“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.” An insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life

(1)

NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences Department of Social Work

Fleurtje HuiskesAn insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life

Fleurtje Huiskes

“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.”

An insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life -

A photovoice study

Master’s thesis in Social Work

Master ’s thesis

(2)

(3)

Fleurtje Huiskes

“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.”

An insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life

- A photovoice study

Master’s thesis in Social Work Supervisor: Anne Moe

April 2021

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Faculty of Social and Educational Sciences

Department of Social Work

(4)

(5)

Preface

In front of you lays my master thesis. A project with quite some ups and a few downs, sometimes for better and sometimes for worse. The execution of this thesis has given me new insights, both professionally and personally. The fact that I now can present this thesis is also due to all the people that have supported me along the way.

First, I would like to extend a huge thank you to the women who were willing to set aside some time for me and this project. Without your contribution, this work would not have been able to exist. A thank you to Ester, who made the first steps of contact so much easier and less scary.

Thanks to my boyfriend Jafar, for all the support and encouragement along the way. Lastly a big thanks to Anne, my supervisor, whose guidance, feedback, and comments helped to make this thesis such a positive learning experience.

Fleurtje Huiskes Trondheim, April 2021

(6)

(7)

Abstract

The focus in this thesis is the knowledge about and insight into immigrant women’s perspective and reflections on their social lives, and therefore has the following research question: “How do immigrant women participate in social activities in daily life and how does this impact their social networks?”. The research takes a phenomenological point of view and the data has been collected using the photovoice method. The definition of an immigrant has been understood in its’ wides meaning and therefore has included both labor-, and study-related immigrants as well as refugees. In total 5 women have participated in the research project.

The theory in this thesis includes the subject of agency and the difference between being an agent and having agentic power. Additionally, Putnam’s (1993;2000;2002; 2007) theory on social capital with bridging, bonding, and linking is described, adding the dimension of voluntary organisations. Lastly, the connection between social lives and feeling of well-being are highlighted, with an extra focus on migration and immigrant women.

The main findings in this study are that the participating women were highly active in voluntary organisations and that this is the most important arena where get in contact with members of the majority population. Moreover, their networks exist out of international friends and acquaintances, who they both meet in voluntary organisations and non-organised activities. The women also establish networks with compatriots, which often represent a space of comfort and emotional support. The most striking finding was efforts and the agency the women display in building up a social life in a new country. However, this effort seldomly resulted in informal and friendship-based relationships with ethnic Norwegians. Although most of the women express to be satisfied with their social lives and their social networks, they often also express a wish for more informal relationships with members of the majority population than they had now. Seeing the time, efforts, and knowledge that the immigrant women put into socializing and integrating into Norwegians society and networks, it becomes necessary to acknowledge that inclusion and integration is a two-way street that includes efforts from the majority population too.

(8)

(9)

Sammendrag

I denne masteroppgaven ønsker jeg kunnskap og innsikt om kvinnelige innvandrere sine perspektiver og refleksjoner over sine sosiale liv, og har følgende problemstilling: «Hvordan deltar kvinnelige innvandrere i sosiale aktiviteter i hverdagen og hvilke betydninger har dette for deres sosiale nettverk?». Forskningsprosjektet har et fenomenologisk ståsted og datamaterialet har blitt samlet inn gjennom Photovoice metoden og kvalitative intervju.

Kvinnelige innvandrere inkluderer her kvinner som har kommet til Norge for jobb, studier, eller som flyktning. Totalt har 5 kvinner deltatt.

Teorikapittelet tar opp begrepet aktørskap og forskjellen mellom å være aktør og makten til å ta aktørrollen. Begreper som sosial kapital og bridging, bonding og linking (Putnam, 1993;

2000; 2002; 2007) og anvendes til å belyse frivillige organisasjoner sine roller. Til slutt blir sammenhengen mellom sosiale liv og velvære belyst med fokus på innvandring og innvandrer kvinner.

Sentrale funn i denne undersøkelsen er at de deltakende kvinnene er svært aktive i frivillige organisasjoner, som blir den viktigste arena for å komme i kontakt med etniske nordmenn. I tillegg har kvinnene internasjonale nettverk som består av kontakter fra både frivillige organisasjoner og uformelle aktiviteter. Kvinner har også nasjonale nettverk som består av venner og bekjente fra opprinnelse landet som de har uformelle møter og aktiviteter med. Disse nettverkene representerer et avslappende og støttende miljø. Det mest interessante funn er kvinnenes anstrengelse og aktørskap i å bygge opp og forsøk på å etablere et sosialt liv i ett nytt land. Likevel resulterte denne innsatsen ikke i uformelle og sosiale vennskap med etniske nordmenn. Selv om de fleste kvinnene fortalte at de var fornøyde med sine sosiale liv, ønsket de mer vennskapsbaserte relasjoner med majoritetsbefolkningen enn det de hadde. Dette viser at selv om at kvinnene brukte mye tid, innsats og prøvde seg på nye sosiale aktiviteter for å integrere seg i det norske samfunnet og for å etablere norske nettverk, blir det desto mer tydelig at integrasjon og inklusjon er en to-veis prosess som også innebærer inklusjon fra majoritetsbefolkningen.

(10)

(11)

1. Introduction

Central themes in social work are inclusion and integration. These topics are especially used in the context of integrating and including immigrants into society. As a social worker and migrant woman, having had experiences with migrants from early on in life, migration, integration, and inclusion have become topics of interest to me. This study aims to uncover some aspects of the social side of migrating from the views of migrant women. In other words, I hope to shed a light on the reality of immigrant women and their social lives, activities, and networks.

1.1 An insight into immigration and integration

Although historically the vast majority of people remain living in their country of birth, a small portion of the world population has always felt the need to move. Those people, also called migrants, only represent a small minority of the world population. In the past 100 years, the migrant population has stayed relatively the same size, however, from 2010 to 2015 their numbers have been rising from a total of 220 million to 248 million. In 2019 the number of international migrants worldwide reached 272 million. While this still accounts for only 3.5%

of the world population, the developments have already surpassed some of the projections for 2050 (Edmond, 2020). Most migrants are people who move voluntarily across national and state borders, but a smaller portion is forced away from their home grounds. Currently, the world is witness to the highest levels of displacement on record. Around 79.5 million people are forcibly displaced from their homes, out of fear of persecution or danger of a conflict, or other causes. This number contains refugees, internally displaced people, asylum seekers, and Venezuelans displaced abroad (UNHCR, 2021).

