What matters for behaviours and development is the environment as it is perceived rather than as it may exist in objective reality (Bronfenbrenner, 1979:4)
Introduction
This chapter will explore the utility of applying Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological systems theory to help explain the influence environmental contexts have on first and second generation immigrants’ success. An examination of direct and indirect experiences and the effect these experiences have on Latina youth’s sense of self and integration into the dominant culture will be examined. In this chapter I also discuss the relationship between environmental barriers, integration practices and problem behaviours among Latina youth through the application of Agnew’s general strain theory (GST). My theoretical framework is taking a novel approach of combining three theories to address my research aims compared to more traditional methods for research on Latin American youth that tend to apply said theories separately. This approach highlights the most notable aspects of each theory to theorize Latino culture.
For Young (1999:449) the concentration of deprivation and isolation of some immigrant groups has a particular effect on the second generation who may achieve citizenship status in legal terms, but because of social exclusion, low educational and occupational attainment and diminished economic rights, experience marginalization and in effect have citizenship
“thwarted”. Evidence suggests that the process of underclass creation in America is
underway. On virtually every measure of socioeconomic well-being, Latinos in general, but Mexicans in particular, have fallen from their historical position in the middle of the
53
American socioeconomic distribution somewhere between blacks and whites-to a new position at or near the very bottom (Massey, 2007).
A study conducted by Rumbaut (2008) indicates that second generation Mexicans in the US exhibit the lowest level of educational and occupational attainment among all immigrant nationalities; a legacy of their history as the largest and longest-running labour migration in the contemporary world. Gans (1992) notes that many immigrants arrive into the host country with modest class backgrounds, bringing low human capital, such as formal education and occupational skills, which fail to equip them with the skills necessary to steer their offspring around the complexities of the American educational system.
The consequences of ill equipped human capital, in an increasingly knowledge-based economy, leaves children of immigrants without an advanced education unable to access the jobs that would facilitate their upward mobility leaving them stagnated into manual labour and low-wage work, not too different from that performed by their parents. Those unwilling to replicate their parents’ life of economic scarcity and hard physical labour, perhaps a result of heightened American-style, consumerist aspirations, may turn to gangs and the drug culture to obtain a better material life (Portes et al., 2009). Other scholars contend that if Latino youth integration were to be examined through Agnew’s (1992) GST, outcomes would suggest that the stress of not being able to achieve the positively valued goals set by parents and western culture coupled with the inability to escape from poverty, stigmatization, oppression and crime ridden neighbourhoods may well offer another explanation for crime (Kam et al., 2010).
The theory of segmented assimilation has been used to explain the stagnation of limited success among second generation Latin Americans in the US and to partially link the
54
relationship between Latinos and crime (Portes & Zhou, 1993). Assimilation in its basic form is one of the four stages of Berry’s (1997) acculturation model. As a stage of integration into the host society assimilation sanctions the rejection of the ethnic culture and adoption of the current dominant society’s norms, values and customs.
Portes and Zhou (1993) describe the process of segmented assimilation as a departure from earlier waves of European immigrants. For instance, newer immigrants have a non-white racial identity and are typically concentrated in urban areas with a high concentration of other immigrants, but also in close contact with poor, native-born minorities. Furthermore, changes in the labour market restrict the upward mobility of many immigrant groups by reducing the proportion of mid-level jobs available to lower educated workers (Jarkowsky, 2009).
Segmented assimilation consists of three parts: a) an identification of the protective factors involved in the child’s life, b) a description of the principal barriers confronting today’s children of immigrants and c) a prediction of the distinct paths expected from the interplay of these factors (Portes et al, 2009).
