Immigrant and Ethnic Minority Representation in Europe: Conceptual Challenges and Theoretical Approaches

Abstract

This article introduces the symposium on the representation of immigrant-origin and ethnic minorities in Europe. It argues for the importance of research on this topic, noting the large, established populations of immigrant-origin citizens and their descendants across Western European countries and these minorities’ underrepresentation in elected bodies. Current research gaps concern both empirical knowledge and the theoretical conceptualisation of immigrant and ethnic minority political involvement. The article argues that existing research on representation needs to be extended to suit the cases of immigrants and ethnic minorities. It ends by providing a brief overview of each contribution to the symposium.

Acknowledgements

Authors’ names are listed in alphabetical order. The articles in this special section originated from a workshop on immigrant political incorporation organised by the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity (Göttingen, Germany) and the Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies (University of Amsterdam), held in Amsterdam on 10 and 11 June 2010. We thank all the workshop participants for their comments and the funders for their financial support.

Notes

1. The European literature is too new to provide purchase on the question of whether descriptive minority representation translates into substantive policy outcomes, but work in the United States suggests that this might be the case (e.g. Owens 2005, Preuhs 2007).

2. The case of citizens who previously lived in overseas, colonised territories, such as the Surinamese in the Netherlands or Antilleans in France, are a particular in-between category: they belonged to an empire and have stronger historical claims than other migrants, but they can be seen as immigrants to the core territory and be perceived as ‘non-Western’.

3. Often those of mixed parentage are also included. This is open to debate and should in the long run be decided on the basis of empirical evidence on their participation and representation.

4. In principle the term ‘ethnic’ does not necessarily connote physical difference, but in the British context where the concept is common, the term is mostly used for people of darker complexion – and not for, say, Italian or Polish immigrants – although they may share a strong ethnic consciousness. The Dutch category ‘non-Western’ is also a covert line of distinction between those of European and non-European backgrounds, or ‘White’ and other individuals.

5. See also Bilodeau (2008) and Bilodeau, McAllister and Kanji (2010) with mixed evidence: coming from an authoritarian regime represses political protest activities, but has little effect on formal political participation.

6. But here as well Moser (2008: 273) notes that ‘surprisingly little empirical evidence’ exists that examines the effects of different electoral systems.

7. In the United States, Trounstine and Valdini (2008: 555, 567) argue that ‘single-member district elections increase descriptive representation of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups on city councils’, but ‘only when underrepresented groups are highly concentrated and compose moderate portions of the population’.

8. For example, corruption by a majority male candidate is probably not understood to mean that all native-born males are corrupt; similar corruption by the ‘Moroccan’ candidate might have a very different effect.