Figure 1: Global developments in the migrant population (IOM world migration report, 2020, p.40)

(16)

2 As shown before, the term migrant is an umbrella term that incorporates vastly different groups of people and the term is not defined under international law (IOM, 2021). The UN Migration Agency defines a migrant as following:

“Any person who is moving or has moved across an international border or within a State away from their habitual place of residence, regardless of (1) the person’s legal status; (2) whether the movement is voluntary or involuntary; (3) what the causes for the movement are; or (4) what the length of the stay is.” (UN, 2021, para. 2)

The definition of a migrant, therefore, includes different well-defined legal categories such as migrant workers, refugees, and international students and does not always correlate with the understanding of the public. The classical image of a migrant as young, single, unskilled men trying to find work in the global North is not accurate anymore. In Europe, North America, Oceania, Latin America, and the Caribbean, women migrants are in the majority. Additionally, migrant flows consist of increasing levels of skilled workers, both male and female. Women nowadays migrate more often to study or work, rather than joining a life partner (UN, 2017).

1.1.1 Migration and Norway

Generally, it is agreed that Norway has established itself as a migration country around the end of the 1960s to the beginning of 1970s with the arrival of labor migrants (mostly from Pakistan) and the first post-war stream of refugees (mostly from Vietnam) (Vassenden, 1999). Over the past decades, the number of immigrants arriving in Norway has fluctuated but steadily increased, following global developments. In 1975, Norway enacted an immigration stop, mostly fuelled by stories of migrant mismanagement in Europe and the threat of a sudden immigration flow. The ‘immigration stop’ of ’75 was the first legislation to formally restrict immigration to Norway (Bratsberg, Raaum & Sørlie, 2007; Cooper, 2005).From the late 1980’s to the early 2000’s immigration spiked from time to time, in

accordance with periods of unrest elsewhere in the world, such as Iran, Chile, Sri Lanka (1987/88), Bosnia (1993), Kosovo (1998/99), Iraq (200-2002) and Somalia (2002), which temporarily resulted in a higher number of refugees (Bratsberg, Raaum & Sørlie, 2007).

Figure 2: Immigration to Norway 1967-2003, immigrant flow indicating the number of migrants entering at a given time and residents indicating the original cohort immigrants who remained (alive) in Norway by the time of measuring in 2004 (Bratsberg, Raaum & Sørlie, 2007)

(17)

3 In recent years, conflicts in the Middle East and Northern Africa have been responsible for the temporary increase in immigration. In 2015, the total amount of asylum-seekers in Norway added up to 31145, which was about as much as the three previous years combined (Tanner, 2016; Kåresen Hervik, 2016). However, the general fear of continuous high increased immigration turned out to be ungrounded, as the number of asylum applicants in 2016 turned out to be significantly lower than previously predicted (Hervik, 2016). In recent years, the growth in the number of immigrants has subsided (Steinkellner, 2019). After several years of drop in net migration, the first positive net immigration was noted in 2019 (caused by a drop in emigration) (Thorud, 2020). The Central Bureau of Statistics (SSB) puts the number of immigrants living in Norway in 2021 at 800 094 which equals ca. 15% of the total population in Norway (SSB, 2021).

1.1.2 Migration attitudes and policies

Scandinavian countries have long taken pride in playing responsible and constructive roles on the global stage, including their attitudes and policies regarding immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. The established welcoming reputation has functioned as a pull factor, contributing to recent migrants bypassing the more traditional destinations like Germany or France. For example, Norway offers asylum seekers to live in reception centres, stipends for basic necessities, access to health care, schooling for minors, and the right to apply for further financial assistance. With decades of welcoming policies, significant diaspora communities have grown and possibly acted as another pull factor for recent immigrants (Tanner, 2016).

Even though Norway has continuously been offering relatively welcoming immigration policies, public and political support for immigration has been curbing since the 1980s. From the edges of the political field, political parties with restrictive immigration policies have grown into major players gaining significant public support (Tanner, 2016). Norway’s modern migration policy is grounded in the belief that the Norwegian welfare state has limited resources to offer. Therefore, two basic principles have remained consistent throughout Norway’s journey into an immigrant-receiving country; immigration must be limited, and all immigrants admitted should have equal legal and practical opportunities in society. Especially the understanding around how immigrants should have legal and equal rights in society has changed. Starting from emphasis on respect for immigrant’s language and culture, the government has in the past decades stressed more on the responsibility of the immigrant to participate and learn the Norwegian language (Cooper, 2005).

(18)

4 Although immigration and integration policies have become stricter in the past years, anti- immigration parties have grown, and public opinion seems to have become more negative, other (more positive) developments have also been found. Hellevik & Hellevik (2017) researched Norwegian attitudes towards immigration and integration and found, perhaps surprising, results. Between 1993 and 2015 attitudes towards immigration and immigrants have become more positive. At the end of 2015, this tendency decreased slightly, but not dramatically.

Norway, therefore, stands out from other global developments. These findings also make it more difficult to justify and understand the developments towards a more restricting and negative immigration climate that did occur in Norway, despite a generally more positive public.

1.1.3 (Social) Integration policies

Integration is a topic closely connected to immigration. The common fear is that a lack of integration will cause marginalization and weakening of societal bonds, which would endanger society and individuals (Walstad Enes, 2019). The ultimate goal of integrational work is that all who live in Norway will be able to use their resources and contribute to society. Immigrants and their families will not only contribute to but also participate in society. Additionally, all migrants who live in Norway should be able to get into the job market, become taxpayers, and partaking citizens (St. Meld 30 2015-2016, s.10). Measures such as language training, labor market integration, and initiatives to prevent racism and xenophobia have been set in motion to realize these goals (Cooper, 2005).

Even though work and education are seen as the more important integrational areas, Solbergs’

government (2013 - dd) intends to spend more attention on the integration areas regarding everyday life and the right to a free life (Walstad Enes, 2016). Every day-life integration also implies the help of the majority population in the integration process of newcomers by inviting them into daily activities such as invitations to dinner parties, football teams, and other social activities (Språkrådet. 2016).

