Andrey V. RezaevChair and Professor, Comparative Sociology, St. Petersburg State University, RussiaValentin S. Starikov, PhD. Candidate, St. Petersburg State University, Russia

Natalia D. Tregubova, PhD. Candidate, St. Petersburg State University, Russia

ANO: InterComCenter. Russian Humanitarian Scholarly Foundation (RGNF) 10-03-00911а/Г.

Social Exclusion and Social Inclusion of Transnational Migrants in Action: Sociological Analysis of Institutional Framework and Everyday Life Practices in St. Petersburg, Russia

Objectives and Goals

The paper I am about to present has three foci. • First, I will discuss, rather briefly, theoretical and

methodological settings that oriented us in sociological analysis of social inclusion and social exclusion of transnational migrants.

• Second, I will characterize the case of Russian immigrant policy and current situation with transnational students migrants.

• Third, I will try to portrait the challenges that sociology is facing in exploration of everyday life practices and will present the ideas, materials and outcomes of the field researches on transnational migrants the chair of Comparative Sociology and the IinterComCenter at St. Petersburg State University, Russia have conducted in 2009 – 2012.

I. Social inclusion / social exclusion

Approaches to Define the Concepts

Social Exclusion• Social exclusion as a socio-economic and political

problem came to light recently with the events in dense immigrant housing quarters in Paris, France. In spring 2005 immigrant families from the suburbs or banlieues at the periphery of the greater Paris started to demonstrate their demand for a solution to their exclusion from society through weeks of rioting.

Defining “Social Exclusion”

“…literature has noted that there is no clarity on exactly what defines social exclusion, but it’s range can include poverty, lack of social integration, economic exclusion, political exclusion, and cultural exclusion…”

Madanipour, Cars, & Allen, 1998, pp. 76-78; Mayes, Berghman, & Salais, 2001; Percy-Smith, 2000, pp. 3-5).

Defining “Social Exclusion” II “Mandanipour et al. trace the use of the term “social

exclusion” to French social policy and Percy-Smith explains that originally it referred to a “group of people living on the margins of society and, in particular, without access to the system of social insurance” (Madanipour, Cars, & Allen, 1998; Percy-Smith, 2000). “

“The editors of Social Exclusion in European Cities observe that social exclusion is a growing trend across Europe in the areas of employment, income, education and health. In particular, they note that: “In many cities, these changes are especially visible in the spatial concentration of immigrant and ethnic minority communities and in large areas with deteriorating environmental conditions”

Ibid.

Defining “Social Exclusion” IIIAli Madanipour has cautioned that the “combination

of multiple forms of exclusion becomes a spatial reinforcement of exclusion, pushing those individuals to the spatial edge of society. At that point Madanipour says the exclusion can become a conflict between ‘the system and actors’ and continues: ‘In such dissociation, the marginalized people and marginalized places undermine the legitimacy and authority of these systems and threaten to block the route to survival. Tackling the problems of social exclusion becomes ever more crucial, as these areas become scenes of riots and social unrest’”

Ibid.

Defining “Social Exclusion” IV

Researcher David Mayes has defined social exclusion as “a “process” and as a “state” (Mayes, Berghman, & Salais, 2001, p. 6). These two aspects of social exclusion have a direct influence on policy response. As a “process,” Mayes notes that once social exclusion is evident in the life of an individual, it becomes a “vicious cycle” from which exit is difficult or impossible. “

Ibid.

Defining “Social Exclusion” V

Mayes concludes that it is, “more efficient and effective to prevent entry into this cycle than to combat the effects of social exclusion and try to exit the cycle. Thus it is Mayes’ prescriptive suggestion that policy measures to encourage social inclusion address the issue of exclusion more accurately and efficiently than a “prevention” policy strategy against exclusion, which Mayes describes as a “generic” approach to the issue.”

Ibid.

Defining “Social Exclusion” VIMayes’ view is that, “social exclusion is a broad

term that allows member states to tailor it to fit their needs, which he sees as a pro and a con. His criticism is that “It does not impose a particular social model on the members…however that very vagueness would enable states to do very little that was new” (Mayes, Berghman, & Salais, 2001, p. 4).”

Ibid.

II. Transnational migrants’ exclusion as a challenge for social research. Case of Russian higher education

Transnational migration in postcommunist countries • We believe that transnational migration is one of the

hottest issues in the list of problems and challenges that all the countries of the fSU have to deal with.

• The liberal democratic principles that have been at least proclaimed in contemporary Russia have generated a logic of inclusion and equality of opportunities vis-à-vis different kinds of migrants. Yet various studies have emphasized the contradiction between formal inclusion and exclusionary practices targeting more or less radical Others. As a rule, this is the case of “visible,” most often non-Slav minorities.

Government Policies to Influence the Level of Immigration, 2012

unpopulation.org

Post-Soviet Immigration Regime

The demographical policy of the Russian Federation until 2025: “The aim is … to attract migrants in compliance with the demographical needs and the social-economical developments, taking into account the necessity of their social adaptation and integration”.

