Understanding Social Cohesion from the Perspective of the Host Community: Turkey Example

Abstract

According to recent statistics from the DGMM (Directorate General of Migration Management of Turkey), more than 3,5 million Syrian refugee people are living in Turkey. This number, however, reflects only registered Syrians, not the many unregistered Syrian refugees and asylum-seekers also living in Turkey. In order to cope with the refugee crisis, various projects are being conducted through the support of national and international funds. Social cohesion has been identified as a key to integrating host and refugee communities. Socio-cultural activities hve been designed to include participants from both communities. In this context, this study aims to discover the attitudes of Turks toward social cohesion which is promoted to be built between them and refugees. This limited research relied on a semi-structured in-depth interview technique as research methodology for a random sample of 45 residents of Ankara living in neighborhoods that contain a high number of refugees. The main reason of limiting the number of participants with 45 was related to reputation. According to findings, the members of the host community are in favor of developing social contact with refugees; however, misinformation and rumors, language barriers, and a lack of social connection were considered as the main factors affecting the negative attitudes of the host community members towards refugees.

Keywords

• Syrian refugee
• Social cohesion
• Host community
• In-depth interview
• Turkey

References

1. Alesino, A. and Ferraro, L. E. (2002). Who trust others? Journal of Public Economics 85, 207–234. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/S0047-2727(01)00084-6 google scholar
2. Apak, H. (2015). Suriyeli göçmenlerin gelecek beklentileri: Mardin örneği. Birey ve Toplum 5 (9), 125–142. DOI: 10.20493/bt.53521 google scholar
3. Arikan, R. (2011). Araştırma yöntem ve teknikleri. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık. google scholar
4. Aydin, H., Gundogdu, M. and Akgul, A. (2019). Integration of Syrian refugees in Turkey: Understanding the educator’s perception. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 1-12. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12134-018-0638-1 google scholar
5. Baban, F., Ilcan, S. and Rygiel, K. (2017). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Pathways to precarity, differential inclusion and negotiated citizenship rights. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43 (81), 41–57. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1192996 google scholar
6. Beltekin, N. (2016). Turkey’s progress toward meeting refugee education needs: The example of Syrian refugees. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 66, 175–190. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.66.10 google scholar
7. Benedetta, B. (2015). The Syrian refugee crisis: Regional and human security implications. Strategic Assessment, 7 (4), 41–53. google scholar
8. Boztepe, V. (2017). Televizyon haberlerinde Suriyeli mültecielrin temsili. ILEF Journal, 4 (1), 91–122. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.24955/ilef.312831 google scholar