That social integration is a field on its’ own is among others highlighted in Harald Eia’s (2020) TV program (red:) “Such is Norway”. In one of the episodes, the difficulties new Norwegians or newcomers encounter socially are (amusingly) explained. Eia refers to a research executed among expats which reveals that Norway ranks 60th of 64 worldwide concerning the easiness of finding friends (Internationals, 2019). Ranking 64 resembles the hardest place to make friends. Julien Bourelle, a man experienced with living in different foreign countries, states to have encountered the biggest challenges regarding social culture in Norway. Bourelle was so

(19)

5 surprised that he ended up writing two books to help guide newcomers into the Norwegian social culture; “The social guidebook to Norway” and “The social guidebook to Norway:

Friendships and Relationships” (Bourelle, n.d.). Although, there are several (personal) accounts of the difficulties of socializing in Norwegian society, the (red:) Integrational Barometer from The Institute for societal research (2020) indicates that around two-third of their respondents (n2950) have family, friends, or acquaintances with an immigrant background from Asia, Eastern-Europe, Africa and/or South- and Central America. A distinct minority, one of three, does not know any person with an immigrant background from these countries. As Western Europe is not included in this survey, one could assume that this number might be even lower.

The Integration Barometer also shows the amount of contact occurring with the immigrant population (see figure 3) It is, however, unknown what this contact consists of. If this is a family connection, friendship, colleague, or just someone they meet in the shop or on their way to work and how this relationship is perceived by those

involved.

Figure 3: Frequency contact with immigrants (Integration barometer, 2020)

1.2 Research theme and question

From the above-collected information and my personal experiences as an immigrant woman, an interest in the social activities of immigrants emerged. As the statistic often shows that women who go through the introduction program lack behind concerning work and education, it became natural to focus the attention of this research towards them (Walstad Enes, 2016).

The research topic moved towards the arena of social activities as this is an arena separate from jobs and education and more accessible for all. One does not need to qualify for anything to be a part of the social arena, as they would need in the case of work or education.

More specifically this thesis will focus on the following research question:

“How do immigrant women participate in social activities in daily life and how does this impact their social networks?”.

(20)

6 To define the research question more closely, there are several aspects of social activity that will be highlighted. Factors such as: what kind of social activities are the women involved in, how did they encounter these activities, who do they meet with, where do these activities happen, are the women satisfied with these activities, and what kind of possibilities/changes do they wish for otherwise?

1.3 Clarification of central concepts

This thesis focuses solely on immigrant women. As shown above, the term immigrant can be understood in varied ways, certainly also because the media uses the term in different contexts.

In this thesis, the definition given by the UN will be followed closely. The immigrant women partaking in this research have come to Norway for varied reasons, some for work or study and some as refugees, but all of them have crossed state borders to reach their destination. Migrants who have moved within their state or country are not represented in this study. All migrants participating in this study had stayed in Norway for at least one year.

Another central topic is social activity of the immigrant women. Social activity will be defined by the definition of Uni Sveen (2020) par. 1 as used in (red:) The Big Medical Encyclopaedia.

Here social activity means: social activities are leisure activities and cultural activities; for example, gatherings with friends or family, participation in sports, musical activities, and other hobby activities. Within the health department, the definition is also used in connection with activities in daily life.

1.4 Previous research findings

To get more specific into the topic of immigrant women’s social activities in daily life one must dig a little deeper. As this research is executed in Norway, previous findings from the Scandinavian context will be discussed. To finalize, the researcher will elaborate on how she will contribute to the research field.

1.4.1 Importance of social networks

The importance of social networks has long been recognized in the field of migration studies (see among others: Boyd 1990; Portes and Rumbaut 1990; Gurak and Caces 1992; Zhou 1997;

Korac 2001; Krissman 2005). Several studies have stated that many refugees experience social marginalizing and make few Norwegian friends. Contacts they have with Norwegians are often described as acquaintances and occur in specific contexts such as neighborhoods, education or work-related and seldomly in leisure time (Berg & Svarva 1994; Akman 1993; Valenta 2008).

(21)

7 Refugees consider social isolation and marginalization to be one of the major issues of living in exile (Berg, 2010).

In her master thesis, Reinar (2016) stresses that immigrants who experienced close connections with their neighbors or others in their local community defined those as meaningful and contributed to a pleasant community. Immigrants who experienced a lack of social belonging described this as a strong negative influence on their phycological health. Fyrand (2016) showed that feelings of loneliness occur double as much in the immigrant population than the native population.

1.4.2 The function of the social network

Valenta (2008), however, has shown that few or weaker contacts with Norwegians is not necessarily a sign of social marginalization, but can be done by choice or for varied different reasons. Refugees can combine relatively weak ties with the majority population with stronger bonds within their ethnic community and have a satisfying social life in such a manner. The ethnic or national social network of refugees has been both characterized as positive and negative social capital. The network can be regarded as positive as it functions as a “self-help”

system where immigrants are provided with guidance into the new society and have the possibility to positively influence their economic and social living conditions, cultivate peculiar cultural practices as well as lessen negative impacts concerning racism and discrimination (Korac, 2001; Dorias 1991; Valenta 2008). On the other hand, the ethnic network can represent negative social capital. The connection with the national community can hamper immigrant’s possibilities to access other social networks and their possibilities which might reduce their social mobility (Valenta, 2008).

1.4.3 Immigrant women and social participation

Interesting to this research is the fact that several studies have shown that certain categories are more exposed to social isolation, passivity, and unemployment; among whom refugee women (Dalgard et al 1995; Djuve and Kavli 2000; Al- Ali and Koser 2002; Berg et al 2006). In a study comparing Scandinavian-born women and immigrant women in Scandinavian countries, immigrant women score lower on social participation, such as visits to public places, private parties, union meetings, partaking in other organisations across the board. The results showed a diversion among Western immigrants and Non-Western immigrants, where non-western immigrants scored lower and western immigrants scored closer to the reference population. The only area where social participation was higher than the reference population was religious gatherings and activities (Lindström, 2004). Women who predominantly have family

(22)

8 connections with their own culture often maintain the same cultural practices in Norway. The ethnic community sticks to own cultural frame, which can form a barrier for women to (socially) participate in Norwegian society. Barriers for women to participate in Norwegian society are mainly found in cultures that are more male-dominated or patriarchal (Kalupe, 2017).