Protective factors can be conceptualized as the principal resources that immigrant families possess to help protect their children from the challenges they face in society. These factors involve the human and social capital that immigrant parents hold, the social context that receives them in their host country and the composition or structure of the family. Hence, the greater the human and social capital of the family the greater the likelihood their children will integrate successfully into the host country’s social structures eventually becoming more competitive in the host labour market and increasing their potential for achieving desirable positions in the hierarchies of status and wealth (Portes et al., 2009). The transformation of this potential into a reality however depends on the context into which immigrants are incorporated by their external environment; inclusive of social structures (Bronfenbrenner &
55
Ceci, 1994). This section discusses the pathways of influence from the environment to the individual utilizing EST.
Ecological Influences
Urie Bronfenbrenner (1917-1988) was an American developmental psychologist best known for his advancement of the ecological systems theory of child development (Lang, 2005). His research centred around informing child psychology on a large number of environmental and societal influences on child development. He helped form the Head Start Program in the US in 1965 promoting a focus on parent-child interactions within the larger social structures.10 Bronfenbrenner (1979) argued that the interaction between an individual and his or her environment shaped that individual’s development. Hence the specific path of development was a result of the influences present in the person’s surroundings (e.g., parents, friends, school, culture, etc.).
In 1964 scholars and social service providers viewed child development as purely biological.
Bronfenbrenner also helped inform US policy towards poverty stating that government measures should be directed towards children in order to reduce the effects of poverty (e.g., poor education, unemployment, crime, etc.) on the child’s development (Ceci, 2005). While this perspective may be popular among contemporary sociology scholars it was contrary to the predominant view at the time. Since Bronfenbrenner’s introduction of the theory in 1977 (see Toward an Experimental Ecology of Human Development) EST has been widely used among child development, psychology and ethnic scholars to examine the effects that a child’s interactions has on their development, actions and decision-making abilities (Tudge et al., 2009).
10 Head Start is akin to the UK’s Sure Start family assistance program.
56
EST holds that the ecological environment is a set of nested structures, each inside the next.
The model illustrated in Figure 2 depicts the individual at the centre of a series of concentric circles with each circle representing a layer of environmental influence on the person’s identity. Bronfenbrenner (1979) argued that the interconnections between these nested structures can be significant for youth development as the individual interacts with each environmental layer regularly taking in the messages from each one and assigning significance to those interactions.
Figure 2 Ecological Systems Model (Bronfenbrenner, 1979)
EST not only takes into account direct interactions with members of society but also the influence of less direct systems (e.g., ideologies, societal structures, etc.) on identity development. These indirect or distal systems impact the individual by influencing the
policies and attitudes of the social institutions the child and her family come into contact with
57
on a regular basis, such as schools, work and government. Bronfenbrenner suggested that among the most powerful influences affecting the development of young children in post industrialized societies are the conditions of parental employment and economic status in the home. Consequently, the development and futures of Latino youth are inevitably linked to the occupational and economic circumstances of their parents. According to EST, the underclass creation of Latin Americans in the US can very well be linked to a culture of poverty where the first and second generation youth have a propensity for low educational and occupational attainment resulting in limited social and economic mobility and potential problem
behaviours or criminal activity.
EST extends beyond the immediate situation directly affecting the developing person by accounting for the significance in the interactions between the distal and proximal concentric layers of the model. The microsystem level refers to the most proximal or direct points of contact for the individual such as family and peers and accounts for the influence that close interpersonal relationships have on youth behaviours across other levels of contact
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Hence the parent-child relationship has a significant effect on the developing child’s behaviours not only in the home but in other social settings like school or neighbourhood, illustrating how influences in one system can affect the child’s interactions with other systems.
The principle connecting these multilevel interactions puts forward that exchanges within systems are just as influential to the child whether she is a part of the interaction or simply observing it as in the meso- and exosystems. The mesosystem level consists of the interactions between two or more systems in which the individual actively engages, such as home and school or peers and community. This system is an extension of the individual’s direct interactions where other individuals can actively participate with the person be it directly or
58
indirectly. For instance, the child’s teacher interacts with the child’s parents on school performance resulting in events that affect the child either positively or negatively.
