Integration

Assimilation is viewed as a one-way process by which immigrants adopt the customs and cultural practices of the host society, whereas integration is defined as a “two-way process of acceptance and cultural evolution among both the immigrant group and the host society” (Nimmerfeldt et al. n.d). If an individual wishes to maintain their original culture and interact with other groups, this is seen as the integration strategy, which occurs in multicultural societies; “there is some degree of cultural integrity maintained, while at the same time seeking to participate as an integral part of the larger social network” (Berry, 1997:10). “An individual who retains a strong ethnic identity while also identifying with the new society is considered to have an integrated (or bicultural) identity” (Phinney et al. 2001a).

It must be understood that migrant generations have to adapt their culture of origin and the culture of the new country and subsequently will develop an ethnic identity within larger society (Phinney et al. 2001b). These individuals have been socialised by parents who bring the language, values and customs of their country of origin, but they may also have been educated in the host country and subject to new customs and norms, with opportunities to interact with ethnically diverse peers (Phinney et al. 2001b). Therefore second generation migrants may form an ethnic identity influenced by these two cultures.

Thus in this research, second generation migrants may “tend to move towards integration into the mainstream culture and way of life” (Ghuman, 2003:111), which may affect the intergenerational communication process within their ethnic community, but there may be communication in the wider mainstream culture.

Thus the acculturation process, where first generation migrants may experience separation and second generation migrants experience assimilation or integration may lead to variations in the extent that an individual participates in their ethnic minority social network. This may limit whether there is intergenerational communication of flood experiences, adherence to generational elders and transfer of risk perceptions.

2.6.5 Intergenerational Cultural Dissonance

Furthermore, the acculturation process may lead to strain about lifestyles and values, and therefore increase the conflict and distance between migrant generations. This may arise due to dissonant acculturation, where parents and children acculturate at different times.

Dissonant acculturation occurs because “children from immigrants acculturate easier and quicker than their parents who are more likely to cultivate values and traditions of their culture of origin” (Merz et al. 2009: 292). Thus “as the rates of adaptation following immigration may vary between parents and adolescents, intergenerational discrepancies in

cultural values may increase” (Phinney et al. 2009: 528). This is called the acculturation gap or ‘Intergenerational Cultural Dissonance’ (ICD), which is a clash between parents and children over cultural values (Choi et al. 2008) and can lead to conflict (Farver et al. 2002). As parents retain their traditional culture and children acculturate to the host culture, this results in children having decreased ties to their traditional culture (Birman & Trickett, 2001, Tsai-Chae & Nagata, 2008). The children may oppose the traditional collectivist cultural beliefs such as involvement with the extended family and adherence to social and gender norms especially where acculturation involves ‘outside earning’ increasing their bargaining power and leading to them having a voice in the home. They may endorse dominant western values within the individualist culture where there are obligations to parents and families, but greater equality with parents and less emphasis on obedience (Ghuman, 2005, Phinney et al. 2009). This may also be related to a role reversal between genders or between children and their parents, due to dissonant acculturation affecting power structures in the household (Renzaho et al. 2011) including daughters empowering their mothers (Alam, 2014). This westernisation of second generation migrants and particularly women is important as it may be seen to affect the honour of the family and may lead to increased patriarchal control and enforcement of gender roles.

The importance of the individualist–collectivist concept and the increased patriarchal control for influencing communication between generations in this research may be understood via a study on Arabic migrants in Australia. The research found that second generation migrants (youths) were integrating into the host society. They were experiencing greater freedom within the individualist environment compared to their traditional collectivist culture (Renzaho et al. 2011). This resulted in them not obeying parental authority, wishes or commands. The acculturation gap subsequently led to conflict between generations, with first generation migrants (parents) adopting a system of close control over children, which effectively invaded their privacy and freedom. The children subsequently disengaged from family activities and parents felt that “they were not longer in control of young people’s life and the opportunity to transmit cultural values was lost” (Renzaho et al. 2011). In the context of this research, it is argued that the acculturation gap may lead to conflict between migrant generations and limit whether there is communication of flood experiences and transmission of risk perceptions. This has not been explored in existing research.

2.6.6 ‘Old stories’

Furthermore, even if there is communication of flood experiences, the acculturation gap may still play a role in how second generation migrants respond to flood narratives and indigenous knowledge and how their risk perceptions are affected.