1.5 Thesis structure

In the next chapter, the theory relevant to the research theme will be explained to reach a deeper understanding of topics central to this issue. The theory in this chapter comes forth from the analyses of the data material. In this study, subjects as agency, social capital and the importance of social contact will be discussed. Chapter three will contain all aspects regarding the methodological approach and the use of the described methods. The reader will get an insight into how the research has been conducted and an understanding of the process that the researcher has gone through. Aspects that will be treated are methodological approach, method use, selection of participants, recruitment, data collection, validity, ethics, and reflection. In chapter four the analyses of the results will be shown. Central findings and analytical categories will be clarified with the help of quotations from the data material. The researcher interprets the data and starts moving towards an answer to the research question. The discussion will be held, and a conclusion will be drawn in chapter five. The results are summarized and discussed with the help of the theory. The researcher will describe the study’s impact, but also the limitations the study inhabits. Finally, a conclusion will be drawn. Attachments such as bibliography, NSD forms, the interview, information sheet for participants, and consent forms can be found at the end.

(23)

9

2. Theory

Research projects surrounding the topic of social life and networks are often associated with certain specific theories. In this study, three of these theories will be highlighted. First, the capabilities of the individual to act and initiate, otherwise known as agency, will be discussed.

Afterwards, the different forms of social capital associated with social networks will be explained with the help of Putnam’s theories as well as the role voluntary organisations take.

Lastly, the importance of social networks on well-being and mental health will be in focus, to put the importance of social capital and agency in a concrete and relevant social context.

2.1 Agency

In this paragraph, the essentials of human agency will be discussed. Furthermore, the topic of agency will be clarified with extra focus on the distinction between the power of agency and agentic power.

2.1.1 Human agency

Agency-theorists concern themselves with the purposes behind human actions, and the degree of rationality that can be found in them. Within agency theory, there are different perspectives that influences the way one looks at ‘the freedom to act’ that individuals possess. Social constructionism, which emphasises methodological individualism, is one of the leading perspectives and bases itself on the belief that society is constructed on human interaction, choices, and actions executed by individuals (Østerberg, 2003). Theorists from a structuralism point of view, which emphasises methodological collectivism, will argue that society inhabits social structures which provide people with certain possibilities and limitations, which results in limited freedom of acting and people adapting to society as it ‘is’. Behaviour and choices will be determined and/or executed within the framework individuals find themselves in, this can be according to culture, politics, history, norms, traditions, religion, ethnicity, etc. Social constructionism is criticized for paying too little attention to structure and power and overestimating the possibilities of individuals’ interactions and actions. Structuralism can be criticized for too much attention on structures and too little trust in individuals own capabilities to act and influence (Martinussen, 1999). Noteworthy to mention is that Anthony Giddens has attempted to find a middle way in the discussion of the importance of individual action vs.

social structures. In Giddens’ views, actors are active and use the social structures, however social structures give possibilities and limitations. Individuals influence the social structures with their actions, which in turn changes the way social structures influence their lives (Garsjø,

(24)

10 2001). This perspective can be recognized in the works of Berger and Luckmann (2000) who described the relationship between individual actors and social structures as dialectic, where individuals are a product of the society just as well as the society is a product of individuals.

As this study focuses on the individual, a deeper look into the social constructivism perspective will be taken. Within this field Bandura (1986;1989;2000) has in his studies highlighted the element of human agency. Individuals are seen in an agentic perspective where they are producers of experiences and shapers of events (Bandura, 2000). Self-generated activities are seen as the hearth of causal processes. Human agency has been conceptualized in at least three different ways; autonomous agency, mechanical agency, or emergent interactive agency.

Complete autonomous agency has very few serious advocates as few scholars see humans as entirely independent agents of their actions. Bandura (1986) subscribes to a model of emergent interactive agency. Individuals are neither autonomous agents, nor are they simply mechanical communicators of environmental influences. People are partly products of their environment, but by selecting, creating, and transforming environmental circumstances, they are too producers of their environments. This agentic capability helps to influence events and shaping lives (Bandura, 2000).

People are able to make a causal contribution to their motivation and actions. One of the strongest contributors to personal agency is people’s belief in their own control over events that affect their lives, also called self-efficacy. Self-efficacy functions as an important set of determinants of human motivation, affect, and action and may affect thought processes that either is self-aiding or self-hindering. The stronger one’s perceived self-efficacy the higher the goals one set and the firmer the commitment to these goals is. For example, the stronger people believe in their capabilities of finishing a given task in a proper manner, the more dedicated they will be to do so, which in turn enhances their performances (Berry, 1987). A considerable amount of literature and research, based in varied spheres of functioning, shows that people guide their actions partly by their beliefs of personal efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Moreover, statistical analyses that combine the findings of numerous studies confirm the important role perceived self-efficacy plays in people’s ability to adapt and change (Bandura, 2000).

Forethought is another factor that plays a crucial role in personal agency. People do not simply react to immediate impulses from their environment, nor can/do they always relate to experiences from their past. Most human behaviour is regulated by forethought. People anticipate the likely consequences of their prospective actions, they set goals for themselves, and they plan courses of action likely to produce desired outcomes. Other aspects influencing

(25)

11 personal agency are skills at one’s command and other self-influence tools that affect and/or support selected courses of action. Above- named aspects aid people in generating novel ideas and innovative actions that exceed their past experiences and support efforts to realize valued futures (Bandura, 1989).

Depending on their environment’s circumstances and perceived self-efficacy, people may invoke different styles of human agency. Bandura (2000) distinguishes between three different forms of agency: personal, proxy, and collective. Personal agency is by far the most researched of the three and incorporates the cognitive, motivational, affective, and choice processes through which it exercises its’ effects. This directs approach is however not always possible as people often do not have direct control over social conditions and practices that affect their lives. In these cases, well-being and security can be reached by acting through proxy agency.

