Intergenerational relations among immigrants in Europe: the role of ethnic differences, migration and acculturation

ABSTRACT

An understanding of the characteristics of intergenerational relations within immigrant families in Europe and micro-level social processes shaping those relations is essential from both an academic and a policy perspective. Yet there has been little empirical research devoted to testing the theoretical frameworks underlying intergenerational relations and migration studies and comparing ethnically and culturally different immigrant groups across diverse contexts. The articles featured in this special issue provide new evidence on various aspects of intergenerational relations among European immigrant populations. In this introduction, we briefly review the main and most significant of these findings while comparing them with previous research results. We conclude by identifying a set of relevant research questions that remain unanswered and recommend a roadmap for future research on intergenerational relations among immigrant populations in Europe.

KEYWORDS:

• Intergenerational relations
• immigrant families
• family solidarity
• Europe
• immigration
• acculturation

Intergenerational relations – along all of their different dimensions of conflict and solidarity (i.e. affectual, associational, consensual, functional, normative and structural) – are a key aspect of the European social model’s sustainability and future development. Intergenerational relations reflect and shape changes in population demographics, economic cycles, family cultures, values and social policies. At the micro level, there is a pervasive effect of intergenerational support and family responsibilities on individuals’ well-being and life chances. In recent decades, in part due to the growing availability of micro-level data and a convergence towards a common theoretical framework (i.e. that of family solidarity, conflict and ambiguity; see Bengtson and Roberts 1991; Bengtson et al. 2002; Connidis and McMullin 2002; Lowenstein 2007), social scientists have paid increasing attention to the study of patterns, determinants and consequences of intergenerational relations in European families (Arber and Attias-Donfut 2000; Brandt, Haberkern, and Szydlik 2009; Albertini 2016; Szydlik 2016). The role of intergenerational relations in shaping individuals’ life courses and chances is particularly important for European immigrant populations: family support is of paramount relevance for the socio-economic integration of second-generation immigrants in the destination society and the reduction (or amplification) of inequalities in life chances separating natives’ and immigrants’ children. At the same time, the availability of family care in old age is a decisive factor in accounting for the well-being of elderly people – both in origin and destination countries. Although studies of intergenerational relations among immigrant families have flourished in recent years (Baykara-Krumme 2008; Glick 2010; Attias-Donfut et al. 2012; Steinbach 2013; Bordone and de Valk 2016), in the fields of family sociology, gerontology and demography there have been few systematic analyses comparing support patterns and behaviour among immigrant and native populations. Also, previous research has generally ignored the possibility that specific subgroups of the population – and different groups of immigrants, in particular – may apply a different rationale in their intergenerational support behaviour and/or face dramatically different sets of opportunities and constraints than the majority population. In particular, what is missing is empirical research that: simultaneously considers the theoretical frameworks of studies of intergenerational relations and migration; compares ethnically and culturally different immigrant groups in different contexts; integrates the comparison between migrant and native populations with comparisons across migrant groups and between temporary migrants, permanent migrants, and individuals who remain in their origin countries. This special issue aims to start filling some of these gaps.

A complex, relevant and yet underexplored topic

Understanding the specific characteristics of intergenerational relations among immigrant families in Europe – and the main differences across ethnic groups and destination countries – is essential from both an academic and a policy perspective. The integration of new and old waves of immigrants is key to the prosperity of European societies, the sustainability of their welfare systems (confronted with the progressive ageing of their native populations) and the containment of increasing socio-economic inequalities. At the same time, exploring the patterns, social meanings, and main factors affecting the exchange of support in immigrant families will help scholars in the field of migration studies and those interested in the analyses of family relations to shed light on some of the more complex micro-level social mechanisms that regulate the functioning of families and, in particular, the implementation of solidarity norms along the joint life course of two or three family generations.