9. Bruhn, G, J. (2009). The group effect. New York: Springer Press. google scholar
10. Castleberry, A. and Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10, 807–815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019 google scholar
11. Chan, J., To, H. and Chan, E. (2006). Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research. Social Indicators Research, 75, 273–302. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1 google scholar
12. Cheong, H, P., Edwards, R., Goulbourne, H. and Solomos, J. (2007). Immigration, social cohesion and social capital: A critical review, Critical Social Policy, 27 (1), 24–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0261018307072206 google scholar
13. Ceritoğlu, E., Yunculer, B, G, H., Torun, H. and Tumen, S. (2017). The impact of Syrian refugees on natives’ labor market outcomes in Turkey: Evidence from a quasi-experimental design. Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey Recent Working Papers, 17 (5), 1–51 google scholar
14. Corning, A, P. (1982) Durkheim and Spencer. The British Journal of Sociology, 33 (3), 359–382. google scholar
15. Council of Europe. (2008). Towards an active, fair and socially cohesive Europe, Report on High-Level Task Force of Social Cohesion. Retrieved from https://mdomsp.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/arhiva/files/50850/REPORT%20 OF%20HIGH-LEVEL%20TASK%20FORCE%20ON%20SOCIAL%20COHESION_2008.pdf (Accessed 25 September 2019) google scholar
16. Çebi, E. (2017). The role of Turkish NGOs in social cohesion of Syrians. Turkish Journal of Middle East Studies, Special Issue, 135-170. DOI: 10.26513/tocd.312245 google scholar
17. Dandy, J and Pe-Pua, R. (2015). The refugee experience of social cohesion in Australia: exploring the roles of racism, intercultural contact, and the media. Journal of Immigrant& Refugee Studies, 13 (4), 339–357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2014.974794 google scholar
18. Delhey, J and Dragolov, G. (2016). Happier together. social cohesion and subjective well-being in Europe. International Journal of Psychology, 51 (3), 163–176. DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12149 google scholar
19. Dinçer, B, O., Federici, V., Ferris, E., Karaca, S., Kirişci, K. and Çarmikli, E.Ö. (2013). Turkey and Syrian refugees: The limits of hospitality. Washington: USAK: Brookings. google scholar
20. Durkheim, E. (1984). The division of labor in society. London: Macmillan Press. google scholar
21. Efe, I. (2015). Türkiye basınında Suriyeli mülteciler. Ankara: SETA. google scholar
22. Erdoğan, I. (2003). Pozitivist metodoloji. Ankara: Erk Yayincilik. google scholar
23. Erdoğan, M, M. (2014). Turkiye’deki Suriyeliler: toplumsal kabul ve uyum araştırması. Ankara: HUGO Yayinları. google scholar
24. Festinger, L., Back, K., Schachter, S., Kelley, H.H. and Thibaut, J. (1952). Theory and experiment in social communication. Michigan: Edward Brothers Inc. google scholar
25. Fonseca, X., Lukosch, S. and Brazier, F. (2018). Social cohesion revisited: A new definition and how to characterize it. The European Journal of Social Sciences, 32 (2), 231–253. Doi: 10.1080/13511610.2018.1497480 google scholar
26. Forrest, R., and Kearns, A. (2001). Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood. Urban Studies, 38 (12), 2125-2143. DOI:10.1080/00420980120087081 google scholar
27. Friedkin, E, N. (2004). Social cohesion. Annu. Rev. Social., 30: 409–425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. soc.30.012703.110625 google scholar
28. Gough, I and Olofsson, G. (1999). Introduction: new thinking on exclusion or integration. In I.Gough and G. Olofsson (eds) Capitalism and social cohesion (pp.1–10). London: Macmillan Press. google scholar
29. Grimalda, G and Tanzler, N. (2018). Social cohesion, global governance and the future of politics: Understanding and fostering social cohesion. CARI. Retrieved from https://t20argentina.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/ TF8-8.1-Social-cohesion-Policy-Brief-Version-II.pdf (Accessed 20 September 2019) google scholar
30. Helliwell, F, J and Wong, S. (2011). Trust and wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 1 (1), 42–78. DOI: 10.5502/ijw.v1i1.9 google scholar
31. Içduygu, A. (2015). Syrian refugees in Turkey: The long road ahead. Migration Policy Institute Report. Retrieved from https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/syrian-refugees-turkey-long-road-ahead, (Accessed 10 December.2019) google scholar
32. Jansen, T., Chioncel, N. and Dekkers, H. (2006). Social cohesion and integration: Learning active citizenship. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27 (2), 189–205. DOI: 10.1080/01425690600556305 google scholar
33. Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping social cohesion: The state of Canadian research. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks. google scholar
34. Kağnici, Y, D. (2017). Suriyeli mülteci çocukların kültürel uyum sürecinde okul psikolojik danışmanlarına düşen rol ve sorumluluklar. Elementary Education Online, 16 (4), 1768–1776. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17051/ ilkonline.2017.342990 google scholar
35. Karasu, A, M. (2016). Şanlıurfa’da yaşayan Suriyeli sığınmacıların kentle uyum sorunu. SDU the Journal of Faculty of Economics, 1 (3), 995–1014. google scholar
36. Keyes, M. L. C. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61 (2), 121–140. google scholar
37. Larsen, C, A. (2014). Social cohesion: definition, measurement and developments, Aalborg: Aalborg University Press. google scholar
38. Lazarev, E. and Sharma, K. (2017). Brother or burden: An experiment on reducing prejudice toward Syrian refugees in Turkey. Political Science Research and Methods, 5 (2), 201–219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ ORTDUM google scholar
39. Le Bon, G. (1896). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. New York: The MacMillan Co. google scholar
40. Lindloff, R. T. and Taylor, C. B. (2011). Qualitative communication research method. California: SAGE Publications. google scholar
41. Lockwood, D. (1999). Civic integration and social cohesion. In I.Gough & G. Olofsson (eds) Capitalism and social cohesion (pp.63–84). London: Macmillan Press. google scholar
42. Maxwell, J. (1996). Social dimensions of economic growth”, Eric John Hanson Memorial Lecture Series, 8. University of Alberta. Retrieved from https://www.ualberta.ca/economics/economics-research/eric-j-hansonmemorial-lecture-series (Accessed 01 August 2019) google scholar
43. Mckinnon, M. A. (2010). Energy and society: Herbert Spencer’s ‘energetic sociology’ of social evolution and beyond. Journal of Classical Sociology, 10 (4), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1468795X10385184 google scholar
44. Özden, Ş. (2013). Syrian refugees in Turkey. MRC Research Report. Retrieved from http://cadmus.eui.eu// handle/1814/29455, (Accessed 12 August 2018) google scholar
45. Pahl, R. (1991). The search for social cohesion: From Durkheim to the European Commission. European Journal of Sociology, 32 (2), 345–360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975600006305 google scholar
46. Pandir, M., Efe, I. and Paksoy, F.A. (2015). Türk basınında Suriyeli sığınmacı temsili üzerine bir içerik analizi. Marmara İletişim Dergisi, 24, 1-26. DOI: 10.17829/midr.20152419995 google scholar
47. Stovring, K. (2012) The cultural prerequisites of social cohesion: With special attention to nation of Denmark. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 32 (3-4), 134–152. Doi: 10.1108/0144333121121472 google scholar
48. Şen, F. (2017). Bir “öteki” olarak mülteciler: Suriyeli mültecilerin anaakım ve alternatif medyada temsili. Atatürk İletişim Dergisi, 12, 27–41. google scholar
49. Şimşek, D. (2018). Integration processes of Syrian refugees in Turkey: class-based integration. Journal of Refugee Studies, 1-18. Doi:10.1093/jrs/fey057 google scholar
50. Yazgan, P., Utku, E, D. and Sirkeci, I. (2015). Syrian crisis and migration. Migration Letters, 12 (3), 181–192. google scholar