Turkish return migration from Western Europe
Başlık çevirisi mevcut değil.
- Tez No: 402223
- Danışmanlar: PROF. KUTLAY YAĞMUR, PROF. FONS VAN DE VIJVER, PROF. SJAAK KROON
- Tez Türü: Doktora
- Konular: Siyasal Bilimler, Political Science
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
- Yıl: 2015
- Dil: İngilizce
- Üniversite: Tilburg University
- Enstitü: Yurtdışı Enstitü
- Ana Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Sayfa Sayısı: 153
Özet
Özet yok.
Özet (Çeviri)
The present dissertation investigated the return migration experiences of Turkish immigrants from different generations returning from Western Europe. Overall, I aimed to provide insight on how and under which conditions return migration takes place and to explicate the post return experiences of return migrants. In particular, the following three research questions were addressed: Why do people return? What are the consequences of return migration? And, what are the perceptions of Turkish mainstreamers towards return migrants in Turkey? In order to answer these questions, I started with a review of the relevant literature and a discussion about the theories used in return migration studies (Chapter 2). Then, I conducted three empirical studies on various aspects of return migration (Chapters 3, 4, and 5). Specifically, in Chapter 2, the main goal was to present an overview of the theories in the field of return migration and to discuss extant models from different approaches. More specifically, bringing together the perspectives of several disciplines such as economy, sociology, and psychology, I presented the main theoretical issues, studies and findings in the field of remigration. To specify it more, I focused on the immigrants with a pull incentive (e.g., labor migrants) who migrated mostly for economic or sometimes educational reasons rather than the immigrants who are forced from their own countries and 'pushed' (e.g., political refugees) into a new environment (Ward, Bochner & Furnham, 2001); and, I addressed the strengths and the weaknesses of the extant models and theories in explaining the causes and the consequences of the remigration experiences of the traditional migrants. The review revealed that although the extant models provided valuable insight in explicating different dimensions of return migration, no model by itself was found comprehensive or sufficient enough to provide a comprehensive picture of return migration. I discussed, based on the existing studies, how remigration differs from the migration experience and stated that contextual conditions such as attitudes of mainstream groups in the remigration country are salient moderators of the reacculturation process. Therefore, as most models attempting to explicate return migration processes have been borrowed from the migration literature, I concluded that a more encompassing model referring to identified differences of return experiences from migration experience is needed. Furthermore, it was emphasized in the review that the experiences of subsequent generations need to be reflected more in reacculturation frameworks. In Chapter 3, I investigated the motives for Turkish return migration. More specifically, I explored return migration motivations of different generations of Turkish migrants returning from Germany, the Netherlands, and France. The study was based on the semi-structured face-to-face interviews among 48 remigrants and drew on a qualitative approach and inductive content analysis. The interviews revealed the social, cultural and linguistic issues leading to return decision. It was found that initially determined return ambition, perceived discrimination in the migration context and strong sense of belonging to the country of origin play the most essential roles in return decisions. As participants emotionally and ethnically felt they belonged to Turkey, the home country was commonly idealized and return was longed for during the migration period. The concepts of 'home' and 'belonging' were found to be central for all generations in the return migration. The findings also suggested that motives of the returnees vary substantially across generations and socio-economic status of the informants. Especially for the subsequent generations, perceived discrimination was found to have created a serious concern for the future of their children. Therefore, the results showed that return was commonly an action taken not to let their children experience being negatively stereotyped or not to let them experience an unequal social status in society. Therefore, the study concluded that voluntary return should not be perceived as an individual decision triggered by just one major factor, as it is mostly a consequence of many factors that show considerable individual differences. In Chapter 4, I examined the consequences of Turkish return migration. More specifically, I aimed to identify the factors influencing the (re)adaptation of Turkish migrants who return from Germany, the Netherlands, and France. The study used semi-structured in depth interviews with 48 returnees and the analysis was based on a qualitative approach and inductive content analysis. The results of the study are discussed within Berry's acculturation model and Sussman's cultural identity model. The interviews revealed the social, cultural, and linguistic issues emerging in the return process and shed light on the factors moderating the reintegration process of Turkish returnees. On the basis of informants' self-reports, I found that perceived discrimination, cultural distance with mainstream Turks and children-related issues experienced after return were major themes in the returnee's narratives. After longing for old friends, customs, friendship patterns and values, and living with the idealized dreams of home in the host cultures for years, the returnees were disappointed not to find reunion a pleasant experience. The results also revealed that personal, emotional and social re-adaptation difficulties varied substantially across generations and the socioeconomic status of the informants. Further, the migration experiences and the acculturation orientations of the migrants in