The experience of migration

The first and most obvious difference between migrants and native populations is the experience of migration itself. How can this experience, per se, affect the bonds between different family generations? The academic debate on this issue has generated an array of hypotheses, revolving around two contrasting views. On the one hand, scholars have focused their attention on the adaptation of migrant family members to the context of arrival and their exposure to the host society’s traditions and values: these changes have been often associated with the weakening of family relations. Two main social mechanisms encourage this outcome. Firstly, most migrants moving to Western European countries experience a shift from a collectivistic to an individualistic society. The adaptation to the context of arrival allegedly produces a reduction of family solidarity vis-à-vis what is observed among families who do not migrate (Kagitçibasi 2005; Zhou 2009; Hwang, Wood, and Fuijmoto 2010; Kagitçibasi, Ataca, and Diri 2010). Secondly, distinct family (and immigration) generations experience a different pace and degree of acculturation, and this, in turn, generates intra-familial conflict over values and social norms.¹ The different degree of adaptation – or the ‘acculturation gap’ – among children, parents and grandparents allegedly undermines a variety of dimensions of family solidarity (Berry 1997; Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Thomson and Crul 2007). Adding to this, and as a special case, it has been suggested that since migration leads to families being separated by significant geographical distance (‘transnational’ families) the process of (partial) migration of kin networks leads to lower levels of functional and structural family solidarity (King et al. 2014). On the other hand, other scholars have suggested that the psychological, social and economic difficulties connected with the process of migration, the stigma and social marginalisation experienced in the country of arrival, and the desire to preserve the origin country’s cultural identity and traditions might actually help strengthen generational solidarity within families and, thus, engender higher degrees of cohesion and support exchange than those observed among both native populations and families remaining in the origin country (de Valk and Liefbroer 2007; Nauck 2007; Arends-Tóth and van de Vijver 2008; Cela and Fokkema 2017). Furthermore, it has been suggested that, despite the physical distance that might separate family members in transnational families, the latter feature a high intensity of support exchange and strong family solidarity – in part thanks to newly available communication technologies and/or cheaper transportation services (Baldock 2000; Faist 2004; Treas and Mazumdar 2004; Baldassar 2007; Boccagni 2015; Baldassar et al. 2016; Rooyackers, de Valk, and Merz 2016).

Two of the articles in this special issue provide empirical support for the second of these two sets of hypotheses. In particular, by comparing Turkish immigrants in Germany with similar families who stayed in Turkey, Baykara-Krumme and Fokkema (2019) find that ‘full-solidarity families’ – i.e. families for which intergenerational bonds and interdependence are strongest – are more frequent among migrant than stayer families, whereas the autonomous type of family is more widespread among those families remaining in Turkey than migrant ones. Furthermore, contradicting the predictions of the differential acculturation hypothesis, the authors find that differences between migrant generations are negligible. In sum, Baykara-Krumme and Fokkema’s results suggest that the relatively high levels of family solidarity found among migrant families in Europe are, at least to some extent, a result of the migration process per se. As a matter of fact, when compared with those families who stayed in the country of origin, the intergenerational bonds within migrant households seem to have been reinforced throughout the migration experience.

Karpinska and Dykstra (2019), who explore multiple dimensions of family solidarity in transnational Polish families, show that a large majority of young adults recently migrated to the Netherlands – and whose ageing parents are still in Poland – are able to abide by the strong family solidarity norms that characterise the Polish family system and comply with the familialistic nature of the elderly’s safety nets in their country of origin. This, of course, is facilitated by the fact that these migrants live relatively near their origin country and experience fewer restrictions in travelling between the host and the origin country than most migrants from countries outside the European Union. The authors also argue that the duration of migration has only a minor effect on intergenerational relations in Polish transnational families, whereas the largest role is played by individuals’ characteristics. This latter point is in line with some scholars’ suggestion to de-essentialise individuals’ belonging to minority groups and pay more attention to so-called super-diversity (Vertovec 2007; Meissner and Vertovec 2015). In sum, Karpinska and Dykstra’s findings do not support the pessimistic view of migration’s effect on family intergenerational relations in the case of transnational families. It is worth noting, however, that this finding might be contingent on the specific group and destination country considered in the study and not necessarily apply to migrants from other, and especially extra-EU, countries. Baykara-Krumme and Fokkema’s results, for example, suggest that transnational Turkish families living in Germany have lower levels of family cohesion than both stayers and non-transnational migrant families.

Adaptation or distinction: intergenerational relations in immigrant vs. native families

Although intergenerational relations in transnational families are a ‘classical’ topic of migration studies, and the analysis of support patterns among majority populations has received considerable attention in the fields of family sociology, gerontology and demography, the flourishing of research comparing intergenerational relations between immigrant and native families is a relatively recent phenomenon (Rapoport and Docquier 2006; Foner and Dreby 2011). In general, existing studies on the topic indicate that both intergenerational solidarity and perceived support obligations are strong among immigrant families living in Europe, and indeed stronger than what is usually observed among native populations (Baykara-Krumme 2008; de Valk and Schans 2008; Schans and Komter 2010; Bordone and de Valk 2016; Rooyackers, de Valk, and Merz 2016). At the same time, however, it has been found that, within this general pattern, immigrants’ transfer behaviour varies considerably according to cultural background, country of origin and country of destination (Attias-Donfut and Wolff 2008; Baykara-Krumme 2008; de Valk and Schans 2008; Silverstein and Attias-Donfut 2010; Attias-Donfut et al. 2012).

