The impact of social capital on the immigrants' integration alongside the Rural-Urban Continuum: Evidence from Greece

Petroula Liltsi ^b , Anastasios Michailidis ^a*b , Efstratios Loizou ^b , Fotios Chatzitheodoridis^b

^a*Department of Agricultural Economics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece . Corresponding author's email address: pliltsi@agro.auth.gr

^bDepartment of Agriculture, Division of Agricultural Economics, University of Western Macedonia, Terma Kontopoulou Str., Florina, Greece.

Keywords:Greek communities, Immigrants, Integration, Rural-urban continuum, Social capital

ARTICLE HISTORY: Received: 30-Aug-2017, Accepted: 09-Oct-2017, Online available: 23-Oct-2017

Contribution/ Originality

The survey provides information for integration of immigrants, a topic not widely examined in Greece, and it is analyzed for the first time on the basis of rural-urban continuum theory.

1. INTRODUCTION

Undoubtedly, the phenomenon of immigration is a recent and significant new challenge for all countries, and especially for the Euro-Mediterranean ones. Greek societies, particularly in recent years, have received a large number of immigrants (Kasimis, 2008). According to the results of the 2011 census of Greece more than 10% of the whole population in Greece are foreigners (ELSTAT, 2011).

Immigration brings importing positive long-term impacts to local societies and economies as it contributes to the increase of the host population and to improve its socio-demographic characteristics (age pyramids) (Imran et al., 2019; Mitrakos, 2016; Boulet and Boudarbat, 2015). Moreover, immigration increases the local workforce especially in jobs that do not require specific qualifications (Sandeep, 2015; Schovankova, 2013; Williams, 2009; Peridy, 2006) and contributes to reducing inflation and boosting the local economies (Mitrakos, 2016; Piracha et al., 2016; Kotani, 2012). On the other hand, in short term periods, immigration brings about negative changes to the social and political well-being of local population as it has negative effects on social cohesion and social capital of the area (Gilmartin and Migge, 2015; Putnam, 2007).

Social capital is an essential component of harmonious coexistence and contributes to boosting social cohesion and promoting integration of immigrants (Warburton, 2019; Schmidt, 2016; Tselios et al., 2015; Beugelsdijk and Sjak, 2009; Cheong et al., 2007). Societies with high rates of social capital have also positive attitudes to social issues (Herreros and Criado, 2009; Martinovic et al., 2009). Proper design of social capital can solve the problems that arise from the existence of different social groups within the communities (Bilodeau and White, 2016; Tham-Agyekum and Nimoh, 2013; Evergeti and Zontini, 2006; Jacobs and Tillie, 2004). According to Perkins and Long (2002), "sense of community" is an important dimension of social capital as it expresses the combined effect of networking, reciprocity and trust (Lowea et al., 2016; Sama et al., 2016; Jamshidi and Kenarsari, 2015; De Blasi et al., 2012; Casieri et al., 2010). Immigrants are an organic part of the host society and their integration must be a fundamental concern of societies. Integration is the result of political and social debates and derives from the interaction of different social groups (Gilmartin and Migge, 2015).

This paper aims to estimate the impact of social capital on the integration of immigrants in a typical Greek area. In addition, the paper seeks to develop modern methodological tools aiming to define the factors which contribute to the integration of immigrants alongside the rural-urban continuum of the study area and conclude empirical findings. In accordance with theory of rural-urban continuum areas and according to their distance (either the physical distance from other settlements or as travel time), the municipalities of the Prefecture of Thessaloniki are classified into a linear continuum (Liltsi et al., 2014; Pateman, 2011).

The contribution of this research to scientific literature is particularly interesting and important as for first time in Greece, in a period which characterized by uncertainty, is carried out a survey to determine the interaction between social capital and integration of immigrants as well as to investigate the characteristics of immigrants that contribute to their integration. Social exclusion can be reduced by implementing appropriate programs and policy measures that boost social capital (Stanley et al., 2012). Therefore, on the basis of the results and according to the characteristics of immigrants that contribute to their integration, policy recommendations will be drawn to identify a new immigration policy that encourages the social cohesion and will help to facilitate the social and economic integration of immigrants in host societies. The rest of the paper consists of the following sections: Section two outlines the employed methodological framework. The empirical results are discussed in section three and finally in the last section the conclusions are offered in combination with some emerging policy recommendations.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

This paper draws from an empirical study conducted in 607 residents of the 14 Municipalities of the Prefecture of Thessaloniki during the period June to November 2016. The data were collected through a personal response questionnaire survey. According to the more recent census statistics (Table 1), the permanent residents of the Prefecture of Thessaloniki are 1.040.590 of which 69.961 (6,7 %) are immigrants (ELSTAT, 2011).