This socially mediated form of agency refers to people activating other people who have more expertise or influence to act on their behalf to reach the desired outcome. Proxy agency can also be utilized when people do not want to saddle themselves with the work needed to obtain needed competencies or the responsibilities and stressors associated with the action. Few to no people live their life in individual autonomy. Many of the desired outcomes can only be achieved by interdependent effort and collective action, hence collective agency is employed. People’s shared beliefs in their collective power to produce desired results are a key ingredient of collective agency (Bandura, 2000).

Bandura (1989) rejects the separation of self as agent and self as objective. Acting on oneself and acting on one’s environment entails shifting the perspective of the same agent, rather than transforming the self from agent to object. Acting over one’s environment requires relying on one’s knowledge, cognitive skills, and behavioural skills to reach the desired outcome. Acting as an agent over oneself requires monitoring one’s actions and enlisting cognitive guides and self-incentives to produce desired personal changes.

2.1.2 Agency and agentic power

Although Bandura’s work portrays theories around human agency to be quite straightforward and understandable, the concept of agency is widely recognized as a “slippery” theme. The difficulties surrounding the concept have led some scholars to label agency as a concept with no sociological utility (Loyal & Barnes, 2001). Campbell (2009) claims that the confusion around agency stems from the disorientation of agency relating to one concept, whereas Campbell states that agency can be divided into two types.

(26)

12 Campbell (2009) claims that the debate around agency has become too bound up to the agency- structure relationship which concerns the degree of autonomy that should be attributed to individuals versus the constraining power of social structures. Part of the confusion is created in the definitions given by different sociological dictionaries and textbooks, where agency is both portrayed as “the volitional, purposive, and intentional aspect of human activity” (Ritzer, 2005:8) and “the ability of actors to operate independently of the determining constraints of social structure” (Calhoun, 2002:7). One of the definitions refers to the ability of individuals to implement their will, while the other emphasises the individuals’ ability to do so against resistance. Yet there is not clear if there is a good reason to treat “the capacity for willed voluntary action” as identical to “the capacity of individuals to act independently of structural constraints” (Campbell, 2009).

According to Campbell (2009), it would be helpful to view the term agency in the same way as the term power, namely, it possesses two different forms. In the case of power, this would be the power to and the power over, in the case of agency this would concern the way agency relates to the individual. On the one hand, agency can refer to the power possessed by the individual that enables them to engage in actions, while on the other hand, it can refer to the individual acting as an agent. Campbell labels these as type 1 and type 2 forms of agency. That these terms refer to different forms of agencies becomes clear as type 1 refers to the ability of the individual to act (agency), while type 2 refers to character and the effects of their actions (agentic power). The clear distinction that Campbell makes is that while the individual might have the power to act (agency), that this does not automatically makes them into agents (agentic power), as they might not be acting independently of social structures or in any tangible way create change. A quotation of Campbell (2009:410) might clarify matters:

“All actions will, of course, have some effect, but this may impact mainly on the physical environment or indeed on the actor, while even when it impacts on other actors or larger structures there is nothing to say that it will be anything other than that prescribed by law, custom, or convention, let alone that it will encounter resistance of any kind. It is true that in both senses the concept of agency implies autonomy and voluntarism, even possibly creativity.

However, this has very different implications for the nature of action when used in the contrasting senses noted above. For while in type 2 conceptions of agency it means that the actions themselves are judged to possess these qualities, when agency is used in the type 1 sense it merely implies that these qualities apply to the means through which action is accomplished.”

(27)

13 It is important to note that both agency types can vary in degree. Fuchs (2001) observed that many agency theorists seem to think that persons just “have agency”, instead of inquiring about the extent to which they could be said to have it. The variation in how far people have type 2 agency is in many more ways obvious, as also the debate around individual’s freedom from structural constraints is an unavoidable issue in agency-structure discussion. These discussions are however rarely taken up concerning type 1 agency. The ability of individuals to execute self-conscious willed actions is often taken for granted. It is important to emphasise that the ability to exercise type 1 agency has varied over time, between individuals and according to circumstances (Campbell, 2009).

Another aspect concerning agency worth discussing is its’ relation to culture. Alexander (1992) noted that there is a tendency in the agency-structure debate to conceptualize culture as something separate from individuals. However, Weber ‘s (1964; 1965) works show that culture is undoubtedly related to agency. Specific cultural developments, such as identifiable beliefs and values which once they are internalized by actors, led to a massive utilization of their power of agency. Weber’s analysis, for example, shows that due to cultural developments in modern times, men and women nowadays have greater powers of type 1 agency than their ancestors but may enjoy lesser volumes of type 2 agency.

2.2 Social capital in the light of Putnam’s theory

In this paragraph, the topic of social capital will be further discussed, with a focus on Putnam’s theory of bonding and bridging. Also, the new term of linking will be shortly highlighted.

Additionally, the theory of bridging and bonding will be reviewed in the context of voluntary organisations.

2.2.1 Bonding & Bridging

Burt (2000) views society as a market in which people exchange a variety of goods and ideas to pursue their interests. Some people or some groups of people manage this better than others and they will see higher returns for their efforts. By using the human capital point of view, this inequality would be viewed as some people just doing better than others or being more able individuals; more intelligent, more attractive, more articulate, or better skilled to name a few.

Social capital would look at these phenomena of inequality in a social context. The people or groups of people who do better in a society are those who are better connected.

Bourdieu (1980), Coleman (1988), and Putnam (1993) are all names heavily associated with research around the topic of social capital. Although their definitions on social capital have

(28)

14 different origins and styles of accompanying evidence, the common ground and understanding they create are that social structure is a form of capital which for certain persons or groups of persons gives a competitive advantage in pursuing their ends, where the better connected enjoy more benefits. Putnam (1993:167) defines this more concretely in the following quote:

“Social capital refers to features of social organisation, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated action”.

Though much of the empirical work concerning social capital stresses the beneficial effects, the more recent literature has explicitly stressed the importance of recognizing the effects of different types of social capital. In particular, the distinction between the effects of homogeneous networks (bonding) and heterogeneous networks (bridging) and the different positive and negative consequences these entitle (Putnam, 2000; Coffé & Geys, 2007). The distinction between bonding and bridging is partially inspired by the works of Granovetter (1973, 1985, 2000) on embeddedness and bonding and, bridging will have some similarities to the topic of weak and strong ties. Bonding and bridging have been described as types (Ramos- Pinto, 2012), forms (Gooderham, Minbaeva and Pederson, 2011; Woolcock and Narayan, 2000), dimensions (Woolcock and Narayan, 2000), and/or functions (Seferiadis et al, 2015) of social capital and all these terms are used interchangeable and boil down to the same essence (Claridge, 2018).