A review of preceding studies frequently points to a set of important differences between the intergenerational support behaviour in (most subgroups of) the immigrant population and that of natives. Firstly, norms of filial responsibility and, coherently, parents’ expectations about support from children tend to be stronger among immigrant families. It has been suggested that this is the result of the collectivistic character of origin societies, cultural traditions and family obligations, connected with the fact that in most of the countries from where immigrants depart there is little – if any – public support for the care and economic needs of the elderly population. Secondly, financial support flows mainly upwards along the generational lineage within migrant families, with a lower likelihood of transferring to children vis-à-vis supporting parents – the opposite of the pattern observed in native Western European populations. Again, this can be explained by factors similar to those mentioned previously and the fact that elderly parents who are first-generation migrants or ‘left behind’ parents often do not enjoy pensions when exiting the paid labour market. Thirdly, the exchange of economic support – especially under the form of informal loans – is much less restricted to the nuclear family and often involves enlarged-family members or non-relatives. Fourthly, the amount of social support provided by immigrants to their parents is, on average, lower than that recorded in the native population, whereas contact with parents is more frequent. The former finding, which contrasts with the strong filial obligations observed among immigrant families, is largely explained by the fact that, especially in transnational families, geographical distance between elderly parents and adult children makes it difficult (or even impossible) to have regular face-to-face contact and provide care. As a matter of fact, when considering only migrants whose parents live close by, the likelihood of providing support to parents is higher than among natives. Fifthly, among migrant families intergenerational co-residence between parents and adult children is generally more widespread than in the native population. Apparently, this is connected with the economic constraints faced by immigrant families and the fact that this strategy is used to provide support to young adult children and/or ageing parents, in line with cultural traditions. Lastly, siblings who are students are less likely to receive financial support from immigrant parents than children who work (Burr and Mutchler 1993; Kritz, Gurak, and Chen 2000; Louie 2001; Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Glick and Van Hook 2002; Lowenstein 2002; Treas and Mazumdar 2004; Ajrouch 2005; Aldous 2006; Giuliano 2006; Wolff, Spilerman, and Attias-Donfut 2007; Arends-Tóth and van de Vijver 2008; Attias-Donfut and Wolff 2008, 2009; Baykara-Krumme 2008; Björnberg and Ekbrand 2008; de Valk and Schans 2008; Gurak and Kritz 2010; Keene and Batson 2010; Schans and Komter 2010; Silverstein and Attias-Donfut 2010; Zorlu and Mulder 2011; Attias-Donfut et al. 2012; Steinbach 2013; Bordone and de Valk 2016; Bueno and de Valk 2016; Kang and Raffaelli 2016; Trieu 2016; Albertini and Semprebon 2018). Empirical evidence also points to similarities between migrants and natives, for example, as regards the level of emotional closeness and conflict between family generations – two relevant dimensions of the ambivalence paradigm (Fuligni 1998; Luescher and Pillemer 1998; Connidis and McMullin 2002; Lau et al. 2005; Hardway and Fuligni 2006; Pasch et al. 2006; Chung, Flook, and Fuligni 2009; Telzer 2011).

Besides these generalisations reflecting some commonalities across various empirical studies, it is worth noting that immigrants’ intergenerational support behaviour varies according to their cultural or geographical origin and the country of destination. Thus, for example, in France immigrants of African origin are less likely than immigrants from Europe to provide economic support to their children, and Muslim parents are more likely to provide such support for sons than daughters (Wolff, Spilerman, and Attias-Donfut 2007). In Germany immigrants from Turkey and the former Soviet Union provide less economic support to their children than immigrants from other countries. Relevant variations are also observed across different destination countries, and thus appear to depend on the institutional context. For instance, while both in Germany and France first- and second-generation immigrants are less likely than natives to receive economic help from ascendants, the opposite is found in Sweden. Or, again, while cultural factors help explain differences in transfer behaviour between immigrants and the native population in France, immigrants’ culture and religion do not seem to play a role in Germany, where parents’ economic resources appear to be more relevant (Baykara-Krumme 2008; Björnberg and Ekbrand 2008). Overall, it is clear that we still have a quite limited knowledge of the cleavages and dimensions along which differences and similarities between immigrant and native families are to be found.