Table 1: Sample distribution

Source: Hellenic Statistical Authority (ELSTAT, 2011)

To meet the aims of this paper a qualitative research was initially conducted in a small pilot sample of residents of the Prefecture of Thessaloniki (two focus groups). According to the results of this qualitative research, the final questionnaire was structured, and the main quantitative research was carried out, using stratified random sampling through personal interviews, in 607 residents of the study area (each Municipality was a strata).

The survey questionnaire is divided into four sections (Figure 1). These sections consist of variables about: (1) the sense of community (2) the integration of immigrants (3) the impact of immigrants' installation in rural areas (4) the demographic and personal characteristics of the respondents. Aiming to increase participation, and in order to avoid the cognitive burden on respondents, a 5-point Likert scale was used where "1 = Strongly Disagree", "2 = Disagree ", "3 = Neither Agree or Disagree", "4 = Agree" and "5 = Strongly Agree".

Figure 1: Questionnaire functionality

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The main aim of the paper was to estimate and map the "integration" and "social capital" in the rural-urban continuum scale (Figure 2). Using simple descriptive statistical analysis, the average size of "integration" and "social capital" was calculated for each Municipality and was designed on an in rural-urban continuum scale. Social capital is a key element in the structure of the relationship between natives and immigrants in most Municipalities in the prefecture, as municipalities with a high average social capital have higher levels of average "integration" (Chalkidona, Neapolis-Sykeon, Pavlou Mela, Thessaloniki, Kalamaria, Thermaikou).

Figure 2: "Integration" and "social capital"

Therefore, Categorical Regression Model (CatReg), via SPSS v.23 for Windows, has been employed to correlate the factors that influence integration of immigrants (Loizou et al., 2013; Michailidis et al., 2011). CatReg has been selected and used in order to explain and model the immigrants' integration in terms of socioeconomic attitudes while it can also handle better when compared to other regression models, nominal and ordinal (qualitative in nature) variables (Charatsari et al., 2013; Chatzitheodoridis et al., 2013; Michailidis et al., 2012; Krikeli et al., 2020). The applied CatReg model is well-performed and indicates a significant relationship between the dependent variable which is immigrant's "integration" and the group of selected predictive variables (R2 = 0.962). The results (Table 2) show that the most important factor of integrating immigrants, according to Pratt measures of relative importance, are "the participation of immigrants in community activities" (26.3%), "employment in jobs which do not preferred by the local residents" (8.9%), "help of locals to immigrants to find a job" (6.8%) and "the growth of workforce in community" (6.5%).

Table 2: Relative importance measures of the empirical CatReg model

Note: Dependent variable "integration"

Investigating further the integration procedure, according to the theory of Rural-Urban Continuum, the Municipalities of the study area were classified in three separate categories based on their physical distance from the main urban center (Municipality of Thessaloniki) and some certain characteristics of each area: a) urban, b) semi-urban and c) rural areas (Table 3).

Table 3: Distribution of municipalities based on the theory of rural-urban continuum

In order to find out the factors that influence integration of immigrants alongside the Rural-Urban Continuum, several CatReg sub-models were employed (Table 4).

Table 4: Relative importance measures

Note: Dependent variable "integration"

The participation of immigrants in community activities is the major reason for "integration" of immigrants in urban (0.274) semi-urban (0.251) and rural areas (0.242). As for the inhabitants of rural areas, they examine the importance of "integration" immigrants through cooperation in the working environment (0.142) as migrants contribute to the increase of the workforce in the region (0.149). They also believe that the development of friendly relations with migrants (0.145) and the participation of immigrants in elections (0.151) improve their levels of "integration".

4. CONCLUSION

According to the paper results, the integration of immigrant's procedure in the study area adjusts satisfactory to the theory of rural-urban continuum. The employed multivariate statistical investigation supports the need for area segmentation alongside the rural-urban continuum as the integration factors of immigrants are different in the selected models. More specifically, for all models, the main reason, which has a positive impact on the "integration" of immigrants, is their participation in community activities. Nevertheless, the factors change significantly for the model of rural areas. Immigrants contribute to increase the workforce of the rural community therefore the cooperation in the work environment and friendly relations with immigrants improving contribute to improving integration levels of immigrants in rural areas (Gidarakou et al., 2011; Kasimis, 2008; Levitt and Jaworsky, 2007).

