Does the canonical theory of assimilation explain the Roma case? Some evidence from Central and Eastern Europe

Abstract

This article focuses on the relation between mobility and assimilation among the Roma. Quantitative results from UNDP research in four Central and Eastern Europe countries provide new data and show the need for a new conceptualization of the evidence. These results demonstrate that there are no significant data to confirm the existence of a straight-line process of assimilation in the Roma case. Thus, they question the canonical theory of assimilation by demonstrating that middle-class Roma tend not to leave their identity behind. I propose the need for a segmented theory of the different upward mobility paths that Roma people tend to follow. In a complementary way, the observed results also point out the need to take into account some variations in Roma ethnic identity depending on the source of ethnic data, how they are collected and the implications for research in the different national contexts explored.

Keywords:

• Ethnicity
• segmented assimilation
• social mobility
• Roma
• ethnic boundaries
• acculturation

Acknowledgements

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 16th Council for European Studies Conference in Chicago (2008) and at the 102nd American Sociological Association Annual Meeting (2007). I would like to thank Thurston Domina for the help and comments he made on the different statistical exploitations in this chapter during his stay in the Office for Population Research at Princeton University. The sole responsibility for this paper lies with the author. I would like to thank the following people for pre-writing comments and suggestions: Ramón Flecha, Cristina G. Mora, Lídia Puigvert, Teresa Sordé, Xavier Torrens and King-To Yeung. I would also like to thank Alejandro Portes for offering me the opportunity to work temporarily on this project in the Center for Migration and Development at Princeton University. Finally, I thank the several anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and advice.

Notes

1. The interviewers for the Koulish study were trained in how to differentiate those people who consider themselves to be Roma and those who do not through the recognition of people based on their surnames, the way they dress, their lifestyle or their language.

2. The sample chosen by Ladányi and Szelényi was not based on census data since the authors did not trust its reliability. In this case, the survey which was eventually carried out was based on the development of an over-sample decided upon by experts who identified residential areas and/or estates which were registered under traditionally Romani surnames. Out of this information, a random selection of cases was chosen. A team of experts including social workers, teachers, policemen/women and doctors carried out an identification process of areas in which the Romani population and people from that ethnic group were highly concentrated.

3. Aliya Saperstein (2006) recently pointed out the need to differentiate classification by the interviewer or observer (interviewer classification) and self-classification, since they do not measure ethnicity or race in the same way. The differences between the two strategies are so significant that they have a decisive effect on the conclusions of the research. In that sense, the two distinct methods respond better to different research questions on ethnicity.

4. Various Romani associations declared, at an international meeting organized by the Project for Ethnic Relations in 2000, that the preferred methodology for recollecting the Roma identity of those attending the meeting was self-classification, accompanied by the active participation of organizations and Romani people in the collection of the data used such as the research developed by the UNDP.

5. Although there are high rates of self-classification among the Romani population, this does not mean that there can be no variability in the ethnic identification of a person.

6. Although it is difficult to make the position of the researcher disappear, some mechanisms may be introduced to try to avoid this gap (McCorkel and Myers 2003). In this case, one of the cornerstones of the research carried out by the UNDP was the participation of Romani organizations in its elaboration and execution.