CC BY
12ARTICLES
EVGENI VARSHAVER, ANNA ROCHEVA, NATALIYA IVANOVA
BRIDGING SCIENCE AND PRACTICE:
MIGRANT INTEGRATION EVENTS IN MOSCOW NEIGHBORHOODS
Urban Studies and Practices Vol.2 #1, 2017, 25-39 https://doi.org/10.17323/usp21201725-39
Introduction
International migration flows force receiving societies to face the issue of newcomers' integration. Integration is a topic of scholarly research, social projects, and social policies. Despite simultaneous advancement in these fields, interaction between them needs improvement. With some important exceptions, practitioners launch projects and policies based on shaky grounds and scholars are busy with their work and generally not interested in participating in social activities.1 This article is based on a project that arose on the boundary between scholarship and community work and was aimed at the integration of different groups of migrants in Moscow neighborhoods. It is rooted in the scholarly knowledge of intercultural interaction and integration of migrants and its core comprises four intercultural events that aimed at integration of migrants in Moscow residential neighborhoods, the effect of which was carefully measured with the methods of social sciences. As it is a rare example of a combination of practical efforts and scholarly work in the field of the integration of migrants, the aim of this article is to deliver the results of the project: the theoretical framework and the events — their course and results.
The project consisted of four separate intercultural events (or sets of events) that aimed at changing migrants' and non-migrants' attitudes toward each other in Moscow residential neighborhoods, as well as building better relations bet-
1 Among the exclusions should be mentioned the new public management approach as the framework for integration of scholarly knowledge with decision making, and the public sociology as an attempt to make sociology contribute more to the public debate on societal issues of importance [Lane, 2000; Schedler, Proeller, 2000; Burawoy, 2005a; Burawoy, 2005b].
Evgeni Varshaver, PhD in Sociology, Senior Research Fellow, Russian Presidential Academy for National Economy and Public Administration; of. 2105, 84 korp. 3, Prospect Vernadskogo, 119571 Moscow, Russian Federation.
E-mail: varshavere@gmail.com
Anna Rocheva, PhD in Sociology, Research Fellow, Russian Presidential Academy for National Economy and Public Administration; of. 2105, 84 korp. 3, Prospect Vernadskogo, 119571 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: anna.rocheva@gmail.com
Nataliya Ivanova, BA in International Relations, Research Fellow, Russian Presidential Academy for National Economy and Public Administration; of. 2105, 84 korp. 3, Prospect Vernadskogo, 119571 Moscow, Russian Federation. E-mail: nataliya.ivanova.0709@gmail.com Abstract
This article describes the results of a project focused on the integration of migrants in Moscow's urban neighborhoods. It comprises two parts. The first part encompasses the scholarly knowledge and best practices of integration in local contexts and results in a theoretical framework for the project. The second part provides a thorough descriptions of four intercultural events organized in 2014-2015. Descriptions include the details of the events and the results of their effect evaluation. The overall conclusion is that an event developed on the basis of contact theory and an integration framework is an effective tool for the integration of migrants on a local level. The article concludes by reflecting on opportunities and hindrances to the wide-scale implementation of the project's results.
Key words: migrants; immigrants; integration; assimilation; interculturalism; human library; contact theory; Moscow neighborhoods
ween them. The leading principle of the events was the face-to-face, non-superficial interaction between representatives of the two groups. Each event was designed for specific groups of migrants and non-migrants present in a Moscow neighborhood. These groups were selected on the basis of the in-depth research in two Moscow neighborhoods [Varshaver, Rocheva, Ivanova, 2017]. Some events were adapted from glob-
al best practices of migrant integration; some of them were developed from scratch. For each event (except the pilot one) or a set of events, a strict quantitative evaluation procedure was designed and implemented. The events were:
(1) "Faces of a Neighborhood" — a documentary contest between schoolchildren who filmed migrants and locals residing in a neighborhood with the subsequent screening of the films to other neighborhood dwellers in a local library;
(2) "Intercultural Cooking Workshop" — a set of cooking events for migrant and local women who met biweekly and taught each other how to cook dishes of their ethnic cuisines; (3) "Human Library" — a renowned format arranged in a way that "typical" migrants were invited to a local school and had conversations with schoolchildren; (4) "Intercultural Football" — a community event with an emphasis on a football tournament with ethnically-mixed teams participating. According to the evaluation results, the overall short-term effect of the events can be described as lying between moderate and substantial. This article includes explications of the theoretical and practical grounds of the project, descriptions of the events of the project (including the methodology and results of evaluation), and a reflection upon opportunities and hindrances for the inclusion of the project results into policies toward the integration of migrants in Russia
The Project's Background
The project is built on two theoretical pillars. The first pillar is the concept of integration developed by German sociologists Hartmut Esser [Esser, 2001] and Friedrich Heckmann [Heckmann, 2005]. The second pillar is the contact theory suggested by G. Allport and summed up by T. Pettigrew [Pettigrew, 1998]. An additional building block of our project comprised the evidence on intercultural practical projects that were completed worldwide. Below, we will briefly overview the above-mentioned theoretical approaches, show how they are combined into a joint theoretical framework, and describe the integration efforts undertaken in different countries that are in line with our framework.
Contact theory is a proposition, first formulated in 1954 [Allport, 1954], according to which a contact between representatives of different ethnicities, if happening under certain conditions, reduces the prejudices of their members towards each other. Among these conditions are
the following: equal status, intergroup cooperation, common goals, and support by social and institutional authorities [Wittig, 1998]. Since then, numerous experiments substantiated the theory and were summoned in the meta-analy-sis of 515 publications that demonstrated statistically significant correlations between contact and prejudice reduction [Pettigrew, Tropp, 2000; 2006]. A contact proved to be more efficient in overcoming stereotypes than other ways, for example, increasing awareness about "other" cultures [Ibid., 2013]. Moreover, as other researchers show, prejudice can be reduced as a result, not only of face-to-face interaction, but also of indirect contact: when a person imagines such an encounter ("imagined contact") [Crisp, Turner, 2009; Crisp et al., 2009] or is informed about such a contact of a member of his/her group ("extended contact") [Wright, 1997; Turner, Hew-stone, Voci, 2007]. The contact proved to be effective in a variety of circumstances and settings including workplaces [Oerlemans, Peeters, 2010], residential neighborhoods [Petermann, 2014], schools [Slavin, 1985] and even prisons [Hod-son, 2008]. It showed its importance in terms of prejudice reduction both for tolerant and intolerant people [Ibid., 2011]. Also, it turned out to be associated with the improvement of locals' attitudes toward migrants [Voci, Hewstone, 2003; Escandell, Ceobanu, 2009] and vise-versa [Marti-novic, Tubergen van, Maas, 2009]. Overall, despite some critique [Dixon, Durrheim, Tredoux, 2005], the contact proved to be an effective tool of prejudice reduction.