the countries of immigration played essential roles for a successful re-adaptation period. The findings were discussed within Berry's acculturation model. As Berry's model was designed to explain the experiences of the immigrants who entered into a new ethnic, linguistic and religious group, it was not found to be adequate in predicting the experiences of Turkish return migrants who felt excluded within the same ethnic, linguistic and religious group back at home. The process of return migration was also conceptualized in terms of Sussman's (2010) cultural identity model. Although the framework provided valuable insight in terms of identity changes the immigrants go through, the model was found to be inadequate in explaining the influence of certain factors such as reacculturation conditions (e.g., attitudes of home country citizens) that affect readaptation of return migrants. Further, the model did not provide enough scope for evaluating post-return processes from the perspectives of different generations. In Chapter 5, I investigated the perceptions of Turkish mainstreamers in Turkey towards Turkish (re)migrants from West European countries. Turkish immigrants, from any of Western European counties, are called 'almancı' (German-like) upon returning to Turkey and the term has several connotations such as 'culturally distorted', 'nouveau riche' (rich and spoiled) or having lost Turkishness. Therefore, Turkish immigrants who develop migrant identities in Western countries have to negotiate their migrant identities against a backdrop of 'almancı' identities attributed to them by mainstream Turks in Turkey. Applying the qualitative findings of Chapter 2 and 3 of this thesis, regarding perceived discrimination of return migrants and 'almanci' stigma, I constructed a questionnaire investigating the underlying dimensions of the 'almanci' stereotype. I tried to get insight into themes and issues emerging in the cultural contact of (re)migrants with the Turks back in Turkey and explicate the dimensions of the perceived stigmatization of Turkish (re)migrants. Therefore, the study used an original survey instrument (N = 606), in which the items are generated based on the semi-structured interviews with 53 informants (48 return migrants and 5 Turkish mainstreamers). On the basis of the survey results, I developed and validated a model. I discussed the results of the study within the frameworks of intergroup relations in social psychology and social categorization of the social identity approach (Taijfel, 1981). The findings revealed that perceptions towards return migrants have three different dimensions. The dimensions are positive attitudes on return migrants and reintegration processes, negative attitudes on return migrants and reintegration attitudes and the sources of conflict. The main reasons of conflict between groups were found to stem from failure to abide by normative and behavioral expectations. In particular, ethnolinguistic and sociocultural characteristics related norms and expectations of Turkish mainstreamers, perceived low adaptation skills of immigrants in Western context and finally the traditional orientations of return migrants after their migration experience were found to create conflict between the two groups. In Chapter 6, I provided a brief summary integrating and discussing the findings of the present study. It pulled together the most important characteristics of Turkish return migration, and highlighted scientific and practical implications of this study. Further, empirical chapters are discussed in relation to the theoretical frameworks and extant models presented in Chapter 2. The findings overall suggested that return migration is a rather multi-causal and multi-layered process. That is, return migration should not be perceived as a decision triggered by just one motive as the decision was mostly taken due to many interrelated reasons. Further, the study highlighted the importance of emotional aspects and ethnic belonging to the home country as well as the influence of socio-political context of immigrated context in return decision. As for the consequences of return migration, it is highlighted that reacculturation conditions, orientations and outcomes differ greatly from the ones the migrants had in their initial migration experience. In particular, cultural distance experienced with mainstreamers, changes of society, norms and values also make return different from migration experience. Finally, this research addressed the need to develop a theoretical model identifying and referring to different characteristics of the return migration phenomenon in terms of reacculturation conditions, orientations and outcomes in return migration literature.
Benzer Tezler
- Yurtdışından işçi geri dönüş göçlerinin işleyişi, paterni ve etkileri: Kırşehir örneği
Başlık çevirisi yok
ŞEREF ÜNLÜER
- Türkiye as a transit country for international students from the Mano River Union countries
Mano Nehri Birliği ülkelerinden gelen uluslararası öğrenciler için transit ülke olarak Türkiye
KARAMO FARUK KONNEH
Yüksek Lisans
İngilizce
2024
SosyolojiAnkara Sosyal Bilimler ÜniversitesiGöç Çalışmaları Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. SUTAY YAVUZ
- İstanbul'da günlük yaşam sahnelerinin Türk resim sanatına yansımaları
Reflections on the Turkish painting art of daily life scenes in Istanbul
EVREN KARAYEL GÖKKAYA
Sanatta Yeterlik
Türkçe
2012
Güzel SanatlarMimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar ÜniversitesiResim Ana Sanat Dalı
PROF. AYDIN AYAN
- Avrupa ülkelerinden Türkiye'nin batı kıyılarına yönelik göçler: Marmaris, Kuşadası ve Ayvalık ilçelerinde karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma
Immigration from European countries towards western coast of Turkey: A comparative study in Marmaris, Kuşadası and Ayvalık
İLKAY SÜDAŞ
- Avrupa Birliği'ne üyelik sürecinde Bosna Hersek
Bosnia and Herzegovina during the accession process to the European Union
MUKADDES YILMAZ
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2019
Uluslararası İlişkilerKaradeniz Teknik ÜniversitesiUluslararası İlişkiler Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. COŞKUN TOPAL