“In order to compensate for the population loss due to natural causes and possibly low birth rates, it is necessary to activate the efforts to attract working age immigrants for permanent residency in Russia”.

“Until 2025 the overall aim is to increase the population (also through substitutional migration) to 145 million people”.

Post-Soviet Immigration Regime

• During the Soviet period, any migration (immigration, emigration, and internal migration) was regulated by the propiska system, which required the registration of each person at a particular address and required permission to settle in large cities such as Moscow and St. Petersburg

• In 1993, laws were adapted to reflect the new post-Soviet era, granting the right of free movement, choice of residence and obviating government-approved permits for residence changes.

Post-Soviet Immigration Regime

• Further changes in 1995 established two options for registration, either at the place of residence or place of stay (for periods of ten days or longer), each of which required passport identification and proof of legal residence

• The Federal Migration Service was created in 1992 to oversee the development and implementation of migration policy. The FMS was primarily concerned with protecting the rights of migrants and refugees yet it failed to attract migrants to regions deemed appropriate for migration and proved ineffective at assisting with housing and employment (Voronina, 2006)

Post-Soviet Immigration Regime

• In 2003 several regions had either retained propiska or established new rules to officially restrict registration based on social status, the presence of relatives in the area, age and health regulations (Open Society, 2006, 39)

• St. Petersburg city government, acting in accordance with public opinion, has been adamantly opposed to dismantling restrictive propiska standards fearing a flood of migrants (Schaible 2001, 350).

• As of January 2007, a new package of laws was completed with the goal of simplifying previously cumbersome procedures. According to the new rules, a migrant worker must be recorded at his/her place of stay, whereas a more formal registration process is required for a place of residence.

In the period from 1992 – 2008 immigration compensated for a little less than 50 % of the excess of deaths over births in the country (Ioffe and Zaĭonchkovskaya, 2010, 105).

Theory, Methodology and Empirical Analysis

• The theoretical and methodological part of the Project sets out to discuss more general issues regarding definitions of the major concepts such as “migrants”, “transnational migrants”, “social inclusion and exclusion” and so on, discussion of Post-communist migration flows, incentives, trends, and categories as well as migrants’membership and sense of belonging. In order to be able to carry out this task, I considered how the postcommunist period of Russia provides a fruitful terrain for the study of migration by challenging well-established paths in this area, and bringing forth – among others – a category of migrants hardly explored so far: students.

• Russian immigration policy does not distinguish between labor migrants and educational migrants. Both face with the same institutional policies and practices.

III. Migrants exclusion in everyday practices. New perspectives for sociological perspective.

Paradigmatic turn in social analytics1. A number of recent and influential works of sociology deal with the seemingly

trivial phenomena of everyday life. The standard mass surveys are being replaced by in-depth, interpretative, and qualitative procedures that focus on the visual surface of society.

2. We observe a shift in sociological method from the quantitative mass surveys that for many decades dominated sociological research toward more qualitative approaches: observation, case studies, in-depth interviews, the interpretation of ‘ego documents’, i.e. spontaneously created personal records of experience (letters, lifestories, family photographs), and the analysis of the social iconosphere as a particularly interesting novelty.

3. The ‘third sociology’ takes as its ultimate object of inquiry social events: human action in collective contexts, constrained on the one hand by the agential endowment of participants and on the other hand by structural and cultural environments of action. (Piotr Sztompka, ISA Presidential address)

Research objectives and goals

The Project “Sociological analysis of the everyday life practices of legal transnational labor migrants in St.

Petersburg in 2009-2012”

•The basic research questions of the Project:

• What are the everyday life practices of transnational labor migrants in St Petersburg during the years of financial and economic crisis 2009 -2012?• Can everyday life practices be considered as a barometer for understanding processes in higher education?

Survey procedureTime: 2009-2012 Research methods: observation, group discussions, semi-

structured interview, in-depth interview, case-study•Sample: observation - 17 persons in St. Petersburg•Group Discussion: 118 migrants •Participant observation (2011-2012 St. Petersburg) •Semi-structured interviews - 17 persons Stages of the study:- 2009 desk research and a pilot project in St. Petersburg

- 2010 networking, observation- 2011 scaling, studying value orientations of migrants- 2012 Case-studies

Theory, Methodology and Empirical Analysis• Part of the empirical analysis relies on data collected in

St. Petersburg in July 2011 - February 2012 by means of ethnographic observation, semi-structured interviews, and “informal discussions” (Roger Brubaker classifies informal discussion as “variant of the focus group” yet given the more informal and interactive nature of the setting and conversation usually engaging friends or acquaintances, the author puts it separately. See, in Rogers Brubaker et al, Nationalist Politics and Everyday Ethnicity in a Transylvanian Town Princeton University Press, 2006.) with migrants from Vietnam. In total there were conducted twelve in-depth interviews and six discussions.

