1

Parallel communities? The Segmentation of Migrants’

Social Capital

Mario Diani

(University of Trento)

Sponsored by:

2

My talk will address three issuesa) How much and with whom do ethnic

& migrant organizations (EMOs) link

b) What is the structure of the EMO organizational field

c) What are the implications for the relationship between organizational social capital and the cohesion of civil society

3

Four cities and eleven groupsBarcelona: 100 EMOs interviewed

(Moroccan, Ecuadorian, Andeans)

Budapest: 51 EMOs interviewed (Ethnic Hungarians, Chinese, Muslims)

Geneva: 48 EMOs interviewed (Italians and Kosovars)

Milan: 46 EMOs interviewed (Egyptians, Filipinos, Ecuadorians)

4

How much do they connect? Barcelona: 3.8 major partners (could name 10)

Budapest: 3.9 (Ethnic Hungarians more active)

Geneva: 3

Milan: 2.4 (Egyptians more active)

Differences across cities but not significant differences between groups

5

To whom? (Bonding or bridging?) Barcelona: 1.9 mentions for each actor (198).

Autochtonous below the average

Budapest: 1.4 (139 mentioned) Ethnic Hungarians more central than other groups Autochtonous below the average

Geneva: 1.2 (114 mentioned) Autochtonous above the average

Milan: 1 (105 mentioned) Autochtonous above the average

6

Patterns I Major

partners for EMOs

Many Few Many Geneva

Milan

Ties to autochtonous organizations

Few

Barcelona Budapest

7

Barcelona (density 0.019)

8

Budapest (density 0.028)

9

Geneva (0.026)

10

Milan (density 0.028)

11

Patterns II Geneva, Milan: Fewer ties in generalbut more ties to autochtonous Network integration

Barcelona, Budapest:More ties in general but less ties to autochtonous Network segmentation

12

Provisional remarksa) High involvement in organizational

alliances (many major partners) greater segmentation of organizational fields (ties concentrated within ethnic & migrant groups)

b) Low involvement in organizational alliances (fewer major partners) greater integration of organizational fields (with key role for autochtonous organizations)

c) Social capital does not always yield cohesion