On the other hand, "social capital" is the key component in the structure of the relationship between natives and immigrants (Tselios et al., 2015). ?n most areas, the relation that links social capital and integration is proportional, as areas with high social capital have higher levels of "integration" Herreros and Criado, 2009; Martinovic et al., 2009). Areas with high social capital reserves are less vulnerable and have greater opportunities to achieve high levels of prosperity and solidarity than those with low levels of trust and weak civil society (Wilkes and Wu, 2018). Efforts should be made to create hospitable societies in which immigrants are able to participate. By encouraging participation in society's activities, they increase the chances of interacting with the locals, reducing prejudice and creating new values that lead to improve levels of trust and social capital as well as the empowerment of local organizations and society (Paluck et al., 2018; Haussermann and Siebel, 2001).

Therefore, there is an important need for an immigration policy that emphasizes the strengthening of policies towards multiculturalism and social cohesion. To achieve this, effective acceptance measures and programs should be considered to promote the development of social capital and the "sense of community". Through the proper structuring of social capital, it is possible to solve the problems that arise from diversity in societies, as areas with high levels of social capital reserves have a more positive attitude towards social issues.

References

Beugelsdijk, S., & Sjak, S. (2009). Bridging and bonding social capital: which type is good for economic growth. Tilburg: CentER Discussion Paper Series no. 2009 27.

Bilodeau, A., & White, S. (2016). Trust among recent immigrants in Canada: levels, roots and implications for immigrant integration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(8), 1317-1333. doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2015.1093411.

Boulet, M., & Boudarbat, B. (2015). The economic performance of immigrants with Canadian education. Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, 15(2), 23-40.

Casieri, A., Nazzaro, C., & Roselli, L. (2010). Trust building and social capital as development policy tools in rural areas. An empirical analysis: the case of the LAG CDNISAT. New Medit, 9(1), 24-30.

Charatsari, C., Papadaki-Klavdianou, A., Michailidis, A., & Partalidou, M. (2013). Great expectations? Antecedents of women farmers' willingness to participate in agricultural education programmes. Outlook on Agriculture, 42(3), 193-199. doi.org/10.5367/oa.2013.0134.

Chatzitheodoridis, F., Michailidis, A., Theodosiou, G., & Loizou, E. (2013). Local cooperation: A dynamic force for endogenous rural development. In Balkan and Eastern European Countries in the Midst of the Global Economic Crisis (pp. 121-132). Physica, Heidelberg. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2873-3_9.

Cheong, P. H., Edwards, R., Goulbourne, H., & Solomos, J. (2007). Immigration, social cohesion and social capital: A critical review. Critical social policy, 27(1), 24-49. doi.org/10.1177/0261018307072206.

De Blasi, G., De Boni, A., Roma, R., & Trevisan, G. (2012). The social capital for Adriatic small pelagic fish value-enhancing: a network analysis. New Medit, 11(1), 27-32. doi.org/10.4135/9781473911871.n2.

Evergeti, V., & Zontini, E. (2006). Introduction: Some critical reflections on social capital, migration and transnational families. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(6), 1025-1039. doi.org/10.1080/01419870600960271.

Gidarakou, I., Kazakopoulos, L., & Koutsouris, A. (2011). Economic immigrants in Greek rural areas: socio-economic integration and questions of ethnic exclusion. South European Society and Politics, 16(4), 533-553.

Gilmartin, M., & Migge, B. (2015). European migrants in Ireland: Pathways to integration. European Urban and Regional Studies, 22(3), 285-299.

Haussermann, H., & Siebel, W. (2001). Integration and segregation - thoughts on an old debate. German Journal of Urban Studies, 1, 68-79 (in German), available in English: http://www.difu.de/publikationen/integration-and-the-city.html-3.

Herreros, F., & Criado, H. (2009). Social trust, social capital and perceptions of immigration. Political Studies, 57(2), 337-355.

ELSTAT-Hellenic Statistical Authority (2011). Population-housing census 2011. De Facto Population. Athena.

Imran, K., Devadason, E. S., & Cheok, C. K. (2019). Developmental impacts of remittances on migrant-sending households: micro-level evidence from Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of South Asian Development, 14(3), 338-366. DOI: 10.1177/0973174119887302.

Jacobs, D., & Tillie, J. (2004). Introduction: social capital and political integration of migrants. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 30(3), 419-427.

Jamshidi, M. H. M., & Kenarsari, N. H. (2015). The effect of social capital on creativity of employees a case study: productive firms of electrical household appliances in the north of Iran. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 5(4), 205-218.

