![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The concept of integration plays an increasingly important role in Western societies, which is accompanied by a similar increase in statistical indicators designed to measure the policies that shape integration. In this paper, we critically examine one such system of measurement: the Swiss Federal Office of Statistics’ Indicators of Integration. We use an interpretative methodology to analyse the political and conceptual construction of a quantitative policy-tool. As such, we provide an innovative and theory-based approach to analysing statistical policy-tools more widely.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Matteo Gianni, Rémi Baudoui, Jean-Pierre Tabin, Joëlle Moret and Noémi Michel for taking the time to give us comments at various stages of our work. We would also like to express our gratitude towards all those who were present during the presentations of this paper at the University of Geneva and the Nccr Annual Conference 2017 that took place at the University of Neuchâtel. Finally we would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. The FOM became in 2015 the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM).
2. For example, see Wobmann Walter’s interpellation titled ‘Is there no statistics on naturalised delinquents?’ number 08.3407 dating from 13.06.2008, available on the website of the Swiss Parliament.
3. In a further report on the integration measures of 2010, the GIM defined the timing for realizing these indicators (Office fédéral des migrations ODM Citation2010).
4. This was also the case in other European countries before there was a shift towards an emphasis on the individual’s responsibility to integrate. For the Dutch case, see, for example, Bonjour and Duyvendak (Citation2017). Moreover, the biggest party in Switzerland, the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), a populist far-right party, has been promoting the same idea of shifting the responsibility to integrate from the state to the individual.
5. Perhaps the most striking issue with the sources is the matter of the geographical and political division of the data. The data presented by the indicators neglect the political divisions of Switzerland, which greatly impacts the results. There are, for example, different welfare regimes and even migratory regimes in different cantons, which makes it difficult to interpret the results without taking into consideration these differences. And indeed the FSO’s indicators erase these differences to the point that most of the factors that explain the results disappear. For more on the variety of migratory regimes in Switzerland, see, for example, Manatschal (Citation2012).
6. It would indeed be possible to impose an ‘external’ analytical grid, for example, to apply a purely normative analysis of these indicators.
7. See, for instance, the indicators concerning the risk of material deprivation, poverty rate, risk of poverty rate, social aid rate and rate of assistance, difficulty making ends meet, deviation of risk of poverty, deviation of poverty and the poverty rate of active and occupied persons.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Arkan Akin
Arkan Akin is a doctoral fellow at the Swiss National Center of Competence on Research (NCCR-On-The-Move) and is based at the department of political science of the University of Geneva. This paper is part of his Ph. D. which focuses on analyzing migration theories and policies through the lens of post-foundational discourse analysis.
Elisa Banfi
Elisa Banfi is a senior researcher at the Institute of Citizenship Studies at the University of Geneva. Her work focuses on Muslim organizations in Europe, migratory regimes and the relationship between Islam and politics.