Theoretical frameworks that describe the process of migrants' incorporation into society are deeply embedded in the political and ideological context of subsequent receiving societies and are usually a consequence of interaction between state, society, and academia [Favell, 2001]. There are two competing concepts that are mainly used in research in order to describe the relations (and their dynamic) between migrants and receiving societies. The concept used in American academia is assimilation, while European scholars stick more to the word integration [Schneider, Crul, 2010]. Both concepts are connected with certain theoretical efforts that are successful in describing some aspects of these relations, and neglect others. The assimilationist paradigm [Alba, Nee, 1997] (in its current up-to-date version) is good at dealing with the complex nature of receiving societies with the theory of segmented assimilation [Portes, Zhou, 1993; Portes, Rumbaut, 2001; Zhou, 1997]
as the conceptual paramount of the theoretical efforts in the field. However, it centers on ethnic groups rather than on individuals' trajectories, possesses no good classification of incorporation realms, and lacks clear description of micro-social mechanisms that would account for the interaction between these aspects. European scholarship in turn didn't produce theories that would describe the overall process on the societal level, though it provided a good classification of dimensions in which incorporation happens. The theoretical language that includes these distinctions was suggested by H. Esser [Esser, 2001; 2004] and developed further by F. Heckmann [Heckmann, Schnapper, 2003; Heck-man, 2005]. Following their logic, migrant integration happens in four different dimensions: (1) cultural, when a migrant learns a language and cultural norms of a receiving society, (2) social, when a migrant obtains social ties with non-migrants, (3) structural, when a migrant takes on a social status through a position within the labor market, educational system, welfare system, etc, (4) identificational, when a migrant identifies himself/herself with a receiving society and is identified as such by members of this society. Considering achievements of both traditions in terms of the theoretical language, we stick to the European approach, as it seems more giving for the empirical research based on the principle of theoretical individualism.
The theoretical model that puts together the achievements of the contact theory and the integration concept generally implies that contact between migrants and locals and its consequences comprise the main mechanism in charge of the process of integration. The contact is, however, limited in its possibilities without a common language, so the cultural aspect of integration is a prerequisite of successful integration in other dimensions [Clément, 1986; Maass, 1999]. The social dimension of integration that presumes communication and tie formation between migrants and locals can be fully analogized to the concept of contact. The relations between the structural and identifica-tional dimension of integration on the one hand and the social dimension on the other are not straightforward, due to the segmented assimilation theory argument (acquisition of a job in one segment of society may entail interactions with locals while employment in another can lead to no interaction at all). Still there is strong evidence that these dimensions are interconnected [Clément, Noels, Deneault, 2001; Kronenfeld,
2005; Ooka et al., 2006; Martinovic, Tubergen van, Maas, 2011; Gaertner, Dovidio, 2014]. Summing up, the more interaction is happening between migrants and locals, the more that cultural common grounds are created between them, and the more migrants get embedded in the receiving society (or its particular segments), the more they identify with it. This model needs more empirical evidence and elaboration. However, it formed the theoretical basis for the project. On the practical level, this model implies that integration events should maximize positive contact between migrants and non-migrants as contact is the main driver of the overall integration process.
Despite the tendency for most of the receiving societies to formulate the integration policy for the national level, soon it became clear [Emilsson, 2015], that the integration process itself takes place on the local level. Since then, the diversity of efforts were undertaken to foster integration in a number of different local contexts These efforts turned to be much in line with the theoretical framework described above. Below, some of them are described with specifications upon the realm of integration they are mostly touching upon.
The social aspect of integration was covered with the integration events in which the situations for the formation of new ties between migrants and non-migrants were created. A conventional format of such events, being in line with the contact theory, implied equal status cooperation of different groups' members towards a common goal. The bases for such cooperation included, but were not limited to, gardening, sports, and environmental problems. People of various backgrounds were brought together to cultivate fruit and vegetables in community gardens (as was the case in London, UK [East London: Digging..., 2010], Wilmer, USA [Downs-Karkos, 2011], Gottingen, Germany [Gardens of Intercultural Delight, 2014]), solve ecological issues (as with Waitakere City, New Zealand [Downs-Karkos, 2011]), or to prepare for emergency situations (as in Cupertino, USA, where block parties embracing migrants and non-migrants were regularly organized with fire-fighting trainings [Downs-Karkos, 2011]). Sport events were a prominent basis for such integration events as well — they were widely used for integrating the youth of various backgrounds, including dwellers of "bad" neighborhoods in Bristol, Great Britain [Interplay Project] and Munich, Germany [Interkulturellestrafíen-fufíballliga].
For example "Football for Peace" is an internationally renowned event that originated from attempts to bring Arab and Jewish children together [Football 4 Peace Monitoring]. One of the most straightforward formats of the kind is the "community dialogues" effort — a series of meetings of specific groups' representatives who otherwise do not meet with specifically organized communication between them. Among examples of such events are multiple variants of neighbors' meeting aimed at discussing the acute issues of their neighborhoods or talking about migration, religion, etc. [Downs-Karkos, 2011].
The identificational integration events and formats that are in line with the described framework are diverse, but the general idea that underlies them is to make migrants and non-migrants communicate, imagine, and feel commu-nality on the symbolic level. The most typical integration event of this kind is a ritual of citizenship acquisition occurs when a certain gesture a migrant becomes local on the symbolical level. Such rituals are not limited by the national level and sometimes happen in municipalities. For instance, in Tilburg, Netherlands, regular events are held for migrants who successfully complete integration courses and are adopted as Tilburg townsmen. Another way to express the symbolical communality of locals and migrants are provided by multiple art projects that gather migrant stories and convey them to the "general public." Often it happens with the participation of migrants themselves, as in Milan, Italy, where migrants told their stories from posters and videos displayed at the bus stops [Milan Bus Stories]. A similar kind of effort is designed in a way that migrants contribute to the local newspapers with their stories and agendas, as in Finland. The events that are related to identifi-cational integration, thus, not only "invite" migrants to a local symbolical space, but may also seriously restructure it. A striking example of such restructuring is the case of Marxloh-Duis-burg, Germany, where a newly built mosque was planned by local authorities together with representatives of the local community of Muslims and non-Muslims, so that its erection didn't cause conflicts as elsewhere and urged the local inhabitants to re-imagine their community [Winkel, 2012].
