The making of a ‘risk population’: categorisations of Roma and ethnic boundary-making among Czech- and Slovak-speaking migrants in Glasgow

ABSTRACT

This paper critically examines the processes of categorisation of Roma migrants in Glasgow, contributing to debates on the (unsuccessful) attempts of the EU and individual European states to tackle the social exclusion of various Roma populations living in Europe. Hitherto little attention has been paid to how measures aimed at improving the lives of Roma actually ‘work’ in practice, especially in the context of more recent Roma migration within Europe. Moreover, the role that ethnicity plays ‘on the ground’ has often been overlooked or taken for granted in the relevant literature. Based on 12 months of ethnographic fieldwork with Czech- and Slovak-speaking migrants, including Roma, in Glasgow in 2012, this paper aims to address this gap in the literature. Adopting a boundary-making perspective on ethnicity to analyse interactions in institutionalised settings, it traces and discusses various practices through which ‘the Roma’ were constructed as ‘a risk population’ in the city.

KEYWORDS:

• Roma
• migration
• categorisations
• ethnic boundary-making
• formalised settings
• Glasgow

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Hyo Eun Shin for her insightful comments and criticism on earlier drafts of this paper. I am also very grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback and suggestions for improving the article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. All research participants’ names mentioned in this paper have been anonymised; pseudonyms are used instead.

2. A pseudonym.

3. Some projects and services aimed at Roma had been in place prior to 2012; however, these were mainly based in one particular area in the south of Glasgow.

4. A wide range of related activities also took place during this time in the city including surveys, trainings, meetings and conferences.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, UK [grant number ES/G040435/1]; Glasgow City Council [N/A].