Three articles in this special issue contribute to existing empirical research on the topic. While much previous literature on affective-cognitive solidarity between parents and their young children focus on the case of transnational families and left-behind children (Mazzucato et al. 2015), Fernández-Reino and González-Ferrer (2019) analyse the level of closeness and conflict in the relationship between Latino immigrant mothers and their adolescent children living in Spain. On the one hand, their findings do not support the acculturation gap hypothesis, which postulates higher intergenerational conflict in immigrant families (Fuligni 1998; Kwak 2003; Levitt, Lane, and Levitt 2005; Zhou 2009; Glick 2010; Foner and Dreby 2011). The level of conflict among Latino mothers and their children is similar to that observed in native families. On the other hand – in line with the family solidarity, conflict and ambiguity paradigm (Luescher and Pillemer 1998; Bengtson et al. 2002) – their findings confirm the need to consider multiple dimensions when operationalising the quality of intergenerational bonds: emotional intimacy between mothers and adolescent children is significantly lower among immigrant families. Although this finding is partially explained by Latino mothers’ longer working hours, and consequently lower amount of time shared with their children, it deserves further investigation in future studies using panel data and including immigrants with different origins.

The studies by Albertini, Gasperoni, and Mantovani (2019) and de Valk and Bordone (2019) focus on normative and functional solidarity. The former addresses the norms of family solidarity that underpin the specific intergenerational support behaviour of different groups of immigrants residing in Italy. A number of recent studies on the topic show that, even though much of the difference in support exchange is explained by immigrant families’ demographic, social and economic features, a significant residual component remains and is often attributed to unobserved characteristics, such as solidarity norms, perceived obligations and cultural background (Schans and Komter 2010; Dustmann, Frattini, and Lanzara 2012; Bordone and de Valk 2016). Thus, using data from a survey in Northern Italy, Albertini, Gasperoni, and Mantovani (2019) explore the extent to which values and norms about the provision of economic support to adult children vary across Filipino, Chinese and Maghrebi immigrants. In general, all three groups share the norm that supporting children who want to invest in their education should take priority over helping unemployed children aiming to establish a business. Interestingly, this is in line with previous literature on the inequality of educational opportunities that points to the positive role of secondary effects for university students who have immigrant origins (Cebolla-Boado 2011; Jackson, Jonsson, and Rudolphi 2012), but is in contrast with national data and research showing that immigrant children have a significantly lower likelihood than native ones of enrolling in tertiary education (Mantovani, Gasperoni, and Albertini 2018). Moreover, this attitude – i.e. prioritising offspring’s education over self-employment – is stronger when daughters (rather than sons) are considered and among Filipino and Chinese (rather than Maghrebi) respondents.

De Valk and Bordone (2019) investigate the difference between natives and migrants as regards the likelihood of adopting intergenerational co-residence as a strategy to support elderly parents in five European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands). While previous studies have focused on other support strategies adopted to help elderly parents – namely care provision and economic support – or considered intergenerational co-residence as a support strategy towards young adult children, this is, to the best of our knowledge, one of the few studies exploring the extent and the circumstances in which co-residence is adopted by migrants as a way to cope with parents’ support needs. The study highlights the minimal differences between natives and immigrants in the overall level of co-residence and its driving factors. It can be argued, therefore, that in adopting this strategy other socio-demographic characteristics and contextual factors connected with the country of destination matter more than immigrant status. This can also be read as a sign of migrant generations’ adaptation to the prevailing support patterns in the host society.

Preparing to leave? The relation between transfer behaviour and return intentions

The exchange of financial support among family generations has been the subject of numerous studies, including, to some extent, immigrant families (Wolff, Spilerman, and Attias-Donfut 2007; Albertini and Kohli 2013). As mentioned before, a number of studies have found that immigrant families in Europe are more likely to provide economic support to older generations (parents and grandparents), whilst monetary transfers to adult children are less common and of lower average amounts. This is an opposite pattern than that found among native Western European populations, where financial support flows almost exclusively upwards along the generational lineage – mainly to support children establishing their own families or to cope with the economic strains connected with serious life events such as divorce or unemployment (Albertini 2016). These differences between the majority and immigrant populations have been explained by socio-economic characteristics of immigrant families, demographic (and geographical) characteristics of their kin networks, cultural values, and specific norms about filial support obligations.