Structural integration efforts in Europe that fit the proposed framework mostly included measures that promoted migrants' inclusion in the labor market. There are three main directions
of activities connected to it: reducing prejudice among potential employers towards migrant job seekers; networking migrants with potential employers and partners for launching businesses; and organizing mentoring programs. In the Netherlands, meetings of potential employers with successful migrants were set up so that the former could make sure that migrants are reliable workers [Wood et al., 2010, p. 60]. In Germany, Turkish female migrants who had specific skills in dress-making crafts were matched with young designers to form partnerships [Ibid., p. 84]. In Australia, a mentoring program for migrants looking for career or business advice from "local" mentors was launched [Bright Ideas]. The cumulative effect of enhancing migrants' labor market opportunities awareness and of the face-to-face contact between locals and migrants makes these efforts effective in terms of overall migrant integration.
The cultural integration efforts that are in line with the proposed framework are mostly represented by language courses that aim at building bridges between migrants and particular groups in the receiving society or incorporating migrants in particular social circles. By that means migrants master language, get some specific knowledge of a receiving society, and also form social ties with locals. For instance, in Cardiff, Great Britain, language courses for migrants are supplemented with special lessons, when policemen come to the class and explain legal vocabulary to migrants, as well as their rights and duties [Interplay Project]. Another example comes from Frankfurt am Main, where Germans organized language courses for children and parents simultaneously. Along with mastering the language, parents became engaged in school-life, which was important for their overall integration [Mama lernt Deutsch]. The best practices of migrant integration, thereby, are quite giving in terms of formats for migrant integration. Some of them were incorporated into the project.
Project Context:
Migrants in Moscow Neighborhoods
After the collapse of the USSR and especially with the economic growth of the 2000s, Russia started attracting migrants from other post-Soviet republics: at first these were mostly Russian-speaking refugees who were then followed by "ethnic" economic migrants. At the moment, Russia has become the main receiving country
for migrants from the majority of the CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States): more than 80% of migrants from Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia and Azerbaijan come to Russia and overall in Russia 90% of legally employed foreign citizens originate from the CIS [Chudinovskikh, Denisenko, 2014, p. 29-30]. This allows researchers to speak of the 'post-Soviet/ Eurasian migration system' with Russia at its center [Ivahnyuk, 2012].2 It is underpinned, among other factors, by the visa-free regime that also means that citizens of CIS countries willing to work in Russia are required to obtain registration and work permits (patent). At the same time, citizens of the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union (Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, as well as Belarus, which is also part of the Union State of Russian and Belarus) do not need work permits to enter the Russian labor market.
The number of international migrant stock in Russia is estimated at 8-10 mln people [Chudinovskikh, Denisenko, 2014, p. 27]. The statistics of the former Russian Federal Migration Service3 for the last four years consistently showed the number of foreign citizens on the territory of Russia oscillating around 10 mln with the main countries of origin being Ukraine (2.48 mln), Uzbekistan (1.75 mln) and Tajikistan (0.87 mln).4 The latter two countries together with Kyr-gyzstan are nominated as having the most migration potential for Russia [Zajonchkovskaya et al., 2011].
As the capital and biggest city of the Russian Federation with 12 mln people as the registered population, Moscow is the main magnet for both international and internal migrants.5 The official number of international migrants (foreign citizens) in 2016 in Moscow was 1.46 mln people with more than half of them coming from Central Asia: the three major origin countries are Uzbekistan (23.6%), Tajikistan (15.8%) and Kyrgyzstan (15.2%) [Analiz migracionnoj situacii].
In contrast with many other megalopolises in Europe and North America, migrants in Moscow disperse around the city and do not settle in specific neighborhoods [Vendina, 2004; Vendi-na, 2009]. This is explained by the Soviet legacy
2 However, this notion is challenged: see [Brunarska, Nestorowicz, Markowski, 2014].
3 This state body existed until April 2016.
4 Figures of April, 2016 exposed on the web-site of the FMS, now - Ministry of Internal Affairs: [Statisticheskie svedeniya].
5 Estimates of the permanent population of January,
2016 by the Federal State Statistics Service:
[Moskva v cifrah].
[Vendina, 2012] with its "peoples' friendship" ideology and orientation towards mixing of people with various backgrounds through accommodation, educational institutions and communist party associations including its branches for children and youth. Today it is reinforced by a type of accommodation popular among migrants that implies renting a bed in a flat with other migrants and quickly changing flats without even noticing advantages and disadvantages of the neighborhoods [Rocheva, 2015].
The differentiation of Moscow that is now under way is based not on the ethnic, but on the socio-economic characteristics and can be described by a very rough distinction of "center" and "periphery" [Arheologiya periferii, 2013]. Being generally cheaper and less attractive, the latter is composed of the so called "sleepy neighborhoods" that are mostly residential areas with the standard blocks of flats built in the Soviet period after the World War II. They are similar to each other in the quality of accommodation but are stereotypically rated by the Muscovites as "better" or "worse" [Ibid.].
The two neighborhoods selected as localities for the project (Kapotnya and Kuntsevo6) are "peripheral/sleepy" but differ from each other in a number of characteristics. Kapotnya is considered a "troubled" neighborhood [Ibid.] with environmental problems due to an oil refinery. With the population of 32,000 registered dwellers,7 it is located in the South-Eastern administrative district of Moscow. On the contrary, Kuntsevo, located in the Western administrative district of Moscow with the population of 150 thousands,8 is seen as a "good" neighborhood [Ibid.]. Until the 1960s, both neighborhoods developed as independent settlements: Kapotn-ya was a workers settlement around a large oil refinery and Kuntsevo was a town with its own industry. Since that time, Kuntsevo "grew into" Moscow and became well connected with other parts of the city through various transportation means. It is now a transportation hub with two underground stations and suburban train stations, as well as more than fifteen bus routes. Contrary to this, Kapotnya is isolated from the
6 These were taken as administrative units rather than vernacular districts although in the case of Kapotnya the residential part of the administrative unit almost coincides with the vernacular district called by this name.
7 Estimates of the permanent population as of January, 2016 by the Federal State Statistics Service [Moskva v cifrah].
8 Ibid.
Fig. 1. A screenshot from the award-winning film
rest of Moscow and has only six bus routes that bind it with the city. Kuntsevo is quickly growing with new residential and commercial real estate unlike Kapotnya, which has had a stable housing stock for the last thrirty years. Both neighborhoods have significant numbers of migrants.
