1.
The Social Capital of migrants
and individual ICT use.
A comparative analysis of
European countries
Dr Frank Thomas
FTR Internet Research
Rosny-sous-Bois, France
frank.thomasftr@free.fr
COST 298 The Good, The Bad and the Unexpected
Moscow, 23 to 25 May 2007
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

2.
The context
 The free movement of people a major
political objective in the European Union
 Migrants are important: a - recent -
challenge and a possible solution to a part
of Europe's problems
 i2010 policy: knowledge and innovation
the engines of sustainable growth,
towards an inclusive Information Society,
through widespread use of ICTs
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

3.
e-inclusion and migrants
 The inclusion of migrants into a
sustainable IS has still a considerable way
to go.
 There are a elite and under-class
migrants, the first included in the IS, the
second demanding it.
 Migrants numerically important: in 2002, a
net migration balance of 1.7 mill. inh., i.e.
3.7 per 1,000 inh.
 Including migrants a political necessity.
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

4.
What is a migrant ?
A migrant is not necessarily a foreigner.
Migrant Citizenship
Status National Non-national
Change of borders
- Yugoslavia
- Baltic States
Resident foreigners
Non- Standard case - in border regions
Migrant - Baltic States
Non-nationalised 2nd or 3rd generation
immigrants
- Germany
Returning expat
Migrant Having acquired citizenship
Internal migration Standard case
Transnational migration
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

5.
A better definition of a migrant
Lambert (2004) proposes a definition based
upon
 Having a foreign nationality
 Having one or two parents born abroad
 Speaking a language at home which is not
one of the country's official languages
 A self-definition as belonging to a minority
group in the country
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

6.
Migrants and social capital
 Social capital can be understood as the capacity for
collective action by an individual, an institution, a
society through
 Social links with social acteurs of the same origin: bonding
capital, for social identity
= family, friends, neighbours?
 Social links with acteurs of different origins, that bridge
between bonding networks: bridging capital, for strategic
action
= acquaintances, voluntary associations, self-help groups.
 Trust can be seen either as a result or a condition for
collective action through social capital.
 Migrants can advance in the receiving contry if they can
create both bonding and bridging capital.
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

7.
The quality of survey data on
migrants (or the lack of it)
EUROSTAT EURESCOM Lambert
Source: OECD New Cronos P903 EVS ESS (ESS data)
Indicator Citizenship Citizenship language citizenship citizenship migrants
Year: 2001 2001 2000 2001 2002/03 2002/03
Austria 8,8% 8,9% 1,4% 4,3% 22%
Belgium 8,2% 8,4% 11,2% 4,9% 18%
Czech Republic 2,0% 5,1% 0,5% 0,4% 12%
Denmark 5,0% 4,8% 12,4% 4,1% 2,4% 10%
Finland 1,9% 1,8% 0,5% 1,6% 6%
France 5,6% 5,6% 8,7% 1,4% 4,3% 25%
Germany 8,9% 8,9% 6,7% 2,5% 5,0% 16%
Greece 7,0% 7,0% 1,0% 5,3% 20%
Hungary 1,1% 1,1% 0,2% 12%
Ireland 4,0% 4,1% 1,4% 3,2% 12%
Italy 2,4% 2,5% 5,9% 0,1% 0,3% 5%
Luxembourg 37,5% 36,9% 37,3% 34,0% 55%
Netherlands 4,3% 4,2% 21,4% 2,4% 1,9% 13%
Norway 4,1% 8,1% 2,7% 11%
Poland 0,1% 0,3% 0,0% 9%
Portugal 3,4% 2,0% 2,0% 2,3% 8%
Slovenia 2,3% 0,1% 0,1% 14%
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

8.
Does being a migrant make a
Controls
Controls
difference ?
Social demography
Social position
Regular Internet & email use
Social geography
Social bonding capital
Social bridging capital
Migrant status
Migrant status
Trust
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

9.
To give a context : A classification
of countries by social capital
 Bonding capital
 Mean number of weekly socializing contacts with family & friends
 Family judged more important than friends (calculated)
 Subjective importance of contacts with family
 Subjective importance of contacts with friends
 Bridging capital
 % Nominal membership in voluntary organizations
 % Active membership in voluntary associations
 % Volunteering in voluntary associations
 % Helping outside family, associations, work
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

10.
National profiles of social capital
Social-
democratic Transfor-
& Liberal Corporatist Latin mation
Bonding social capital
- % Weekly socialising 26 34 34 57
- Mean Importance of family (1 ...10) 9,5 9,0 9,4 9,7
- Mean Importance of friends (1 ... 10) 8,7 8,4 8,2 8,1
- % Family more important than friends 34 43 51 60
Bridging social capital
- % Nominal membership 80 75 41 33
- % Active membership 44 42 27 15
- % Volunteering 25 22 11 9
- % Informal & Self-Help 35 45 25 22
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

11.
The Geography of Social Capital
in Europe
Corporatist
Sociodemocrat & liberal
Transformation
Latin
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

12.
Major results of the data analysis
Regular use of the Internet can best be explained
by, in decreasing order of importance, when
using Lambert's definition of migrants

Resource equipment: social position, life cycle,
gender, size of community

Bridging capital: nominal or active membership

Bonding capital: socializing (mostly in
socialdemocratic & liberal countries)

Migrant status (in some countries)

Trust: interpersonal trust (in some countries)
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

13.
And migrants in all of this, after
having introduced controls ?
 In countries with strong ICT development
(DK,SF,NL,UK): no difference for
migrants
 In countries with younger migrants (EIR,
N): more Internet users among migrants
 S, D, GR: migrants are less probable
Internet users than non-migrants
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

14.
Social-democratic & liberal countries Corporatist countries Latin countries Transf ormation countries
Odds ratios DK SF N S GB EIR A B D NL ES F I SLO GR HU
Age group
- 30-60 yrs
- 61 + yrs. Red background:
negative odds
Gender (male)
Living as a couple
Living with children in preschool age
Living with young childr. Yellow background:
Living with adolescents positive odds
Educational attainment
- secondary level
- tertiary level, degree
Household equival.income
- second quartile
- third quartile
- fourth quartile
Size of community
Social capital: bonding
Informal socialising
Importance of friends
Social capital: bridging
Nominal membership
Active membership
Volunteering
Informal volunteering Percentage of
Interpersonal trust variation
Trust in institutions explication
Migrant status
- migrant
Sample size 1237 1741 1918 1753 1723 1572 1305 1305 2208 196 861 1209 590 1116 1621 1265
Nagelkerke's R 0,40 0,47 0,48 0,47 0,46 0,41 0,38 0,43 0,38 0,32 0,47 0,40 0,41 0,45 0,49 0,52
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

15.
Some questions that remain
 What about mobile use ?
 What about the effect of broadband use ?
 What about usage patterns ?
 A refined analysis of the country & cultural context
 There is a lack of longitudinal data
 Representative surveys lack sufficient sub-samples
of (legal) migrants, to differentiate among migrants
 Qualitative and quantitative studies remain
unconnected.
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007

16.
And your questions ?
Thank you.
The full text published in the proceedings
can also be obtained from the author or
from www.slideshare.com/ftr_
An OpenOffice presentation
COST 298 The Good, the Bad and the Unexpected. Moscow 23 – 25 May 2007