ see also Frames of migration, Narrative, Narrative analysis, Narrative technique

References and further reading:

De Saussure, Ferdinand. 2010. Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.

Georgakopoulou, Alexandra, and Goutsos, Dionysis. 2004. Discourse Analysis: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Tannen, Deborah; Hamilton, Heidi E. and Schiffrin, Debora. 2018. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis: Second Edition. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7

[MC]

 

The term discrimination refers to any distinction, exclusion, or preference on the basis of any personal, legal, or other characteristics. According to Article 1.1.(a) of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958, No. 111 by the International Labour Organization, the term discrimination includes “any distinction, exclusion or preference made on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation.” One may add migration and residency status to the list of grounds for discrimination.

⇢ see also: Epistemic injustice, Gender, Inequality, Migration, Politics of mobility, Race

References and further reading:

International Labour Office. 1958. Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958, No. 111. URL: https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_Ilo_Code:C111

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8

[MM]

 

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term diversity refers to “[t]he condition or quality of being diverse, different, or varied.” This is frequently associated with multicultural or multiethnic societies (see, e.g., Parekh 2006, Vertovec 2015). However, the term is not restricted to cultural or ethnic diversity, but may also involve differences related to age, class, gender, sexual identity and orientation, ideology, and other factors that influence a person’s identity. Diversity approaches in cultural studies and the social sciences construct diversity as chances or opportunities rather than risks or dangers (Gregull 2018). Adopting this point of view, the OPPORTUNITIES project envisions Europe as a union of diverse multicultural societies.

⇢ see also: Equality, Gender, Narrative identity, Othering, Diversity

References and further reading:

Gregull, Elisabeth. 2018. Dossier Migration: Migration und Diversity. Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. URL: https://www.bpb.de/gesellschaft/migration/dossier-migration/223777/diversity. 

Parekh, Bhikhu. 2006. Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Vertovec, Steven. 2015. Diversities Old and New: Migration and Socio-Spatial Patterns in New York, Singapore and Johannesburg. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8

[CG]

 

The term empathy refers to “a person’s ability to mentally represent another person’s situation as well as to evaluate the relevance and desirability of that situation and its potential outcomes” (Schneider 2008, 136). A capacity for empathy can be acquired and fostered through perspective taking. Research at the nexus of narrative theory and psychology has often highlighted the cognitive value of narrative, arguing that the engagement with stories can improve perspective-taking skills (see Nünning 2014). Stories can evoke empathy for a specific purpose. Suzanne Keen (2007, 142) distinguishes three types of strategic empathy – bounded, ambassadorial, and broadcast strategic empathy – each of which is directed at a different audience. Bounded strategic empathy addresses an in-group; “stemming from experiences of mutuality,” it invites the audience “to feeling with familiar others” (Keen 2007, 142). Ambassadorial strategic empathy includes “chosen others,” seeking to “[cultivate] their empathy for the in-group, often to a specific end” (Keen 2007, 142). Broadcast strategic empathy encourages everyone “to feel with members of a group,” as it stresses “common vulnerabilities and hopes” (Keen 2007, 142). The migrant stories shared during the Cross Talk events of the OPPORTUNITIES project invite citizens and other stakeholders to understand the perspective of migrants and refugees, creating a more inclusive discourse on migration and integration. In this context, ambassadorial strategic empathy is particularly relevant.

⇢ see also: Migrant narrative, Narrative, Perspective taking, Vicarious storytelling

References and further reading:

Keen, Suzanne. 2007. Empathy and the Novel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nünning, Vera. 2014. Reading Fictions, Changing Minds: The Cognitive Value of Fiction. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.

Schneider, Ralf. 2008. “Emotion and Narrative.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. 136–137. Routledge: London and New York.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

[CG]

 

In an epistemic situation – which is the particular state a person is in, given her beliefs, perceptions, imaginations, and emotions – epistemic injustice can occur. First introduced by Miranda Fricker (2007), epistemic injustice addresses the idea “[...] that we can be unfairly discriminated against in our capacity as a knower based on prejudices about the speaker, such as gender, social background, ethnicity, race, sexuality, tone of voice, accent, and so on” (Byskov 2020, 116). Epistemic injustice is thus the systematic underestimation of a person’s contribution to knowledge and insight. In the context of epistemic injustice, the phenomenon of epistemic reduction reduces a person to a particular aspect, e.g. to the role of patient or to the status of a victim.

⇢ see also: Cross Talk, Empowerment, Integration

References and further reading:

Byskov, Morten Fibieger. 2020. “What Makes Epistemic Injustice an ‘Injustice’?” In Journal of Social Philosophy. 52.1: 114–131.

Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 6, 7

[BBK / CS / FK]

 

In the English language, equality is defined as “the condition of being equal in quantity, amount, etc.” (see the definition in the Oxford English Dictionary). In social terms, equality implies the condition of being equal in law, rights, powers, opportunities, etc. It should be noted that the condition of being equal in law is more about equality of opportunity than equality of outcome. It is often claimed that equality of opportunity, e.g. in education, provides a level playing field for all. But equality of opportunity is the starting point and a necessary condition for having a level playing field. The sufficient condition for a level playing field is equality of outcome. A child from an educated family performs, on average, better than a child from a poorly educated family and therefore – despite both having the same equality of opportunity to start with – will have different equality of outcome.

⇢ see also: Level Telling Field

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

[MM]

 

European integration theory acknowledges that there is no universally accepted definition of integration. The influential neofunctional definition by Ernst Haas (1985, 16) holds that integration is “the process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political activities toward a new centre, whose institutions possess or demand jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end result of a process of political integration is a new political community, super-imposed over the pre-existing ones.” Arne Niemann, Zoe Lefkofridi, and Philippe E. Schmitter (2019, 45) further elaborate that neofunctionalists have always considered integration “to be a process rather than an outcome or an end state.” European disintegration, in contrast, is the process by which European integration is reversed, partially or completely.

⇢ see also: Citizenship

References and further reading:

Haas, Ernst. 1958. The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces 1950–1957. Stevens and Sons: London.

Li, Monica. 2020. What Measures Are in Place to Ensure the Long-Term Integration of Migrants and Refugees in Europe? European Web Site on Integration. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/migrant-integration/special-feature/what-measures-are-place-ensure-long-term-integration-migrants-and-refugees-europe_en.

Niemann, Arne; Lefkofridi, Zoe and Schmitter, Philippe E. 2019. “Neofunctionalism.” In European Integration Theory. 43–63. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Zimmermann, Hubert and Andreas Dür. 2016. Key Controversies in European Integration. Palgrave Macmillan: London.

Category: A

Work Packages: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

[RS]

 

Representations of happenings or events are generally considered as basic components of narrative. Narratives don’t simply “recount” happenings, however, but “give them shape, give them a point, argue their import, proclaim their results” (Brooks 2006, 13). Events are therefore best viewed as complex constructs (Nünning 2010) whose representations may be considered as a form of event modeling (Sommer 2023). Narratives establish and increase “eventfulness” (Hühn 2014) by describing occurrences as specific kinds of events, such as turning points, tipping points, or points of no return (Nünning 2012). Narratological analyses of events focus on (1) the ontological status and truth value of events as something experienced, observed, invented, imagined, or remembered, (2) the significance, relevance, unexpectedness, and unusualness of events, and (3) the ways in which narratives establish temporal, causal, or associative links between different events by means of “event sequencing” (Herman 2009). Like narrative framing, narrative event modeling involves processes of selection, evaluation, and interpretation. In addition, narrative representations of events establish relationships between events, create a sense of coherence, and link past, present, and future experiences in meaningful ways.

In migration debates, events are often at the core of controversial and, at times, toxic debates. For instance, there are disputes over responsibilities whenever humanitarian catastrophes occur in the Mediterranean. Recurring patterns of modeling such events include contradicting claims or counter-narratives: Frontex has been accused of carrying out dangerous maneuvers causing migrant boats to sink, while it insists their ships were in fact offering assistance. Narratives on migration further engage in event modeling by framing the arrival of refugees as a crisis, a security threat, or an opportunity. The narrative dynamics perspective established in OPPORTUNITIES focuses on the strategic goals, rhetorical uses, and political effects of representing events – and on narratives as steering devices which possess considerable manipulative power.

⇢ see also Counter-(master-)narrative dynamics, Narratives on migration, Narrative dynamics, Frames of migration

References and further reading:

Brooks, Peter. 2006. “Narrative Transactions – Does the Law Need a Narratology?” Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities 18.1: 1 –28 .

Hühn, Peter. 2013. “Event and Eventfulness.” In The Living Handbook of Narratology, edited by Peter Hühn, Jan Christoph Meister, John Pier, and Wolf Schmid. Hamburg: Hamburg University. URL: https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/39.html. Accessed August 16, 2023.

Nünning, Ansgar. 2010. “Making Events – Making Stories – Making Worlds: Ways of Worldmaking from a Narratological Point of View.” In Cultural Ways of Worldmaking: Media and Narratives, edited by Vera Nünning, Ansgar Nünning, and Birgit Neumann, 189–214. Berlin and New York, NY: De Gruyter.

Nünning, Ansgar. 2012. “With the Benefit of Hindsight: Features and Functions of Turning Points as a Narratological Concept and as a Way of Self-Making.” In Turning Points: Concepts and Narratives of Change in Literature and Other Media, edited by Ansgar Nünning and Kai Marcel Sicks, 31–58. Berlin and Boston, MA: De Gruyter:

Sommer, Roy. 2023. “Migration and Narrative Dynamics.” In The Routledge Companion to Narrative Theory, edited by Paul Dawson and Maria Mäkelä, New York and London: Routledge: 498-511.

Category: A

Work Package: 2, 5

[RS]