These two neighborhoods were extensively studied in 2014-2015 with qualitative methods to identify the "groups" of migrants and non-migrants with varying levels of social integration into the local life. The results of the study allowed for constructing a "social map" [Varshaver, Rocheva, Ivanova, 2016] of a Moscow neighborhood that demonstrated groups of migrants and non-migrants "typical" for these neighborhoods and presence or absence of connections between them. These materials laid the groundwork for the formulation of a "neighborhood integration concept" describing existing and potential social interactions between different groups of migrants and non-migrants, as well as integration events that are in the focus of this paper.
Faces of a Neighborhood
The pilot event was centered around a contest of short videos filmed by schoolchildren that portrayed the inhabitants of the neighborhood. Each team of schoolchildren was supposed to make four films about an ethnically Russian person living in the neighborhood for a long period of time, an ethnically Russian migrant, an ethnic migrant who has been living in the neighborhood for more than ten years, and an ethnic migrant who has recently moved to the neighborhood. There was a series of workshops on filming and editing for the contest participants.
When all the films were ready, a professional jury selected the winning team and there was an award ceremony showing all the films. It was an open event and local dwellers were invited. After showing all the films, the audience nomi-
nated one of the films as its favorite for a special award. It was a film-portrait of a shoe repairman from Armenia who talked about the necessity for love and respect to everyone independent of his/her origin in a very touching manner (Fig. 1).
Although the impact of the pilot event was not assessed, we can hypothesize that it contributed to the identificational and social aspects of integration: in the process of filming, schoolchildren got acquainted with adults of diverse ethnic and migration backgrounds, whereas the final product was a set of video-portraits of the neighborhood dwellers — both migrants and non-migrants — that manifested the neighborhood as comprising people of a multiplicity of backgrounds.
Human Library
The format for this event was invented in Denmark in 2000 when a young man with migrant background was murdered by neo-Nazis and his friends decided to come up with a way to confront attitudes towards negatively stereotyped groups. The name of the event implies the presence of "books" — representatives of these negatively stereotyped groups — and "readers" — representatives of the "majority;" readers get to know the stories of the books with the facilitation of "librarians" — event organizers. As a result of such communication when readers ask books their questions and get extensive answers, the attitudes of the readers about the specific "book" and the group (s)he represents changes. Although this format has been functioning for more than fifteen years, there are no publications that show the results of its impact evaluation conducted according to a strict methodology.
A specific "Human library" that aimed at migrants' integration was held in one of the local schools in 2015. The four "books" selected for the event were (1) Russian female Muslim, (2) male Muslim from Dagestan, (3) female Kyrgyz migrant, (4) male Kyrgyz migrant yard-keeper.
To evaluate the effect of the event in accordance with the Comparison Group Pre-test/Post-test Design, a quasi-experiment was conducted. Such methodology includes two measurements in two groups (experimental and control ones): before and after the exposure of the experimental group. For the experiment two parallel 10th grade classes were selected. Several days before the Human Library a survey was launched in both of them. After the survey the pupils of the
experimental class were told about the Human Library format and also about the books — who they were and what the questions were that they wanted to discuss. Then the event was conducted. A week after the event, the second survey was conducted in both classes.
The questionnaire consisted of several blocks that measured stereotypes and their content basing on various theoretical approaches and operationalizations: (1) questions on perceived threats coming from representatives of other ethnicities/religions, (2) "thermometer" scale that assessed attitudes towards "immigrants," "Muslims," "Caucasians" ("kavkaztsy"),9 and "Tajiks," (3) semantic differential scale, and (4) Social Dominance Orientation scale. Calculations were conducted using an independent-samples t-test.
According to the results of the measurements, "Human Library" weakened the image of migrants as a social category in charge of social tensions and contributed to the improvement of the schoolchildren's attitudes towards two categories: "Muslims" and "Caucasians." In particular, the experimental group at the post-event test demonstrated higher level of disagreement with the saying "Presence of lots of representatives of the other ethnicity/religion is connected with the high social tension:" the mean value received one more point on the 7-point scale with the significance of p = 0.016.
The thermometer scale with the ratings from -50 to +50 showed that the attitudes towards "Muslims" grew 10 points higher, towards "Caucasians" — 8.4 points higher (Fig. 2).
The results of the semantic differential measurements show that after the event participants started attributing positive characteristics to "Muslims" and "Caucasians". Attitudes towards "Muslims" showed the biggest progress with increased number of such characteristics as friendly, warm, trustworthy, strong; and together with the "Caucasians" — as nice and positive (Fig. 3,4).
Thus, the "Human Library" showed its effectiveness as an integration event format since it contributes to the decrease of social tension and weakening of the stereotypes towards "Muslims" and "Caucasians," and in such a way strengthens the grounds for the formation of social ties between migrants and non-migrants.
9 Contrary to the English notion of "Caucasian" as "white", in Russia it is connected with the status of visible minorities - people coming from the Caucasus.
Cooking Workshops
As the preliminary research in neighborhoods showed, stay-at-home female ethnic migrants are one of the least integrated "groups" on the local level. Various activities, spaces, and institutions connected with children (such as playgrounds and schools) successfully facilitate inclusion of Russian-speaking mothers (both migrants and non-migrants) into local social life, but they do not relax tense relationships between "ethnic" and "Russian" mothers stemming from the "bright" ethnic boundaries. To improve these relationships and contribute to the formation of social ties between different mothers, a special format of intercultural cooking workshop was developed.10
In 2015 in Kapotnya we organized a set of four biweekly events for women of various migration and ethnic backgrounds living in that neighborhood. The participants were five Russian female non-migrants and five "ethnic" female migrants from South Caucasus and Central Asia. For every meeting, there was a lady selected who taught the others how to cook a meal she wanted to share. The workshop generally lasted for three hours: for the first 1.5-2 hours the participants discussed the process and ingredients and cooked together, after which, for the rest of time, they sat at the table, tried the results of their work, and had a talk moderated by a special person. At the first workshop they cooked meals of the Armenian and Georgian cuisine, on the second one — Russian cuisine, on the third one — Azerbaijani cuisine, and on the fourth one — Uzbek and Tajik.
The results of this series of workshops were assessed with specially designed evaluation procedures that included a video recording of the events and analysis of the visual data acquired. This analysis was supplemented with a series of interviews with the participants before and after the set of four workshops.
The visual data was analyzed in two dimensions: static and dynamic. Static-dimension analysis implied assessment of the participants' positions in relation to each other on the snapshots with five-minutes break between them. Dynamic-dimension analysis meant the calculation of the interactions of participants during the whole workshop. Interactions included into analysis were both verbal or physical and
10 A partner for this set of events was the Cook & Talk social enterprise, which aims at stimulating dialogue on the basis of joint cooking [Cook & Talk].