Bonding

Bonding social capital is described connections within a group or community characterized by a high level of similarity in demographics such as background, characteristics, attitudes, interests, ethnicity, and/or availability of information and resources. Whereas in most research on social capital strong bonds include strong ties such as family and friends, in migration research this distinction runs along ethnic group boundaries and intra- and interethnic ties (Heizmann & Böhnke, 2016). The benefits bonding relations and networks provide are predominantly based on material and emotional support. Bonding networks are often defined as in-ward looking and protective and characterized by a high density of relationships between members; most (if not all) members belonging to the network are interconnected because they know each other and frequently interact. Bonding social capital can fulfil a useful social function by providing an essential source of (social) support, especially for people with lower social-economic assets or poor health, as well as it facilitates the basics for collaborative action (Claridge, 2018). Putnam (2000) suggests that the characteristics of bonding capital make it suitable for “getting by”. Although bonding networks clearly have positive effects, many

(29)

15 researchers have pointed to its’ potential negative effects. Networks with excessive levels of bonding tend to result in bias and racism, creating outgroups and exclusion; a classic example is the Ku Klux Klan. Moreover, benefits enjoyed by the members of dense bonding networks might be made unavailable for non-members (Portes, 1998). Emphasis on this distinction between members/ingroup and non-members/outgroup can foster hostility towards the latter.

Strong inward-looking networks may create an us-versus-them attitude in which a group can develop strong social connections and high levels of generalized trust among members but avoid or potentially distrust members of other groups (Abrams et al, 2005; Portes,1998). The absence of contact with individuals who have a different racial, ethnic, or class background serves to reinforce prejudices and segregation (Marshall & Stolle, 2004). Additionally, bonding social capital has been shown to have no effect or negative effect on economic outcomes.

Several studies have therefore claimed that bonding capital limits individuals in their social mobility and that bonding networks can function as a trap where people cannot rise above their given situation as their network is unable or unwilling to raise them up (Claridge, 2018).

Bridging

On the other hand, bridging social capital is reviewed in an overall more positive light. Bridging social capital is the type of social capital that links people across ridges in society that typically divides people, as for example class, ethnicity, or religion. Bridging social capital can therefore be taken quite literally as a ‘bridge’ between communities, groups, organisations, or individuals.

In the context of immigrant research Burt’s (2001) concept of a bridge refers to bridging between two networks, emphasizing different social groups that can be connected by individual ties across network boundaries. This bridging concept provides the necessary tools to introduce the specific situation where immigrants are potential members of two different societies.

Bridging often describes social relationships that include exchange, involving people with shared interests or goals but contrasting social identities (Pelling & High, 2005).

Already in 1848, John Stuart Mills noted the importance of bridging relationships:

“It is hardly possible to overrate the value . . . of placing human beings in contact with persons dissimilar to themselves, and with modes of thought and action unlike those with which they are familiar . . . . Such communication has always been, and is peculiarly in the present age, one of the primary sources of progress.”

John Stuart Mills (1848:517)

(30)

16 Bridging social capital has been ascribed far stronger positive effects than bonding social capital. The benefits of bridging networks can include the increased ability to gather information, the ability to gain access to power or better placement within the network, or the ability to better recognize new opportunities (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Bridging social capital also enables different groups to share and exchange information, ideas, and innovation and builds consensus among the groups representing diverse interests. The overlapping of networks makes resources and opportunities present in one group available to members of the other group (Stone & Hughes, 2002). Additionally, because bridging social capital ranges over social boundaries it tends to increase tolerance and acceptance of different people, values, and beliefs through exposure to diverse others (Paxton, 2002). Putnam (2000) has suggested that bridging potentially functions as a social lubricant and works as social leverage to help one ‘get ahead’.

The relationships involving bridging capital tend to be weaker, owing to the contrast of space- time and therefore less frequent (Claridge, 2018). Van Staveren & Knorringa (2007) stress that the word ‘weak’ should not be interpreted in negatively, since the weakness in the ties is the strength of bridging social capital. Social relationships that fall under the bridging network tend to be voluntary and with the continuous option to break up or changing one relation for another, without suffering grave social sanctions.

Although the concepts for bonding and bridging social capital are often portrayed as quite dichotomous, in practice the distinction between bonding and bridging is not so easy, given the multiple and overlapping relationships individuals have with others (Healy, 2002). Bonding and bridging are not altogether mutually exclusive. Groups seldomly exist out of one characteristic and will in most cases still incorporate diversities (and therefore bridging opportunities) based on generations, sexes, or educational achievements (Claridge, 2018). A good example of the ambiguous aspects of the bonding/bridging social capital is friendship.

While friendship is often understood as a form of bonding social capital, as it is frequently formed between people who share common characteristics or interests and contains a high amount of social support, friendship can also be categorized as a form of bridging social capital when the friendship crosses for example differences in cultural-, or socio-economic backgrounds (Edwards, 2004). Putnam (2000) stresses that bonding and bridging are not ‘either or’ categories where either can be clearly divided, but function more as dimensions along which different forms of social capital can be identified. Claridge (2018) therefore suggests looking at bonding and bridging in a more combined matter and distinguish them in terms of internal

(31)

17 bonding/bridging (bridging and bonding via socio-economic heterogeneity of within organisations) and external bonding/bridging

(bridging and bonding through interconnections between associations – which may predominantly result from the overlapping network between organisations).

Figure 4: Qualities of Bonding and Bridging social capital, Claridge, 2018)

Although researchers generally show a preference for bridging social capital over bonding social capital, the most important aspect to keep in mind is the balance of bonding and bridging social capital in individuals’ lives and the context they are placed in (Claridge, 2018).