The exosystem level refers to one or more settings that do not directly involve the individual as an active participant yet are affected by the events that occur in the setting. For instance, a child’s exosystem may consist of the parent’s work place, parent’s social network, child’s school board or local governing bodies. In this instance a parent’s stressful work environment may result in increased tension between the parent and the child at home. The most distal system in the ecological model is the macrosystem level referring to the overall ideological and structural patterns of social institutions. Macrosystems can describe the cultural or social context of varying social categories such as social class and ethnic or religious groups. The effects of larger principles, defined by the macrosystem, cascade throughout the inner layers.
For example public policy, as a larger principle, determines specific properties of exo-, meso- and microsystems that can steer the course of development and behaviour.
Bronfenbrenner (1979) notes that even within the structures of the same country or culture intra-social contrasts exist between societies of high and low socio-economic status. Hence the macrosystems schemas differ by socio-economic, ethnic, religious and cultural
characteristics reflecting contrasting belief systems and lifestyles which directly affect the ecological environments specific to members of these groups. Hence EST provides a wider lens for examining Latino youth outcomes in western cultures. As the variance between social groups and cultures, such as between Latin American and US culture, can create conflict at the Macrosystem level (e.g., stereotypes of Latinos) and trickle down to the developing child.
59
These multilevel systems can create barriers for immigrant and ethnic minority families.
Through assimilation practices immigrants and their children are expected to interact with all the systems in their ecology in the same fashion as native born whites yet may be unfamiliar with how these systems function or face barriers when attempting to interact with these systems due to established stereotypes. Moreover migrant parents teach their children how to function under the same systems they were raised in their home country not those of the host country, putting their children at a disadvantage for successfully integrating into established social structures. First and second generation Latin Americans are faced with the need to learn how the US systems function for themselves and their parents. The ideological differences that exist between the systems of Latino and US cultures can complicate the negotiation process for all involved (e.g., parents, youth and society).
While EST has gained prominence in the field of social work more recently ethnic studies research has begun to apply EST in studies of Latino youth outcomes (Loukas et al., 2007;
Eamon & Mulder, 2005; Garcia Coll et al., 1996). In addition the field of social psychology has achieved some degree of specificity in the analysis of environments and human behaviour focusing on how the environment affects behaviour and development in relation to processes of interpersonal relations within small groups (Garcia Coll et al., 1996). This approach is limiting however as it restricts the individual to a single immediate setting. Ethnic studies research is the recognition that environmental events and conditions outside immediate settings can have a profound influence on behaviour and development. For example, negative messages perpetuated by the media about Latin American migrants may affect immigrant Latino youths’ perception of themselves and their culture, but they also influence how the rest of society perceives and depicts all Latin Americans.
60
Family and peer group bonds have been researched extensively as indicators of healthy childhood adjustment (Loukas et al., 2007). However, researching the impact of societal pressures on Latino youths’ ethnic identity is starting to gain ground in the US. This focus helps explain the intricacies of adaptation and integration unique to minority ethnic groups in Anglo-European societies (Holleran, 2003; Quintana et al., 2010).
Since its inception in 1977, EST has evolved considerably from its original focus on the influence of the interactions between contextual factors and human development.
Bronfenbrenner emphasized the role that processes in human development have on
explaining the effect the individual has on the environment. From the 1990’s until his death in 2005 Bronfenbrenner focused on the Process-Person-Context-Time model which is considered the mature version of the ecological model (Tudge et. al., 2009).
The theoretical framework and aims of my study were best served by the original version of EST as it facilitates the illustration of how interactions between the individual and her surrounding systems influence identity and behaviours in relation to delinquency. The
Process-Person-Context-Time model would be an interesting element to explore in relation to how Latinos shape their ecology and consequently how this affects societal perceptions of this ethnic group. However this angle of inquiry is tangential to the current research goals set out and would require a different methodological approach therefore was not pursued in my study.