Theory, Methodology and Empirical Analysis• The interview questions revolved around the following

topics: reasons for migration and experience abroad; first impressions in St. Petersburg; encounters with neighbors, friends, colleagues, and strangers; academic life; jobs and opportunities; administration and public offices; future perspectives; perceptions about host and home countries; and leisure time and holidays. The discussions covered similar areas, with sustained interaction between the participants, who knew each other very well, some being roommates who voluntarily offered to participate. In general, the atmosphere in both interviews and discussions was rather casual and informal. A limitation of this study is provided by the sample itself, the absence of experts’ interview and shortcomings of comparative methods. The Project is an attempt to overcome these and other limitations as well as an attempt to prepare and to conduct a more detailed field research in the future

Theory, Methodology and Empirical Analysis• In the preparatory phase of the Project three working

hypotheses were formulated. However, the questions for the focus groups and the semi-structured interviews were developed in a way which gives room for the incorporation of unanticipated issues and topics that might arise during the interviews.

Opposing views: What is a “Migrant”?

• According to Thomas Faist, “person who moves from one country to another with the intention of taking up residence there for a relevant period of time. All those are migrants who reside and stay abroad for more than three months, be they primary migrants – those migrating for the first time - return migrants, or circular and recurrent migrants.”

Thomas Faist, The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Social Spaces, Oxford: Claredon Press, 2000, p. 18.

Thomas Faist

Opposing Views: What is a “Migrant”?• According to the UNESCO Migration GlossaryThe term migrant can be understood as "any person who

lives temporarily or permanently in a country where he or she was not born, and has acquired some significant social ties to this country." However, this may be a too narrow definition when considering that, according to some states' policies, a person can be considered as a migrant even when s/he is born in the country.

http://portal.unesco.org/shs/en/ev.php-URL_ID=3020&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Commission on Human Rights Definition• “The Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights has

proposed that the following persons should be considered as migrants:

(a) Persons who are outside the territory of the State of which their are nationals or citizens, are not subject to its legal protection and are in the territory of another State;

(b) Persons who do not enjoy the general legal recognition of rights which is inherent in the granting by the host State of the status of refugee, naturalised person or of similar status;

(c) Persons who do not enjoy either general legal protection of their fundamental rights by virtue of diplomatic agreements, visas or other agreements”. ( See, Gabriela Rodríguez Pizarro, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human rights in A/57/292, Human rights of migrants, Note by the Secretary-General. 9August 2002 at http://portal.unesco.org/shs/en/ev.php-URL_ID=3020&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html)

Opposing Views: What is a “Migrant”?

• “The US Bureau of the Census collects data on the number of persons who change their usual residence during a 12-month period. If the change is within the same county, the person is a mover, if to another country, the person is a migrant.”

The United States Government

Migration. The Encyclopedia Americana International Edition. 1994 ed.

So, what is a “Migrant”? For the purposes of our study, a “migrant shall be

defined as, “One who moves from one place, to another, for a period of time greater than one year.”

What is a “Transnational Migrant”? “The movement of a person, or people, from one nation,

to another, for duration of time, lasting at least one year.”

Dynamics of the amount of foreign students in Russia

Dynamics of the amount of students from CIS

Rough (Simple) indicator of the problem

Expulsion rate among foreign higher education students is higher than those of russian (Sgn.<0,01)

Armen

ia

Belaru

s

Kazakh

stan

Kirgyzs

tan

Moldova

Tajik

istan

Turkm

enia

Uzbek

istan

Ukraine

Georgi

aLat

via Litva

Estonia

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

FinishStart

Possible explanations of difference between ethnic groups• Armenians (etc.) study harder than Ukrainian (etc.) people• Emigrants from Tajikistan (etc.) integrate better than

Belarusians (etc.)• Alternative: Migrants from Kazakhstan (etc.) have better

access to tertiary education?

Reasons

Structural framework• Migration regime• Economic conditions• Public opinion (positive towards “slavs” and “kazakhs” but

negative towards Central Asia) [Levada-center, 2013]

Everyday life practices

Preliminary Conclusions I

• Transnational Labor Migrants Everyday Life Practices in St. Petersburg potentially can be called as a means of a social EXCLUSION.

Preliminary Conclusions II• Although forms of these ‘elitist exclusion’ by the means

of everyday life practices exist today in St. Petersburg the requirements and aspirations of a modern society urge that practices that labor migrants experience everyday should be transformed into means of SOCIAL INCLUSION.

Preliminary Conclusions III• Taking into account that everyday life practices have a

possibility for a twisted/double role in the process of social exclusion and social inclusion, policy makers should have special attention with regards to potential of labor migrants, youngsters and adults, to take part in protest movements.

Preliminary Conclusions IV: New Language• Scholars and policy makers are in need to develop new

language for understanding what is ‘transnational migrants’ in the time of globalization that foster both internationalization of education and regionalization of education. (According to Bologna Process documents, a student has to study at least on semester in another university)

Preliminary Conclusions V: St Petersburg

• There is lack of political will and real specialists who suppose to formulate politics and policies for transnational labor migrants. The policies in St. Petersburg are dominated by economic rationalism and instrumentalism. Thus, those of us who believe that quality of nowadays urban life are not only necessary to promote but also require constant actions must be willing to engage in the difficult task of crafting laws and procedures (new institutions).