2.2.2 Linking

Woolcock (2001) argues that bridging social capital can appear in a context where the relationship between those involved can be either horizontal or vertical. By missing out on this element, the importance of the power aspect can get lost. Linking social capital would refer to relations between individuals and groups in different social realities in a hierarchy where power, social status, and wealth are accessed by different groups and could therefore be seen as an extension of bridging social capital (Healy, 2000). Granovetter (1985) and Putnam (2000) state that by the introduction of linking social capital, bridging social capital on its’ own would then always relate to bonds of connectedness that are formed over the diverse horizontal group, where the power position can be regarded as relatively equal. Linking social capital describes the networks of trusting relationships between people who interact across explicit, formal, or institutionalized power or authority levels in society (Szretzer & Woolcock, 2004). Connections that form across these levels are defined as vertical. Typical examples of linking social capital would be the relationships between community-based organisations and government-issued funds, or ties of individuals or groups represented in schools, public agencies, business interests, legal institutions, and/or religious/political groups (Healy, 2002). Specific to linking social capital is the power difference that plays a conscious role in the relationship and the feature of reciprocity (Schneider, 2006; Szretzer & Woolcock, 2004).

(32)

18 Linking social capital has several beneficial effects, especially demonstrated in poor countries and communities where it is essential for well-being, for example, linking can contribute to government officials connecting with the right people who can provide them with the knowledge, information, and skills to perform their jobs. However, for linking networks to have any effect, it is important to have a balance of the bonding and bridging networks present (Jordan, 2015). Onyx et al (2007) identified that communities with diverse and higher forms of social capital are more capable to mobilize when in situations of adversity and less likely to endure negative outcomes. Although, the absence of other social capitals and an abundance of linking social capital can quickly develop into nepotism, corruption, suppression, and political favouritism (Grootaert et al, 2003; Szreter & Woolcock, 2004).

Non-government organisations (NGOs) which work together with communities to implement donor or government projects frequently become central figures of linking social capital.

NGO’s which maintaining good relationships with the wider community are often more secure of continuous funding (Clardige, 2018).

2.2.3 Voluntary organisations – bonding and bridging characteristics

Voluntary organisations have been awarded a special place within the concept of social capital and the functioning of a democratic political system since the early works of Tocqueville (1835/1962). Not only do voluntary organisation instil the basis for democratic and cooperative norms and values into individuals, but these individuals will also carry out these norms and values to other’s who might be less active in organisational life (Stolle, 2000). The important role ascribed to voluntary organisations has functioned as one of the foundations of recent literature on civil society and the social capital theories of Putnam (1993,2000) and empirical research seems to be broadly supportive (Coffé & Geys, 2007).

Nonetheless, the fact that group memberships do not always engender beneficial results has been acknowledged as well. The impact of participating in voluntary organisations on the wider community is likely to vary based on the group’s goals and activities and the diversity and inclusiveness of their memberships (Knack, 2003). Voluntary organisations too can be distinguished between bonding and bridging associations. This distinction between bonding and bridging builds mainly on the composition of voluntary organisation memberships and the degree this deviates from the (local) population on a specific socioeconomic trait, the more a certain socioeconomic characteristic is under-or overrepresented in the group and the network the organisation itself possesses. Associations that deviate much from the (local) population and cater to homogeneous members, generally adhere to bonding social capital mannerism. The

(33)

19 bonding property of the organisation will make it harder for its’ members to create meaningful links between various socioeconomic groups within the organisation because they are not represented there. Organisations with a more heterogeneous membership population that resembles more accurately the (local) population, on the other hand, will potentially offer greater chances for bridging social capital. Voluntary organisations with bridging mannerisms are more able to connect their members to others with different socioeconomic traits (Paxton, 2002; Coffé & Geys, 2007). Furthermore, successful experiences of diverse group cooperation can more easily be transferred to the heterogeneous outside world than in-group interaction and trust among homogeneous individuals (Putnam (ed) & Gross, 2002). Just as it is impossible to classify individuals’ relations/networks as solely bonding or bridging, voluntary organisations also incorporate a certain form of ambiguity on whether they can be described as bonding or bridging associations. Organisations can often be described as both bonding and bridging to some extend but will often tend to lean towards either one of them (Paxton, 2002). Foster, Meinhard & Berger (2003) argue that women and women’s organisations, in particular, tend to engage more in bonding than bridging practices. This tendency suggests also that some voluntary organisations are not equally equipped to move from a bonding focused organisation to a bridging-based organisation. Nannestad, Svendsen & Svendsen (2008) support this claim but follow this up with recommendations to empower organisations to enhance their bridging capacities. Organisations with lower bridging abilities for their members are recommended to shift towards a more open membership group, so less focus on one characteristic. Additionally, being situated in decentralised, shared meeting places, ensures regular face-to-face interaction across group splits, and therefore aiding to potential change from being defined by predominantly bonding characteristics to be able to offer more bridging traits.

Van der Meer (2015) criticizes the role of voluntary organisations and the bonding and bridging opportunities they would represent. Even Putnam (2007) has in more recent works claimed that exposure to ethnic diverse groups can, at least in the short term, bring out ‘the turtle in us’ or in other words lead to harmful results for both inter-ethnic and intra-ethnic social cohesion, although this has not been linked to associational environments. Although Hooghe &

Quentellier (2013) claim that it is a general finding that members of voluntary organisations are more tolerant toward minority groups than the population on average, Van der Meer (2015) on the other hand claims that organisations do not live up to the potential that is awarded to them.

Van der Meer’s study does not show any effects of the diversity of associational life, not positive or negative, on intra- and interethnic social cohesion. Differences found are more likely

(34)

20 to be ascribed to self-selection effects: more tolerant people are more likely to be involved in organisations catering to concerns regarding interethnic relations. These findings challenge the notion that voluntary organisations play a role in socializing their members into more pro-social and tolerant citizens. Although the internal effects of voluntary organisations are disputed, the external effects of bridging organisations on the wider community may still be relevant. Van der Meer (2015) does not claim that socialization does not occur in voluntary organisations at all but highlights that effects might be strongest on newer groups (immigrant, youth, and children) and that the overall effect of voluntary organisations, especially on adults, might be overblown. Newton (1997) ads the relative importance of voluntary organisations compared to other societal structures promoting social capital such as schools, family, work, and community which all may have a stronger internal effect as they take up more time and generally involve stronger emotional commitment (Foster, Meinhard & Berger, 2003).