Ecology and Acculturation
The framework of the ecological theory starts from the predisposition that development never takes place in a vacuum; it is always embedded and expressed through interactions within a particular environmental context. Thus, human development is the process through which the
61
individual acquires a more extended, differentiated and valid conception of the ecological environment and becomes motivated and able to engage in activities that reveal the properties of that environment. In this thesis I argue that Bronfenbrenner’s definition of human
development within the environment is consistent with Berry’s concept of acculturation as they both address the change or acquisition of an extended conception of the environment that occurs as a result of the interactions between minority groups and the dominant group resulting in varying degrees of interpersonal change. The acculturation model however compliments EST as it illustrates the degrees of interpersonal change within minority group members through stages that conceptualize the effects of the multilevel systems on a Latina child’s development.
John W. Berry is a professor emeritus in the department of psychology at Queen’s University in Ontario Canada11. He was born in Montreal Canada in 1939 receiving his Bachelor in Arts in Psychology in 1963 from Sir George William University and his PhD in 1966 from the University of Edinburgh. Berry’s interests in the psychology of intercultural relations (including acculturation, immigration and multiculturalism) led to the development of the four-fold stages of acculturation in 1980. Berry’s stages of acculturation have been widely used with immigrant populations in the US and Canada across the academic fields of child development, psychology and sociological research.
Acculturation tends to refer to the cultural changes resulting from intergroup contact. While the concept is neutral by definition studies have found that the change in culture
predominantly occurs among the migrant group (Berry, 1990). The process of acculturation has been documented as a significant contributor to ethnic identity formation (Buriel et al.,
11 Department of Psychology at Queens University, Canada (www.queensu.ca)
62
1982; Phinney et al., 2001; Guyll et al., 2010). The study of acculturation focuses on how individuals who have developed in one cultural context manage to adapt to new contexts that stem from migration (Berry, 1997).
The acculturation process is characterized by four strategies. However, it is important to note that an individual may shift between strategies as a result of their interactions with their ecology. The four strategies of change are: 1) Assimilation; 2) Separation; 3)
Marginalization; and 4) Biculturalism (Berry, 1997). The first strategy, assimilation, refers to an individual who does not wish to maintain their ancestral cultural identity, seeking
interaction with other cultures, primarily the dominant culture. In contrast, separation takes place when the individual values holding on to their original culture or ancestral culture, while simultaneously avoiding interaction with members of the dominant culture. Separation is most common among adult migrants who have left their country of origin for either
political or economic reasons.
Biculturalism refers to an interest of maintaining and integrating the culture of origin and the dominant culture. Of the four stages of the acculturation model Biculturalism among Latin American youth has been found to have the most positive outcomes regarding healthy emotional adjustment. The last strategy is Marginalisation, defined as the rejection of the culture of origin and the dominant culture. Marginalisation has been found to be the most damaging to Latin American youth as it can propel them towards delinquent subcultures such as gangs and other delinquent peers (Phinney et al., 2001). The internalization of any one of these acculturation strategies is not entirely the individual’s prerogative. Berry (1997) contends that influences and pressure from the dominant society can have a direct impact on the strategies available to the individual. For instance, adult Latino migrants may exhibit Separation when they settle into ethnic silos, as they offer the benefit of a shared language
63
with other community members but these ethnic communities tend to be the most affordable or accessible to individuals of limited means and consequently the only realistic option available to immigrant families.
The psychological implications of acculturation have been widely documented ranging from pathologizing the behaviours of ethnic minorities to the normalization of behavioural shifting or culture learning (Berry, 1997). Psychological adaptation to acculturation involves a clear sense of personal and cultural identity resulting in a sense of achievement and personal satisfaction in the new cultural context. When levels of conflict between the individual’s cultural identity and acceptance by the dominant society are experienced, acculturative stress takes hold. Acculturative stress is a response to conflicts between individual’s ethnic culture and the dominant culture that arise during the process of acculturation (Berry, 1997).
Acculturative stress has been found to affect the psychological and emotional well-being of
Acculturative stress has been found to affect the psychological and emotional well-being of