This is based on existing research on the communication relationship between migrant generations. Nayar & Sandhu (2006) highlighted that communication patterns within a cultural group are fluid, not static. They explored intergenerational communication patterns amongst immigrant Punjabi families, looking at three generations of a family, grandparents, parents and children in Canada. The grandparents were considered to be the elders, and were all Indian born, spending their formative years in India. The second generation were parents, who may have been born in India but moved to Canada when they were younger, thus spending most of their adult life in Canada. The third generation were the children of immigrant parents who were born and raised in Canada.

It is highlighted that intergenerational communication patterns are reflective of an important aspect of the distinction between tradition and modernity. Orality, literacy and analytics are categories used to conceptualize the development of thought forms and patterns generated by modernity. Orality is the mode of thinking relating to society’s oral culture, analytics is the critical enquiry mode of thinking that emerges from reading and writing and literacy is the transitional mode of thinking, influenced by the ability to read and write but within the context of oral culture (Nayar & Sandhu, 2006:142). These categories are on a continuum from oral tradition to modern society and generally the three generations correspond to the three categories. But an individual may vary in the extent that they reflect the characteristics of their categories based on factors such as education, length of stay in the host country and age upon arrival to the host country.

Nayar & Sandhu (2006) discussed how elders are for the most part illiterate and thus have an oral mode of communication. Their thoughts have a collective orientation with their communication style involving “telling stories, narrating traditions and their knowledge is based on personal life experiences” (Nayar & Sandhu, 2006:142). Immigrant parents and their children are able to read and write, so there is a shift from the collective. Knowledge is limited to personal life experiences and concrete facts. The children of immigrant parents have an analytic mode of communication where there is self orientation and critical enquiry. Whilst asking the three generations questions, it was discussed that the grandmother was unable to answer conceptual questions, but answered the concrete questions with a concrete thought form based on her own life situation through storytelling. The grandmother voiced her opinion that her granddaughter should get married, and how easy she had it compared to life in India where there would be a need to look after in - laws, a husband and children without electricity. In doing so she communicated in an oral mode and relied on tradition and biographical storytelling to get her point across. However, there was conflict between the grandmother and granddaughter who argued: “My family is not being logical. That’s the whole problem. First of all my grandmother is living in another era. Even in her village

things are changing, they have TV’s, VCRs, and kids go to college and even party at clubs. All she talks about is the past. She doesn’t know anything besides that so she thinks that’s how I have to be too” (Nayar & Sandhu, 2006:146).

It is highlighted that this is a culture conflict where there is a clash between the individualist and collectivist views. In relation to the grandmother, “the present world is seen as a collective and her memories of concrete life events are viewed as authoritative, as a consequence her verbal interaction is based solely on her own life story, which seems to be outdated to a child reared in Western society” (Nayar & Sandhu, 2006:147). The results indicated that the granddaughter thought her grandmother’s narratives did not apply. She thought her grandmother was living in the past and thus her advice was irrelevant and outdated in a modern, developed environment.

Yet this interaction between the two generations may be explored in a wider context. In discussing the norm in India of elders being looked after, and the easier life that she perceives her granddaughter to have in order to do this, the grandmother may actually be expressing her worry over her future and whether she will be looked after by her grandchildren in a society where children may not look after their elders anymore, possibly due to the acculturation gap. She may feel isolated and that she has a lack of power in the home as her granddaughter doesn’t listen to her. In response, by stating that her grandmother is living in a different era and her views don’t have any relevance, her granddaughter may actually be arguing that she does not want the responsibility of looking after her elders. In highlighting that things are changing in the villages in India, that there is now electricity and children have the option to lead a life outside of caring for the family, the granddaughter is drawing similarities with her own life in Canada to emphasise her individual identity. The granddaughter is arguing that if the rules in the traditional environment of India appear to be changing, then she should not have to follow the dated ideologies of her grandmother in a modern environment.

Thus the interaction between the grandmother and granddaughter may be around wider issues than the communication and denial of knowledge. It may relate to the acceptance of knowledge within the context of a deeper interaction around identity and power. The interaction between migrant generations in relation to the relevance of knowledge has not been related to the response of second generation migrants to flood narratives and indigenous knowledge from abroad.