+50
15 1 10 5 0 -5 --10-15 --50
Attitudes of the experimental group
"Muslims -Caucasians
Pre-test
Post-test
Fig. 2. Difference in means in the experimental group's attitudes towards the categories "Muslim" (0.05 ^ p < 0.1) and "Caucasians" (0.05 ^ p < 0.1) on the thermometer scale (-50, +50)
Positive
Negative - Positive
2
Negative
1
' Caucasians ■ Muslims
Pre-test
Post-test
Fig. 3. Difference in means in the experimental group's attitudes towards the categories "Muslim" (p ^ 0.01) and "Caucasians" (0.01 ^ p < 0.05) on the semantic differential scale "negative-positive" (7-point scale: negative — 1, positive — 7)
Disgusting
7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -
Nice
Nice - disgusting
Pre-test
-Caucasians - Muslims
3,72
2,78
Post-test
Fig. 4. Difference in means in the experimental group's attitudes towards the categories "Muslim" (p i 0.01) and "Caucasians" (p i 0.01) on the semantic differential scale "nice-disgusting" (7-point scale: nice — 1, disgusting — 7)
implied conversations, co-doing and "active attention" towards each other (Fig. 5). For each workshop the number of proximity situations and interactions of the three categories (migrant — migrant; migrant — non-migrant; and non-migrant — non-migrant) was calculated. The results were weighed according to the ratio of migrants and non-migrants at each workshop.11
Bidimensional analysis showed that at the beginning of the series of workshops the contacts between migrants and non-migrants were few, at the end of the series they started communicating more. The analysis of visual data in the static dimension showed that the share of proximity situations of migrants and non-migrants among all proximity situations at a workshop increased: it was equal to 26% on the first workshop (out of 76 all proximity situations on that workshop) and grew to 53% by the fourth workshop. Moreover, migrants and non-migrants started interacting more: the dynamic dimension analysis showed the rise of share of interactions between migrants and non-migrants among all interactions from 36% on the first workshop to 65% at the fourth one (Fig. 6).
Visual data analysis together with the analysis of the interviews (which showed the decline of the language barrier and growth of confidence of migrants in the communication with the non-migrants) allow for arguing that this format of cooking workshops is effective for the inclusion of migrants into the local community, and in the long run it can contribute to the full-fledged social integration of the participants.
Intercultural Football
This sport event was developed to integrate two groups of men excluded from the neighborhood social life. The first group consists of primarily non-migrant (or internal migrant) men with Russian language as a mother tongue who spend weekdays out of their neighborhood, stay at home with the family on the weekend, and thus poorly integrated in the local community life. The other group is yard-keepers — primarily ethnic migrants who spend a lot of time in the neighborhood but rarely communicate with the inhabitants of the houses they take care of and other neighborhood dwellers. The event is a neighborhood football tournament with the
11 Some participants could skip one or more events due to their or their children's health issues.
participation of mixed poly-ethnic teams. Such joint efforts of the men of different ethnic backgrounds contributes to decreasing stereotypes of these two "groups" towards each other.
The football tournament was at the center of the festivity specially organized in the Moscow neighborhood of Kuntsevo in September 2015. The program included workshops and competitions for the children as well as performances of the professional and amateur groups. Good-neighborly relations and ethnic and national cohesion were the leading idea of the background music and speeches of the event host.
Overall, there were 42 players with various mother tongues (including but not limited to Russian, Kyrgyz, Lak, etc.) who were allocated into seven mixed teams. The teams were playing against each other with a winner staying and loser leaving the field. A team was getting three points for each win, one point for tie, zero points for defeat. The team with the maximum points was selected as the winner. The three winner teams received valuable trophies. All participants got prizes and were in the final photo.
To assess the effectiveness of this event, a survey with the participants before the start of the football contest (face-to-face format) and a week after the event (telephone survey) was organized. The questionnaires were translated into Uzbek, Kyrgyz, and Tajik languages. The survey was conducted by four interviewers with multilingual skills. There were 51 respondents in the first round and 27 in the second one. Together with the socio-demographic characteristics, the questionnaire included four main blocks: (1) embeddedness in the neighborhood (operationalized as social ties in the neighborhood, identification with the neighborhood); (2) feeling of safety in the neighborhood and in Moscow; (3) attitudes towards their in-group; (4) attitudes towards different groups ("Muslims," "Muscovites," "Russians," "migrants," "Caucasians," "Tajiks") measured with the thermometer scale with ratings from -50 (worst attitudes) to +50 (best attitudes).
To check the effectiveness of the event, mean values of the pre-event and post-event surveys were measured for a range of specially constructed groups: (1) all event participants, (2) "visible minorities," (3) neighborhood dwellers, (4) neighborhood dwellers — "visible minorities," (5) neighborhood dwellers — football players, (6) football players, (7) "visible minorities" — football players. The significance of the
Fig. 5. An example of interactions during the first workshop: there is a group of "red circles" which designate female migrants and a group of "blue circles" which designate female non-migrants
difference between means was calculated with the t-test.
Overall, the event contributed to the increase in the respondents' embeddedness in the neighborhood and improvement of the attitudes towards "Russians" and "Muscovites."
The increase of the embeddedness in the neighborhood is demonstrated by the variation of the index constructed on the basis of three statements: "I know a lot of people in this neighborhood," "When I walk along the neighborhood, I come across a lot of people I know," and "I can solve a lot of problems with the help of friends and acquaintances who live or work in this neighborhood." Cronbach's alpha in the pre-event measurement a = 0.707 and the one
in the post-event measurement a = 0.778. We observe the increase of the index value from the first to the second measurement for two groups: "neighborhood dwellers — football players" and "visible minorities" — football players" (on average, on 0.17 point) (Fig. 7).
Along with that the event led to the improvement of the attitudes among "neighborhood dwellers-visible minorities" towards two groups: "Muscovites" and "Russians" — on 5-7 points (Fig. 8). The attitude towards "Muscovites" improved among all the groups except for the "visible minorities". The results are statistically significant (p > 0.05).
Sociological evaluation of the intercultural football impact showed that this format is an effective tool to integrate excluded groups into the neighborhood life and to decrease stereotypes of these groups towards each other.
Conclusion
This article is dedicated to the project that is localized on the boundary between scholarly work and social activism and provides tools for migrants' integration on the local level. The article contains a manifestation of project's theoretical framework which binds together recent advances in cross-cultural psychology and theorizing on integration, and the detailed description of intercultural events which were constructed on the basis of this framework and launched in peripheral Moscow neighborhoods.
