Negotiating identities and social representations through intergroup contact in a community solidarity initiative

Abstract

In Ireland, displaced people experience segregation, discrimination, and disempowering regulations within the Direct Provision system. Community solidarity initiatives (CSI) aim to address the segregation and discrimination displaced people face through collaborative contact with residents/nationals of Ireland. However, asymmetric power relations mean that residents/nationals and displaced people are likely to experience intergroup contact differently, which has implications for identity negotiation. We investigated how displaced people and residents/nationals negotiated their identities and oriented to social representations in talk about their experiences of a CSI in the West of Ireland. We interviewed 17 displaced people and residents/nationals and conducted a thematic analysis, informed by Social Identity Approach and Social Representations Theory. Then, we applied a discursive approach to understand how participants constructed social identities and social representations. Our analysis produced two main themes: 'Identity negotiation strategies in talk about intergroup contact' and 'Understanding and orienting to intergroup boundaries'. We found that residents/nationals and displaced people negotiated their identities to maintain positive identification in relation to negative social representations about their groups. Participants also oriented to shared group representations in their talk , which has implications for the development of political solidarity between residents/nationals and displaced people. Globally, there are unprecedented numbers of asylum seekers and refugees (hereafter 'displaced people'; UNHCR, 2019), and attitudes toward displaced people are becoming increasingly polarized in Europe (Ambrosini et al., 2019). Although the Republic of Ireland receives a relatively low absolute number of displaced people per year (Arnold, Ryan, & Quinn, 2018), the State has adopted a 'deterrent' approach (Loyal & Quilley, 2016), and reception conditions for displaced people who arrive in Ireland have been widely criticized (IHREC, 2014; Oireachtas, 2019). As a minoritized group, displaced people lack social power, relative to residents/ nationals of receiving countries, which is underpinned by their racialization and precarious legal status (Deaux & Wiley, 2007; Lentin, 2015; Loyal & Quilley, 2016). This power asymmetry is sustained through social representations of displaced people and migrants as 'victims' or 'villains' (Crawley, McMahon, & Jones, 2016; Wroe, 2018), which influence how members of receiving communities respond to them. These representations also influence the ways that displaced people negotiate their social identities in their

“You get to understand we are all human beings”: Community solidarity initiatives as spaces of recognition, resistance, and change

“…Intragroup solidarity and positive collective identification can buffer negative effects of the stigma associated with being an asylum seeker (Kellezi et al, 2018). Power asymmetries mean that displaced people often experience intergroup contact in CSI in qualitatively different ways to residents/nationals (Vine & Greenwood, 2021). We explored these differences in a second study with resident/national CSI stakeholders.…”

“…Most CSIs do not collect data, but an internal evaluation by Sanctuary Runners identified multiple benefits for both displaced people and residents/nationals (McCluskey, 2020). Recent research explored how displaced people and residents/nationals negotiated their identities and social representations through intergroup contact in a CSI (Vine & Greenwood, 2021). However there has been no research to date on experiences of intergroup contact, or how solidarity is produced in CSIs.…”

Cross-group friendship and collective action in community solidarity initiatives with displaced people and resident/nationals

“…Qualitative research on resident/nationals’ and displaced people’s experiences of CSI suggests that CSI facilitate recognition of shared identities and affirmation of valued ingroup identities, which are important for individual and group needs to be met ( Vine and Greenwood 2020 , 2022 ; Kauff et al, 2020 ). For example, participants believed that friendships formed through CSI participation shifted attitudes and broadened acceptance of displaced persons in the wider community ( Vine and Greenwood, 2022 ).…”

“…Collaborative intergroup contact affords advantaged group members opportunities to learn about the circumstances of less advantaged groups ( Tropp et al, 2021 ), and resident/nationals have reported becoming more aware of displaced people’s realities through CSI ( Vine and Greenwood, 2020 ). Accordingly, it is possible that due to this newfound awareness, resident/national participants of CSI discuss the illegitimacy and unfairness of this system with cross-group friends, which may fuel members of both groups’ commitment to collective action for displaced people’s rights ( MacInnis and Hodson, 2019 ).…”

“…This carceral system segregates and excludes displaced people from the wider Irish community through disempowering regulations and restrictions on their rights, with multiple negative effects ( Loyal and Quilley, 2016 ; DORAS, 2020 ). Community solidarity initiatives (CSI) challenge this status quo by bringing displaced people and residents/nationals together around shared activities, facilitating resistance to negative social representations and recognition of valued identities ( Vine and Greenwood, 2020 , 2022 ). CSI are an emerging context of contact among displaced people and residents/nationals, and the correlates of participation for resident/nationals and displaced people are not fully understood.…”