2.3 Social ties and well-being

The belief that social ties play a beneficial role in the maintenance of psychological well-being is generally agreed upon. Durkheim is one of the first who showed the link between social isolation and reduced psychological well-being. Smaller networks, fewer close relationships, and lower perceived social support have all been connected to depressive symptoms (Barnet &

Gotlib, 1988). Integration in a social network may result in direct positive psychological states such as a sense of inclusion, purpose and security, and recognition of self-worth. Participating in broader social structures increases the likelihood of accessing various forms of social support which decreases the chances of experiencing feelings of distress (Cohen, Underwood &

Gottlieb, 2000).

2.3.1 A general view on social ties and well-being

Lin et al (1999) define three layers of social ties being a “belongingness-bonding-bridging”

continuum, which relates to the theories put forward on social capital. The three layers of social ties all influence mental health in a different matter, but each outer layer is overlapping with the inner layer and provides opportunities for the inner layer. For example, social ties related to belongingness may promote bonding social ties. Just as Putnam’s concept of bonding has been highlighted for its’ positive and negative influences, this is also the case connected to dense social networks influences on mental health. Involvement in certain forms of social engagement can function both protective and damaging (Kawachi & Berkman, 2001).

(35)

21 Cohen and Wills (1985) differentiate between two mechanisms by which social relationships influence health outcomes: the main effect model and the stress-buffering model. The stress- buffering model suggests that social ties and the health benefits ascribed to them are only relevant for persons under stress. The main effect model suggests that social ties are beneficial for health, regardless of the emotional state of the individual. These models do not exclude one another but help to explain the influence of specific aspects of social relationships on psychological health. Structural aspects of social relationships such as social networks and social integration may have a bigger influence on main effects, whereas functional aspects such as perceived support are more relevant in the stress-buffering mechanism.

The costs and benefits of social ties vary with gender, socioeconomic position, and stage in life.

It has been widely reported that women note significantly higher rates of psychological distress than men, which might be explained by their different involvement in social networks. Belle (1987) summarizes the differences reported in women’s networks as following: women tend to maintain more emotionally intimate relationships than men, mobilize more social support during stress periods, and provide more frequent and effective social support to others.

Additionally, studies have found that women’s mental health is more strongly affected by negative components associated with social ties than the positive components (Kawachi &

Berkmann, 2001).

2.3.2 Immigrant women and mental health

Where women already constitute a category of their own, also immigrant women deserve special attention. While immigration offers many benefits, settling in a new society will also offer up many new challenges such as navigating new social systems, government bureaucracy, new cultures and not the least new languages. Besides these aspects, basic needs as employment, housings and food need to be organised. The process of immigration, adaptation, and integration is lengthy and by some experienced as dehumanizing. All these circumstances influence immigrant women’s health in generals and their mental health in particular (Guruge

& Collings, 2008; Sandys, 1996). According to the disillusionment model, immigrant mental adaptation follows certain phases. Phase one is also called the euphoria phase where immigrants report equal or better mental health statuses than the host population. The second phase of disillusionment and nostalgia sees the mental health of immigrants deteriorate to finally in phase three adapt to approximately the mental health status of a native-born (Rumbaut, 1985;

Tyhurst, 1951).

(36)

22 Social connectedness, freedom from discrimination and violence, and economic participation are identified as important determinants of mental health. Immigrant women may form a more complex category concerning these determinants as their pre-migration experiences may interfere with their post-migration experiences which affect their mental health (Mawani, 2008). Several studies have stated the specific importance of social networks and the powerful effects they have on the (mental) health of immigrant women (Alvi et al, 2012; Berkman et al, 2000, etc).

According to Berman & Jiwani (2008) the impact of social networks on mental health can be explained through three primary mechanisms: social support, social influence, and social integration. The aspect of social support affects mental health most clearly via the services of various kinds of support including emotional, instrumental, appraisal, and informational (Weiss, 1974). Immigrant women tend to rely on three types of social support covering family, peer, and outsider. Family is seen as the most predominant support group and the most crucial protective factor for good mental health (Lynam, 1985; Donnely et al, 2011). Peers or insiders, who are members of the same or similar ethnical community are often the second sources of social support. Compatriots or persons with a similar ethnical background are expected to understand the women’s needs and challenges as they share a common culture. Outsiders are the third social support group and include everybody outside their family or (near) ethnic community (Lynam, 1985). Independent of the kind of social support immigrant women receive, they can coequally influence mental well-being (Delara, 2016). Social influence affects immigrant women’s mental health via a different route. The interaction with others provides individuals with normative guidance by comparing their attitudes with these of a reference group. This behaviour can result in confirmation, reinforcement, and/or altering of attitudes.

This is specifically important if new shared norms and behaviour patterns influence mental health care utilization or treatment adherence (Marsden & Friedkin, 1994). Thirdly, social networks may influence the mental health status of immigrant women as they promote social integration which offers social ties varying from intimate to extended and offering immigrant women new possibilities. Strong and weak social ties can lead to powerful bonds and attachments to places or people and engage immigrant women in a variety of meaningful social roles which in its’ turn results in a sense of identity, value, belonging, and attachment (Delara, 2016).

Racism and discrimination have been identified as strongly damaging factors regarding immigrant women’s mental health. The resulting psychological factors mentioned in some

(37)

23 studies include disempowerment, low self-esteem, perceived control, and the weathering effect of years of cumulative stress. Discrimination can also function as a reminder of having a marginalized status as being part of an ethnic minority (Beiser & Hou, 2006). Discrimination seems to be a bigger challenge for young female immigrants since they have to cope with peer group pressure to adjust to a new culture, as well as responding to family cultural expectations and possibly elements of social control (Berman & Jiwani, 2008). Older migrant women have also been identified as a more vulnerable group as they may struggle with issues regarding isolation, abuse, language, culture, and mobility (Hasset & George, 2002).

(38)

24

“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.” An insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life

Fleurtje Huiskes

“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.”

An insight into immigrant women’s social activities and social networks in daily life -

A photovoice study

Master ’s thesis

“If one gets scared or shy, one cannot find what one wants. If one does not get scared or shy, one can find what one wants.”

Preface

Abstract

Sammendrag

Table of contents

1. Introduction

2. Theory