In addition to this, intergenerational financial transfers in transnational families – i.e. remittances – have also been the subject of studies in the field of economics and, in particular, development economics (Adams 2009; Bettin, Presbitero, and Spatafora 2014; Duval and Wolff 2016). Most of these studies, in fact, aim to assess the economic impact of remittances at both the individual level (on recipients’ well-being and labour market situation) and the macro level (on the origin country’s economic development). On the other hand, intergenerational financial transfers in transnational families can also be conceived (and studied) as a predictor of immigrant intentions about returning to the country of origin, staying in the host country, or planning the migration of other family members originally left behind. Typically, in previous studies, factors correlated with higher likelihood and amount of remittances include: the temporary nature of migration, or at least the individual’s intention to return to the country of origin; the duration of the stay in the host country, with longer periods being associated with lower transfers to the origin country; immigrants’ feelings of insecurity and stigmatisation in the host society (Amuedo-Dorantes and Pozo 2006; Bauer and Sinning 2011; Dustmann and Mestres 2011; Batista and Umblijs 2016; Chabé-Ferrer, Machado, and Wahba 2016).

The article by Wolff (2019) in this special issue makes a relevant contribution to this literature. Whereas many previous studies have been based on cross-sectional data – and, therefore, cannot properly identify and distinguish causal and selection mechanisms – Wolff uses a unique longitudinal dataset of first-generation immigrants living in France (the ELIPA survey). His results indicate that, firstly, financial transfers are quite common among first-generation immigrants. Despite the economic difficulties connected with migration and settling in a new society (and labour market), as many as 45% of respondents have sent money back to families in their countries of origin during the last year. More importantly, return intentions play a key role in explaining the pattern of remittances, whereas the intention to encourage other family members to migrate does not seem to significantly affect individuals’ transfer behaviour. Wolff, thus, provides strong evidence that financial transfers towards the family of origin are not only intended to support left-behind parents and children, but also to prepare the return of donors themselves by maintaining and reinforcing their economic and social capital in their origin countries. Last but not least, transfers can also represent a sort of insurance in case the situation in the host society becomes adverse and the immigrant feels the need to return home.

A roadmap for future research

Intergenerational relations among immigrant populations in Western European countries, especially in transnational families, have been one of the main topics of migration studies. The study of patterns, causes and consequences of family solidarity among migrant families has attracted comparatively less attention in the fields of family sociology, gerontology and demography. Scholars in these fields have produced an increasing amount of comparative research on the quality of relations and the exchange of emotional and instrumental support between parents and children in majority populations, but have often failed to analyse the extent to which their findings also apply to (groups of) migrants living in the same societies. In recent decades, the availability of new, large, comparative datasets, in which immigrant populations appear in sufficient numbers to be studied adopting standard quantitative methods (such as the Generation and Gender Surveys; the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe; the European Social Survey) and a strong consensus on the theoretical framework of family solidarity, conflict and ambiguity have helped bridge the gap. Understanding patterns, driving factors and consequences of family solidarity and intergenerational relations among European immigrant populations is essential from both the scientific and policy viewpoints. The development of this type of investigation will contribute to a better understanding of the functioning of families across the joint life course of different generations, but also it will uncover micro-level social processes that contribute appreciably to the integration, life chances and well-being of individuals who migrate to European societies. Ultimately social inequalities characterising Western European societies and the overall sustainability and prosperity of the European social model will strongly depend on the mechanisms that regulate and shape solidarities between generations within immigrant (and native) families.