Kasimis, C. (2008). Survival and expansion: migrants in Greek rural regions. Population, Space and Place, 14(6), 511-524.

Kotani, K. (2012). The effect of net migration on the population-growth relationship in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Empirical Research, 2(2), 62-72.

Krikeli, V., Michailidis, A., & Klavdianou, N. (2010). Communication improvement through music: The case of children with developmental disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 25(1), 1-9.

Levitt, P., & Jaworsky, B. N. (2007). Transnational migration studies: past developments and future trends. Annual Review of Sociology., 33, 129-156.

Liltsi, P., Michailidis, A., & Partalidou, M. (2014). Mapping perceived happiness alongside the rural-urban continuum. Procedia Economics and Finance, 9, 288-301.

Loizou, E., Michailidis, A., & Chatzitheodoridis, F. (2013). Investigating the drivers that influence the adoption of differentiated food products: The case of a Greek urban area. British Food Journal, 115(7), 917-935.

Lowea, C., Stanleyb, J., & Stanleyc, J. (2016). Sense of community responsibility as a determinant of corporate responsibility. Sociology, 6(10), 653-662.

Martinovic, B., van Tubergen, F., & Maas, I. (2009). Changes in immigrants' social integration during the stay in the host country: The case of non-western immigrants in the Netherlands. Social Science Research, 38(4), 870-882.

Michailidis, A., Nastis, S. A., & Loizou, E. (2012). Mobile communications technology in rural societies of developing countries. Journal of Rural Development, 31(3), 319-334.

Michailidis, A., Partalidou, M., Nastis, S. A., Papadaki-Klavdianou, A., & Charatsari, C. (2011). Who goes online? Evidence of internet use patterns from rural Greece. Telecommunications Policy, 35(4), 333-343.

Mitrakos, T. (2016). The contribution of migrants to the Greek economy: A meta-analysis of empirical findings. Social Cohesion and Development, 8(2), 87-106.

Paluck, E. L., Green, S. A., & Green, D. P. (2018). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy, 3(2), 1-30.

Pateman, T. (2011). Rural and urban areas: comparing lives using rural/urban classifications. Regional Trends, 43(1), 11-86. doi.org/10.1057/rt.2011.2.

Peridy, N. (2006). Migration from MENA countries to the EU: A Quantitative assessment of recent patterns, policies and prospects. New Medit, 5(4), 4-14.

Perkins, D. D., & Long, D. A. (2002). Neighborhood sense of community and social capital. In Psychological sense of community, Springer US, pp. 291-318.

Piracha, M., Tani, M., & Vaira-Lucero, M. (2016). Social capital and immigrants' labour market performance. Papers in Regional Science, 95, S107-S126. doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12117.

Putnam, R. D. (2007). E pluribus unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first century the 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137-174.

Sama, M. C., Chiatii, E. A., Aquilas, N. A., & Abit, O. M. (2016). Building social capital in the fishery communities of the South-West region of Cameroon: The case of Limbe Municipality. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 6(7), 119-130.

Sandeep, K. A. U. R. (2015). Migration and bilateral trade flows: evidence from India and OECD Countries. Applied Econometrics and International Development, 15(2), 179-196.

Schmidt, G. (2016). Space, politics and past-present diversities in a Copenhagen neighbourhood. Identities, 23(1), 51-65.

Schovankova, S. (2013). Determinants of the spatial distribution of foreign employees on different skill job positions: The case of the Czech Republic. Danube, 4(2), 115-139.

Stanley, J., Stanley, J., & Hensher, D. (2012). Mobility, social capital and sense of community: what value?. Urban Studies, 49(16), 3595-3609.

Tham-Agyekum, E. K., & Nimoh, F. (2013). Investigating social capital levels among small holder maize farmers in the Kwahu North District, Ghana. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development, 3(11), 870-884.

Tselios, V., Noback, I., van Dijk, J., & McCann, P. (2015). Integration of immigrants, bridging social capital, ethnicity, and locality. Journal of Regional Science, 55(3), 416-441. doi.org/10.1111/jors.12160.

Warburton, C. E. (2019). Human capital, divergent opportunities, and development in the Us. Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, 19(1), 5-28.

Wilkes, R., & Wu, C. (2018). Trust and minority groups. The oxford handbook of social and political trust, 231.

Williams, A. M. (2009). International migration, uneven regional development and polarization. European Urban and Regional Studies, 16(3), 309-322. doi.org/10.1177/0969776409104695.