Each event (or a set of events) was centered on the idea of communication between migrants
% 70
53
35
18
Share of Contacts: Migrant and Non-Migrant
65%
• Workshop 1 (N = 171) ■ Workshop 4 (n = 268)
% 60
45
30
15
Share of Proximity Situations: Migrant and Non-Migrant
53%
I Workshop 1 (N = 76) I Workshop 4 (n = 90)
Fig. 6. Shares of interactions between and proximity situations of migrants and non-migrants on the first and last workshops, after weighing
0
0
Embeddedness Index
0,3" 0,20,1" 0-0,1-0,2-0,3-0,4-0,5-
0,15
Pre-test
Post-test
Neighborhood dwellers -football players
Neighborhood dwellers -football players
"Visible minorities" -football players
Fig. 7. Difference in means of the embeddedness index (-1.01; 1.43.) among "Neighborhood dwellers - football players" (0.05 < p < 0.1); Football players (0,01 < p< 0.05), "Visible minorities" - football players (0.01 < p < 0.05)
Neighborhood dwellers-visible minorities
50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 --50
34,41 32,94
Pre-test
Post-test
-Muscovites -Russians
Fig. 8. Difference in means in the attitudes towards categories "Muscovites" (0.01 ^ p < 0.05) and "Russians" (0.05 ^ p < 0.1) among "neighborhood dwellers-visible minorities"
and non-migrants and so, if designed in a proper manner, allows the weakening of stereotypes and the enhancement of the integration process. The "Neighborhood Faces" set of events gave floor to communication between schoolchildren and local dwellers of different backgrounds, as well as to an opportunity for locals to perceive the changed ethnic profile of their neighborhood through personal stories of migrants and non-migrants converted into short films. Within the "Culinary Workshops" the communication was built on the basis of mutual teaching and collective cooking of neighborhood dwellers of different backgrounds. The most direct event in terms of communication was the "Human Library," which differed from the original versions of this format as it was specially designed for the integration purposes. Within this event the schoolchildren were communicating with migrants of different backgrounds and by asking questions studied their life experience and atti-
tudes toward a multiplicity of problems. The last event was the "Intercultural football" where the communication was organized by participation in ethnically mixed teams.
Three of the four events were assessed quantitatively. The effect of the "Human Library" and the "Intercultural football" events was measured using the standard pre-test/post-test study design, the "Cooking Workshops" were constructed in a way that needed some special procedures of effectiveness measurement. Such procedures were created. They entailed tracing interethnic contact cases from the first workshop to the last one with the subsequent comparison of the numbers. Altogether, notwithstanding the method of measurement, the overall effect of the events on integration can be described as lying between moderate and substantial. Thereby both the approach and the events can be considered as an effective tool of migrants' integration.
The subsequent steps should include the implementation of the project's results and inclusion of the general intercultural principles, as well as the formats of the events into practice and the policy. Communication with authorities and practitioners during and after the project clearly showed that the implementation of the results in Russia will require much more effort as compared with designing, launching, and completing the project itself. Why? First, until recently, integration as a concept was completely absent from the public discussion, substituted by differently expressed social phobias toward the "Other." The migration issues on the governmental level were being framed as issues of security rather than of societal solidarity, and it is hardly a coincidence that the governmental body that is in charge of the migration issue in Russia from April 2016 has been the Ministry of the Interior Affairs. When only recently integration issues were raised in public discourse and official documents, ministry officials interpreted integration merely as language-learning and "getting to know the Russian culture," thus underrating the importance of the interactional aspect of it. Second, the field of practitioners working in the field of migration who could next take the baton is currently limited to judicial consulting, language schools, and ethnic organizations. The logic of their functioning doesn't
leave much space for intercultural efforts. Among the rest of the NGOs the most logical implementer of the results can be the organizations and groups that participate in the community movement. Unfortunately in Russia, as for now, this movement is weak. Moreover, notwithstanding the poli-cultural nature of Russian cities, the members of the movement rarely recognize the need of intercultural efforts in their work. The third hindrance lies in the nature of the intercultural events themselves, which are nuanced in their organization and need much effort from the organizers. A new format, however, should necessarily be simple so that people of different backgrounds could understand and reproduce it. If the events become compulsory for schools or local libraries, there is a great chance that they will be simulated, but only formally meeting the requirements, and as a result integration won't happen. Altogether, this makes us pessimistic regarding the future of the project results in Russia at this point; but in our efforts we follow the rule: Do what seems right and come what might. This article, thus, is one of the efforts for the intercultural integration framework to be implemented and to contribute to the integration of migrants and harmonization of relations between people of various backgrounds globally.
The article is prepared with the support of the Russian Presidential Academy for National Economy and Public Administration within the grant provided by Government of Russian Federation for the research project "Theoretico-methodological Resources for Studying Integration Trajectories of the Second Generation of Foreign Migrants in Russia" (2017).
References
Alba R., Nee V. Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 1997, vol. 31, no 4, pp. 826-874. Allport G.W. The Nature of Prejudice. New York: Addison, 1954.
Analiz migracionnoj situacii v Moskve v marte 2016 i 2015 gg. [Analysis of the migration situation in Moscow in March 2016 and 2015]. Dvizhenie "Dobro-sosedstvo" [Social movement "Good-neighborhood"]. Available at: http://www.dobro-sosedstvo.ru/dobro/ ru/etc/o_54628. (accessed 08.03.2017) Arheologiya periferii [Periphery's archaeology]. Issledo-vanie dlya Moscow Urban Forum 2013 [Research for the Moscow Urban Forum 2013]. Research Lead YU, Grigoryan, 2013. Available at: http://mosurbanforum. ru/books/arheologiya-periferii. (accessed 08.03. 2017) Bright Ideas. Refugee Council of Australia. Available at: http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/brightideas/
Bright_Ideas15_ComtyComrce.pdf. (accessed 08.03. 2017)
Brunarska Z., Nestorowicz J., Markowski S. Internal vs External Migration in Post-Soviet Space. CARIM-East Research Report. Osrodek Badan nad Migracjami UW, 2014. Available at: http://repozytorium.ceon.pl/han-dle/123456789/3398. (accessed 08.03.2017)
Burawoy M. 2004 American Sociological Association Presidential address: For public sociology. The British Journal of Sociology, 2005a, vol. 56, no 2, pp. 259-294.