As briefly summarised in the previous pages, the articles included in this special issue provide new evidence (that sometimes disagrees with the main literature) and some clear indications on various aspects of intergenerational relations among European immigrant populations. Firstly, contrary to what is suggested by the acculturation gap hypothesis and the view that migrant families progressively adapt to more individualistic societies, migration processes per se exert a strengthening effect on intergenerational relations. The data do not allow to identify fully the underlying micro-level causal processes behind this evidence – e.g. difficulties underlying the migration experience, overcoming barriers to entering destination countries, the challenge of living and adapting to different (and sometimes hostile) social contexts, the desire to maintain and transmit traditional values of the origin society to offspring – but the overall outcome is that family cohesion is stronger among immigrant families than among comparable families who stayed in the country of origin. Secondly, when migration does not involve the entire kin network, and thus originates a transnational family, the effect of migration on intergenerational bonds is less clear or, at least, seems to be strongly dependent on both the country of origin and that of destination. Confirming the mixed findings from previous research, the studies included in this special issue also provide varied evidence. Focusing on Turkish migrants living in Germany, Baykara-Krumme and Fokkema (2019) find that transnational families are characterised by weaker intergenerational relations than both comparable families who stayed in Turkey and migrant non-transnational families living in Germany. Karpinska and Dykstra (2019), on the other hand, show that even when migration entails physical distance between young adults and the older generation – as in the case of Polish migrants in the Netherlands – this does not automatically entail a weakening of family solidarity and/or the failure to fulfil the traditional norms of family support and filial obligations that apply in the country of origin. Further comparative research and more detailed data are clearly needed to shed light on the specific factors that affect the strength, quality and intensity of family solidarity in transnational families. In particular, data should allow comparisons between immigrants and native populations, but also between different migrant groups in different destination countries and, at the same time, comparable families who stayed in the country of origin.

A third relevant set of findings reported in the studies presented here has to do with important similarities among native and immigrant families, regarding the quality of parent–child relations and the rationale of the strategies adopted to support other family members. Fernández-Reino and González-Ferrer (2019) show that, contrary to some pessimistic views highlighted in previous studies, the level of conflict between Latino mothers living in Spain and their adolescent children is similar to what is observed among Spanish families. Correspondingly, the results reported by de Valk and Bordone (2019) indicate a good degree of similarity between majority and immigrant population as regards the extent to which intergenerational co-residence is adopted as a way to cope with the care needs of elderly parents. The factors driving this behaviour are also similar, and what seems to matter the most is the specific institutional context: differences between migrants living in different European countries are more relevant than differences between them and native individuals. Albertini, Gasperoni, and Mantovani (2019) find an important similarity between solidarity norms observed by migrant families – specifically those norms regarding parents’ obligations towards their children – and the support behaviour of Italian parents: when facing the hypothetical dilemma of supporting a child who wants to study versus one that wants to establish a business, the priority is given to children’s academic career, coherently with what has been observed for Italian parents in previous studies.

Similarities in patterns and functioning of intergenerational solidarity between groups of migrants and the majority population should not be overestimated. In Spain, emotional intimacy between mothers and children is significantly lower among Latino families than Spanish ones. Also, among immigrants living in Italy the relevance of prioritising children’s higher education and the gender bias in solidarity norms varies appreciably according to ethnic origin: migrants from the Maghreb, for example, are considerably less likely to prioritise children’s academic career; daughters are favoured over sons among the Filipinos; whereas the opposite gender bias applies to both Maghrebis and Chinese.

Overall the findings (and limitations) of the articles published in this special issue clearly imply that not only is more research needed on this topic and that a stronger integration of the approaches employed by scholars interested in family solidarity and those focussing on migration would be highly beneficial, but also that more and different data are needed. In particular, studies on these topics would benefit from larger datasets, making it possible to address different migrant generations and groups and conduct comparative studies across ethnic groups; panel data, allowing a more comprehensive identification of causal relations and processes through which migrant family relations change across individual life courses and progressive adaptation to host societies; datasets including information on comparable stayer families, in order to capture the social and individual changes induced by the migration experience; qualitative data, focusing on cultural factors that are often implicitly assumed to be behind the ‘residual difference’ observed when comparing natives and immigrant families while controlling for relevant demographic, social and economic characteristics.

Acknowledgements

The articles appearing in this special issue stem from an international workshop on ‘Intergenerational Transfers and Immigrant Population’, held in Bologna on 11 September 2015 (the scientific committee of which included the three guest editors and Asher Daniel Colombo); the authors thank the workshop’s participants for their useful comments and suggestions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by a ‘FARB’ grant from the University of Bologna [project code FFBO121274].

Notes

1. It is worth noting that although ‘straight-line assimilation’ – which posits that a process of general incorporation of the receiving society’s values and norms is almost unavoidable across generations and essential to upward social mobility (Warner and Srole 1945; Gordon 1964; Park and Burgess 1969) – had declined, since the early 1990s a new revival of the underlying theoretical model has occurred. Although the new approaches do not take ‘assimilation’ for granted, such an outcome is still considered very likely, especially in the long run (Alba and Nee 1997).