Integration policies and acculturation in Estonian society

in last two decadesNew era in integration policies in the Baltic

Sea countries?Tallinn 25.02.2013

Aune Valk

Plan

• Some statistics• Quick overview of last two decades in Estonia,

incl integration strategies• Problems of interethnic relations in Estonia in

my view

Sources

• Pettai, V., Hallik, K. (2002). Understanding processes of ethnic control: segmentation, dependency and co-optation in post-communist Estonia. Nations and Nationalism 8 (4), 505-529.

• Vetik, R. (2007). Eesti ühiskonna integratsiooniprogrammi 2008-2013 üldideoloogia kontseptuaalne põhjendamine.

• Statistics Estonia (2009). Immigrant population in Estonia

Estonian population by ethnic self-identification, 2011 census

84% are Estonian citizens, 7% Russian citizens, 7% undefined citizens

Estonians (darker green) and other nationalities in Estonia 1897-2010

http://www.stat.ee/, slide by Ene Saar

Citizenship 1992-2011

Statistics Estonia, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Office of Citizenshi p and Migration

Share of immigrant population across counties, 2008

What has happened in Estonia regarding acculturation since 1990

• Restoration of the pre-IIWW state in 1991• Most Russian-speakers were immigrants 1944-

1990 and did not obtain automatically citizenship• Estonia chose very radical reform-way that was

most difficult for older people, people in countryside and Russian-speakers

• Segmentation, (economic) dependency and co-optation of Russian minority (Pettai, Hallik, 2002; Lustic 1980)

• First integration strategy 2000-2007 (initiated in 1998 with the title „integration of non-Estonians into Estonian society“)

Cont.• Around 2000: fighting, closed, threatened Estonian

identity and open but unclear-diffused Russian identity

• 2000-2010: EU, NATO, economic growth, new generation: opening up of Estonian identity; new disappointed generation of Russian-speakers and globally integrated (individually oriented) Estonian-Russians (1/3)

• Integration strategy 2007-2013: balanced, multicultural, …. But actions are still one-sided (language-learning and citizenship), Estonians do not see their role

By the end of the first decade of 21 cent

• Estonians (65%) are continuosly more disturbed by the different behaviour and lifestyle of Russians than vv (25%)

• Russian-speakers trust less– State – 36% (Estonian 66%)– mainly government, parlament, president

1998-1999 first integration statements by Parlament and government

State programme `The integration of non-Estonians into Estonian society‘ 19983 central concepts: •an individual-centred approach, •a common societal core and •an Estonian cultural predominance.„the essence of the State Programme is none the less to integrate non-Estonians into an Estonian-dominant state and society. In this respect, it is meant to adapt non-Estonians to a pre-set Estonian world, not to alter that world.“ (Pettai, Hallik, 2002)

2000: Integration in Estonian society 2000-2007

• ‘Estonian version of multiculturalism’: – Cultural pluralism (but ethnic differences are private

matter)– Strong shared common sphere (common democratic

and humanistic values, shared information, but also sharing Estonian language, knowing Estonian history, acknowledging Estonian multicultural society

– Need to preserve Estonian culture• Integration is two-sided• Concentrated on education, language, culture

Priorities of the integration policy (Int Monitoring 2008)

Estonians % Russian-speakers %

Knowledge of Estonian language 57 Compliance with the principle of equal treatment

58

Transition to partial teaching of subjects in Estonian in Russian-medium schools

33 Equal socio-economic opprtunities and welfare to non-Estonians and Estonians

57

Reducing the number of persons with undetermined citizenship

31 Increasing tolerance 57

Increasing tolerance 26 Reduction of separation between information spheres

49

Compliance with the principle of equal treatment

25 Representation and participation in public life

49

Integration strategy 2013-2000• Language learning is seen as the main solution for

almost all problems but „taking into account Estonian integration process, it is relevant to give Russian speakers information in Russian.“

• Participation is low because of lack of language skills not because of Estonian’s attitudes (but 25% feel not welcome)

• First time measures directed to the whole society (i.e. Estonians): tolerance, valuing cultural pluralism

• Participation (in learning, employment) and state/citizen’s identity are seen as aims.