Burawoy M. For public sociology. American Sociological Review. 2005b, vol. 70, no 1. pp. 4-28.
Chudinovskikh O.S., Denisenko M.B. Population Mobility in the Commonwealth of Independent States: Whither Common Migration Policy? CARIM-East Research Report. CMR Working Papers 74 (132). Warsaw: Centre of Migration Research, University of Warsaw, 2014, pp. 29-30.
Clément R. Second language proficiency and acculturation: An investigation of the effects of language status and individual characteristics. Journal of Language and social Psychology, 1986, vol. 5, no 4, pp. 271-290.
Clément R., Noels K.A., Deneault B. Interethnic contact, identity, and psychological adjustment: The mediating and moderating roles of communication. Journal of Social Issues, 2001, vol. 57, no 3, pp. 559-577.
Cook & Talk. Available at: http://cookandtalk.ru. (accessed 08.03.2017)
Crisp RJ. et al. Imagined intergroup contact: Theory, paradigm and practice. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2009, vol. 3, no 1. pp. 1-18.
Crisp RJ., Turner R.N. Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions?: Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. American Psychologist, 2009, vol. 64, no 4, pp. 231-240.
Dixon J., Durrheim K., Tredoux C. Beyond the optimal contact strategy: a reality check for the contact hypothesis. American Psychologist, 2005, vol. 60, no 7, pp. 697-711.
Downs-Karkos S. A Guide For Engaging Mainstream America In Immigrant Integration. The receiving communities toolkit, 2011. Available at: http://www.wel-comingamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ Receiving-Communities-Toolkit_FINAL.pdf. (accessed 08.03.2017)
East London: Digging in for Community. Cities of Migration, 2010. Available at: http://citiesofmigration.ca/ good_idea/east-london-dig-on-for-community/. (accessed 08.03.2017).
Emilsson H. A national turn of local integration policy: multi-level governance dynamics in Denmark and Sweden. Comparative Migration Studies, 2015, vol. 3, no 7.
Escandell X., Ceobanu A.M. When contact with immigrants matters: threat, interethnic attitudes and foreigner exclusionism in Spain's Comunidades Autónomas. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2009, vol. 32, no 1, pp. 44-69.
Esser H. Does the "New" Immigration Require a "New" Theory of Intergenerational Integration? International Migration Review. 2004, vol. 38, no 3, pp. 11261159.
Esser H. Integration und ethnische Schichtung. Mannheim, 2001.
Favell A. Integration policy and integration research in Europe: a review and critique. Citizenship today: global perspectives and practices / T.A. Aleinikoff, D. Klusmeyer (eds). Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001, pp. 349-401.
Football 4 Peace Monitoring & Evaluation. Available at: http://www.football4peace.eu/m&e.html. (accessed 11.04.2015)
Gaertner S.L., Dovidio J.F. Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. New York: Psychology Press, 2014.
Gardens of Intercultural Delight. Internationale Gärten e.V. Göttingen. Cities of Migration, 2014. Available at: http://citiesofmigration.ca/good_idea/garden-of-in-tercultural-delights/. (accessed 08.03.2017) Heckman F. National modes of immigrant integration // Bosswick W., Husband C. Comparative European Research in Migration, Diversity and Identities. Bilbao: University of Duesto, 2005, pp. 99-112. Heckmann F., Schnapper D. (ed.). The integration of immigrants in European societies: National differences and trends of convergence. Lucius & Lucius DE, 2003, vol. 7. Hodson G. Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2011, vol. 20, no 3, pp. 154-159. Hodson G. Interracial prison contact: The pros for (socially dominant) cons. British Journal of Social Psychology, 2008, vol. 47, no 2, pp. 325-351. Interkulturelle straßenfußball-liga. Available at: http://
buntkicktgut.de. (accessed 08.03.2017) Interplay Project. Good practice case study. Available at:
http://goo.gl/7cR6L4. (accessed 04.11.2015) Ivahnyuk I.V. Evrazijskaya migracionnaya sistema: ot ehko-nomicheskogo pragmatizma k vozrozhdeniyu civiliza-cionnogo edinstva [Eurasian migration system: from economic pragmatism to the renaissance of the civilizational unity], 2012. Available at: http://www. gumilev center. ru/evrazijjskayamigra-cionnayasistemaotehkonomicheskogopragmatiz-ma k vozrozhdeniyucivilizacionnogoedinstva/. (accessed 08.03.2017) Kronenfeld D.A. The effects of interethnic contact on ethnic identity: Evidence from Latvia. Post-Soviet Affairs, 2005, vol. 21, no 3, pp. 247-277. Lane J.E. New public management.Taylor & Francis US, 2000.
Maass A. Linguistic intergroup bias: Stereotype perpetuation through language. Advances in experimental social psychology, 1999, vol. 31, pp. 79-121. Mama lernt Deutsch. Frankfurt.de. Available at: http:// www.frankfurt.de/sixcms/detail.php?id=2889&_ff-mpar%5B_id_inhalt%5D=352763. (accessed 08.03. 2017)
Martinovic B., Tubergen van F., Maas I. Acquisition of Cross-Ethnic Friends by Recent Immigrants in Canada: A Longitudinal Approach1. International Migration Review, 2011, vol. 45, no 2, pp. 460-488. Martinovic B., Tubergen van F., Maas I. Dynamics of interethnic contact: A panel study of immigrants in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review, 2009, vol. 25, no 3, pp. 303-318. Milan Bus Stories. Cities of Migration, 2014. June 2. Available at: http://citiesofmigration.ca/good_idea/ milan-bus-stories. (accessed 08.03.2017) Moskva v cifrah [Moscow through the prism of figures]. Federal'naya sluzhba gosudarstvennoj statistiki [Federal State Statistics Service]. Available at: http://mos-
cow.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_ts/moscow/ ru/statistics/. (accessed 08.03.2017)
Oerlemans W.G.M., Peeters M.C.W. The multicultural workplace: interactive acculturation and intergroup relations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2010, vol. 25, no 5, pp. 460-478.
Ooka E. et al. Does social capital pay off more within or between ethnic groups? Analyzing job searchers in five Toronto ethnic groups. Inside the Mosaic, 2006, pp. 199-226.
Petermann S. Neighbourhoods and municipalities as contextual opportunities for interethnic contact. Urban Studies, 2014, vol. 51, no 6, pp. 1214-1235.
Pettigrew T.F. Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 1998, vol. 49, no 1, pp. 65-85.
Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2006, vol. 90, no 5, pp. 751-783.
Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Recent meta-analytic findings. Reducing prejudice and discrimination / S. Oskamp (ed.). Mahwah, New Jersey: Psychology Press, 2000, vol. 93, pp. 114-115.
Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. New York, Hove: Psychology Press, 2013.
Portes A., Rumbaut R.G. The story of the immigrant second generation: Legacies. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2001.
Portes A., Zhou M. The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 1993, vol. 530, no 1, pp. 74-96.
Rocheva A.L. Issledovanie pozicij "kar'ery kvartiros'emsh-chika" i modelej prozhivaniya v Moskve migrantov iz Kirgizii i Uzbekistana [Research of "tenant career" positions and housing models of migrants from Kyr-gyzstan and Uzbekistan in Moscow]. Sociologicheskij zhurnal [Sociological journal], 2015, no 2, pp. 31-50.
Schedler K., Proeller I. New public management. Bern: Haupt, 2000.
Schneider J., Crul M. New insights into assimilation and integration theory: Introduction to the special issue. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 2010, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 1143-1148.
Slavin R.E. Cooperative learning: Applying contact theory in desegregated schools. Journal of Social Issues, 1985, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 45-62.
Statisticheskie svedeniya po migracionnoj situacii [Statistical data on the migration situation]. Oficial'nyj sajt Ministerstva vnutrennih del Rossijskoj Federacii [Official web-site of the Ministry for Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation]. Available at: https://xn--b1aew.xn--p1ai/Deljatelnost/statistics/migracion-naya. (accessed 08.03.2017)
Turner R.N., Hewstone M., Voci A. Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended
contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 369-388.
Varshaver E.A, Rocheva A.L., Ivanova N.S. Social'naya karta rajona kak instrument gorodskih issledovanij [Neighborhood social map as an urban research instrument]. Gorodskie issledovaniya i praktiki [Urban Studies and Practices], 2016, no 3, pp. 31-52.
Vendina O.I. Mogut li v Moskve vozniknut' ehtnicheskie kvartaly? [Can there appear ethnic neighborhoods in Moscow?]. Vestnik obshchestvennogo mneniya: Dan-nye. Analiz. Diskussii [Bulletin of the public opinion: Data. Analysis Discussion], 2004, no 3 (71), pp. 52-64.
Vendina O. Migranty v rossijskihgorodah [Migrants in the Russian cities]. Otechestvennye zapiski [Annals of the Fatherland], 2012, no 3, pp. 216-229.
Vendina O.I. Kul'turnoe raznoobrazie i "pobochnye" eh-ffekty etnokul'turnoj politiki v Moskve [Cultural diversity and "subsidiary" effects of the ethnocultural policy in Moscow]. Immigranty vMoskve [Immigrants in Moscow] / Zh.A. Zajonchkovskaya (ed.). Moscow: "Tri kvadrata" [Three squares], 2009, pp. 45-147.
Voci A., Hewstone M. Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2003, vol. 6, no 1, pp. 37-54.
Winkel E. Participatory planning around mosque building in Marxloh-Duisburg. European Urban Knowledge Network, 2012. Available at: http://www.eukn.eu-/e-library/project/bericht/detail/participatory-plan-ning-around-mosque-building-in-marxloh-duis-burg/. (accessed 08.03.2017)
Wittig M.A., Grant-Thompson S. The utility of Allport's conditions of intergroup contact for predicting perceptions of improved racial attitudes and beliefs. Journal of Social Issues, 1998, vol. 54, no 4, pp. 795812.
Wood P. et al. (ed.) Intercultural Cities: Towards a Model for Intercultural Integration: Insights from the Intercultural Cities Programme, Joint Action of the Council of Europe and the European Commission. Council of Europe, 2010w.
Wright S.C. et al. The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997, vol. 73, no 1, pp. 73-90.
Zajonchkovskaya Zh.A., Karachurina L.B., Mkrtchyan N.V., Poletaev D.V., Florinskaya Yu.F. Zhenshchiny-migranty iz stran SNG v Rossii [Female migrants from the CIS countries in Russia] / E.V. Tyuryukanova (ed.). Moscow: MAKS Press [MAKS Press], 2011.
Zhou M. Segmented assimilation: Issues, controversies, and recent research on the new second generation. International Migration Review, 1997, pp. 975-1008.
Е.А. ВАРШАВЕР, А.Л. РОЧЕВА, Н.С. ИВАНОВА
СОЕДИНЯЯ НАУКУ И ПРАКТИКУ:
МЕРОПРИЯТИЯ ПО ИНТЕГРАЦИИ МИГРАНТОВ В МОСКОВСКИХ РАЙОНАХ
Варшавер Евгений Александрович, кандидат социологических наук, старший научный сотрудник Российской академии народного хозяйства и государственной службы при Президенте РФ (РАНХиГС); Российская Федерация, 119571 Москва, просп. Вернадского, 84, корп. 3, оф. 2105. E-mail: varshavere@gmail.com Рочева Анна Леонидовна, кандидат социологических наук, научный сотрудник Российской академии народного хозяйства и государственной службы при Президенте РФ (РАНХиГС); Российская Федерация, 119571 Москва, просп. Вернадского, 84, корп. 3, оф. 2105. E-mail: anna.rocheva@gmail.com Иванова Наталия Сергеевна, бакалавр международных отношений, научный сотрудник Российской академии народного хозяйства и государственной службы при Президенте РФ (РАНХиГС); Российская Федерация, 119571 Москва, просп. Вернадского, 84, корп. 3, оф. 2105. E-mail: nataliya.ivanova.0709@gmail.com
В статье изложены результаты проекта, в ходе которого были разработаны и проведены мероприятия по интеграции мигрантов в районах Москвы, а также оценена их эффективность. Текст состоит из двух частей. В первой части описываются накопленные научные знания и «лучшие практики» по интеграции мигрантов на локальном уровне. Эта часть завершается изложением теоретической рамки проекта. Во второй части описываются четыре интеграционных мероприятия, проведенные в 2014-2015 гг., а именно их содержание и результаты оценки эффективности. Авторы приходят к выводу, что мероприятие, разработанное на основе теории контакта и теоретической рамки интеграции, -это эффективный инструмент для интеграции мигрантов на локальном уровне. В заключительной части обсуждаются возможности и препятствия для широкомасштабного внедрения результатов проекта. Ключевые слова: мигранты; интеграция; ассимиляция; интеркультурализм; живая библиотека; теория контакта; районы Москвы
Статья написана на основании научно-исследовательской работы «Теоретико-методологические ресурсы для изучения интеграционных траекторий иностранных мигрантов второго поколения в России» в рамках государственного задания РАНХиГС на 2017 г.
