According to Heckmann (1999; 2006), different national integration strategies are associated with a number of determinant factors such as the traditional forms of the macro – social integration, the national ideology and certain key-decisions made during the immigration process. However, this approach does not ignore the role played by the dialectical correlation between the respective national integration model (macro-level or top-down approach) and
the integration process of immigrants as active subjects (micro-level or bottom-up approach) (Heckmann, 2006, pp. 26-27).
Following this line of thought, integration is perceived as a form of social action the outcome of which is shaped in relation to the national opportunity structure and to the extent of immigrant’s accessibility to this. As such, Heckmann (1999) supports that it is the national framework that makes the difference and that ultimately determines the outcome of the immigrant’s integration process. However, he recognizes that the existing national opportunity structure does not constitute a static size. On the contrary, it is influenced inter alia by the way that the national economy functions, the overall quality and the institutions, the relations between the country of origin and the host country, the perception and the respective practices regarding access to citizenship, the receiving society’s attitude towards foreigners and/or the cultural and religious ‘other’ (1999, p. 9).
At the same time, the national integration model suggested by Heckman is an interpretative context that relates to the general regulatory framework. Alternative or complementary interpretations or concepts refer to the individual characteristics of the immigrants that are linked to family background, ethnic group characteristics, gender, discrimination and the extent of marginalisation (as they perceive it) (1999, pp. 9-10).
As pointed out earlier, the distinctive features of national integration policies reflect the range of the socio-structural principles that make up a given society (social class), such as the ‘Soziale Marktwirtschaft’ in Germany or the French ‘étatisme’ (1999, p. 28). It is also a common belief that the social class and in particular the sense of nationality play a catalytic role in shaping the integration policies in general, which in synergy with the embeddeness of national identity determine the level of integration or inclusion of immigrants (ibid.).
An additional feature of the national model of integration is what Heckmann refers to as ‘the social definition of the immigration situation’ (1999, p. 28), which is formed in relation to the historical context of nation-state formation. For the latter, the level of acceptance of the ‘other’ impacts decisively on the design of integration policies. Therefore, the question according to Heckmann is whether immigration and integration are perceived as regulatory procedures intertwined with the public life of a country or are considered a temporary and marginal phenomenon.
The total of the direct and indirect integration policies, which are designed on the basis of the socio-structural principles of a country and the social definition of the immigration situation, Heckmann calls ‘national model of integration’ (1999, p. 28). The three parameters that make up Heckmann’s national model of integration are:
1. The social definition of the immigration situation.
2. The relationship between the 'social order' and sense of 'nationhood'.
3. A checklist for the analysis of integration policies.
The third parameter, the typology analysis (Table 5) of the integration policies, is analysed below in detail:
Table 5. The dimensions of integration policies
Dimensions of Integration Integration Policies
General Specific
Structural 1 5
Cultural 2 6
Social 3 7
Identificational 4 8
Source: Heckmann (1999, p. 28)
As is seen in Table 5, general or indirect integration policies refer to the context of whole policies of a modern state for the integration of the overall population, including nationals and non-nationals. Conversely, the specific social integration policies refer to the creation of new institutions that respond to the specific needs of the immigrant population. In the context of general integration policies, the dimension of structural integration encompasses mainly legal membership that is citizenship or legal integration, education or schooling and the labour market. What’s more, the introduction of special classes for learning the language of the host country is, for instance, considered a separate policy. Cultural integration, on the other hand, also includes the education system with respect to language and history as well as policies toward religion. Identificational integration includes a variety of practices that contribute to the development of feelings of belonging to the nation-state.
Such policies can be political socialization, the teaching of history and the development of particular emotions.
In sum, the whole context of integration policies, which, according to Heckmann, make up the national model of integration, are summarised in Table 6 below.
Table 6. The national model of integration different stages. Thus, some immigrants can be integrated institutionally (citizenship) but can also be excluded by the cultural or social life of the host country, or vice versa. In this context, he identifies four stages of integration:
(i) Structural integration: acquisition of rights and individual access to core institutions.
(ii) Cultural integration or Acculturation: focuses on the process of the (re)socialization of immigrants in the host society. Cultural integration is considered a heterogeneous concept that is intertwined with values and beliefs, with popular culture and everyday practices such as:
Cultural preferences and practices: mass media, cinema, music, food, entertainment.
Language issues: the degree of use of the host country’s language in relation to the use of one’s mother tongue.
Ethical issues: attitudes related to gender role, divorce, cohabitation, and to a homosexual relationship.
Religious matters: the exercise of religious practices.
(iii) Social integration: refers to the socially active and interactive participation of immigrants in a host society. This dimension includes:
Social interaction/networking – refers to the nature of social contacts
Partners and Friendships: refers to inter-ethnic friendships and intermarriages
Membership – political, ethnic, religious, sport organizations.
Political participation – formal and informal (political parties, civil society, business and trade unions).
Racism and Discrimination – discrimination and the phenomenon of racism have a significant impact on the integration process, and a particularly negative impact on cultural integration and identificational integration.
(iv) Identification Integration: reflects the feelings of belonging and identification with the host society, especially at the national, regional and/or local level.