Estonian policies (compared to other European policies)• concentrate on existing minorities not new

immigrants (vs Western-Europe)• are specific – oriented to specific questions (vs

e.g Sweden)• concentrate more on culture and language,

less on economic matters• include less employers (vs Austria and

Denmark), NGOs (vs UK, Spain)• stress similarly less the role of majority

Challenges of ethnic relations in Estonia: problems of Estonians

• Looking globally there are no (major) problems. Is it useful to for someone to keep the problems?

• Estonians feel culturally threatened• Lack of tolerance is not considered a problem.• Integration is seen as assimilation, perceived

assimilation pressure has contrary results

Challenges of ethnic relations in Estonia (cont):problems related to multiculturalism

• Estonian reality is bicultural not multicultural, two cultures (not just historical interests and state politics) are seen as opposite, sometimes conflictual.

• Multiculturalism is understood in the public discourse as anti-Estonian political correctness coming from Europe

• Positive multicultural (Estonian-Russian) identity is not common.

• Estonian national/state identity is highly related to Estonian ethnic identity, it is difficult to become an Estonian/ State identity means different thing for different groups.

Directionality of acculturation: who changes?

• According to its original definition (Redfield et al. 1936: 149), acculturation is a two-sided process that refers to the “changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups”.

• Majority’s role in acculturation– to change oneself/ one’s identity– to influence with attitudes: assimilative,

multicultural, segregative, …

Cross-cultural Intercultural Multicultural

1 nation – 1 culture – 1 language

1 group – 1 culture– 1 “native” language

1 person – multiple cultures/

languages

Cultures/

languages meet at political boundaries

Cultures/

languages meet at social boundaries

Cultures/

languages meet in individuals

“foreign” language teaching

“second” lg. teaching, “sensitivity training”

“minority” vs “standard” lg; lg for special purposes

Communication vs non-communication

E.g. Kaplan, 1966

Communication vs miscommunication

Scollon&Scollon, 1981

Communication always partial

Johnstone&Bean, 1997

By Barbara Johnstone

Multiculturalism on an individual level

RussiansEstonian-Russians Estonians75 92 73

In Your opinion, is it possible to belong to several ethnic groups at the same time? % of yes answers

National identity means different things for different groups

• Multicultural national identity (MNI) Valuing multiculturalism (both on group and personal level) in Estonia. Statements like:– It does not disturb me that people of different ethnic origins live

in Estonia. (group level)– In my opinion someone cannot be simultaneously a

representative of Estonian and of some other culture. (R)(individual level)

• National pride (NP) - feeling pride and connection to Estonian state, land and people. Statements like:– For me it is / it would be important to be an Estonian citizen.– I am proud that Estonia is known as a successful small country.

Means for national identity, correlations of ethnic pride (EP) to national pride

(NP) and multicultural national identity (MNI)  Ethnic

Estonia

ns

Ethnic

Russians

t-value Self-cat

as

Russian

Self-cat

as

Russian-

Estonian

t-value

Means

Nation pride 1.20 0.23 27.80*** 0.04 0.59 8.28***

Multic nat ID 0.67 1.12 -13.08*** 1.01 1.29 5.35***

Correlations

NP-EP .66*** .08 .07 .17*

MNI-EP -.00 .28*** .36*** .26***

Future, new norm?

Report to the European Council ’Diversity andCohesion, New Challenges for the Integration of

Immigrants and Minorities’ (J. Niessen 2004)

• Valuing diversity • Solidarity (why we have immigration)• Good government (inclusion of different

groups)• Multiple memberships/identities

Some ideas for (Estonian) future

• Early contacts (and language learning) in kindergarten

• Multiple identities, building positive merged/dual identities

• Individualist approach: If people prefer to identify themselves neither with an immigrant group nor the host majority, there should still be another alternative to marginalization –individualist approach.

• Language/culture learning due to inclusion not vv = less stress=less culture conflict