In our initial brief the word ‘integration’ was mentioned multiple times. During our group discussions we came to the conclusion that ‘integration’ has become a buzzword whose meaning is rarely challenged. What do we mean when we say ‘integration’? What counts as integration? During our research we noticed that our organisers often use the word in relation to discussions surrounding leisure activities and youth from diverse backgrounds and because of this, we decided to include it in our key concepts. Instead of using the word integration, however, we decided to challenge its meaning by raising the question: what does this word mean to the organisers? After discussing our preliminary fieldwork notes and the data collected through interviews we came with two possible meanings for 'integration': the first relating to creating a sense of belonging and the second to creating networks.
Belonging as Emotional Attachment
Spaaij (2014) explains that the feeling of belonging involves a feeling of attachment that relates people with other people, a particular space, or ways of behaving. Indeed, for Spaaij (2014, p. 304) "belonging can be understood as a personal, intimate feeling of becoming ‘at home' in a place or in a particular collective or as a sense of being part of the social fabric". For Peperkamp (2017) a sense of belonging is deeply connected to the emotional ties that people make with other people and spaces through social interactions. Amit and Bar-Lev (2014, p. 948) add that “the need to belong refers to the way in which individuals themselves in relation to others in their society. The feeling of being an outsider, or not being the same as everyone else can have a negative effect on immigrants’ subjective well-being". Visser (2017) summarises that belonging is the desire for attachments and emotional investments. During our fieldwork we were able to see this understanding of belonging in action as discussed in our findings.
The Politics of Belonging
Both Spaaij and Visser present the idea that belonging is a process that involves seeking (the ‘other’, immigrants, refugees) and granting (dominant group, host country); it involves processes of exclusion and inclusion. Spaaij (2017) explains that in the politics of belonging, there are boundary discourses and practices that determine the differences between ‘us’ (host country, dominant group) and ‘them’ (‘the other’). However, these boundaries are not static, they depend on the context and the criteria of what is excluded and what it is not, and they can both be easy or hard to cross (depends on the situation).
Visser (2017) explains that in the case of British youth with an immigrant background in Tottenham, the fact that they were born in the United Kingdom was not enough to generate a sense of emotional belonging to British society. This is mainly due to the fact that the ‘dominant group’ dictates who belongs and does not by stating what is acceptable and what is unacceptable behaviour (moral codes). Youngsters with immigrant backgrounds did not fit the ‘ideal’ of ‘acceptable’ behaviour, thus they were perceived as ‘the other’. Visser states this in the following quote; “in some contexts it is difficult to claim belonging as the young people have to negotiate the ‘othering’ processes that are performed by those who have the power of ‘granting’ belonging” (2017, p. 6). Whilst this study relates to the UK, clear parallels can be drawn with Belgium.
Feeling of Belonging to a Certain Space or Place
Peperkamp (2017) points out that it is important to pay attention to the way mundane activities enable or impede the sense of belonging. Since these ‘mundane’ activities involve practices and interactions that are carried out in specific places, the ‘spatial’ dimension becomes important. Because of this, Peperkamp (2017) argues that a sense of belonging is not only belonging to a particular social category, but it is also belonging to a certain space or place. She states that “by sharing places, and certain place-related practices, a sense of commonality and belonging may develop” (Peperkamp, 2017, p. 3). Moreover, Peperkamp explains that repetition is important for feelings of belonging to arise since ‘it’s through the ritualised and repetitious use of space that individuals develop attachment and belonging to space and the creation of territoriality" (Johnson cited in Peperkamp, 2017, p. 3).
Belonging: Perspectives from the field
In line with what we saw in the literature, most of the organisers we interviewed see a sense of belonging as belonging to a particular space or place. Indeed, most of them believe that they are creating some sort of sense of belonging by making the young people feel comfortable in a certain place, and by making them feel that they are welcome. For example, Laura from Burn explained that it is important for her that the participants in her activities feel like they can be themselves without being judged. Thomas made a similar remark by saying that volunteers are always welcome to come to Quindo even if it is just "to chill”, their door is always open. On the other hand, some of the organisers pointed out that it can be dangerous that the only connection young people have is to a certain place or space, in this case the organisations. For example, in our initial discussions one of the OKAN-Mijn Leuven organisers expressed his concern about making his activities the only safe haven for young people. Another organiser from OKAN-MijnLeuven stated that he “does not encourage” young people to return to their leisure activities after leaving the OKAN-MijnLeuven class. We saw these concerns amongst our central actors, with Broos saying that young people should not feel like they only belong in Quindo. For him, the aim should be to “strengthen them in being able to root themselves somewhere else”. Feeling like they belong to Quindo or Burn, then, may just be the starting point for young people, the idea is that they then feel confident to find a sense of belonging in wider society.
Networking as a key element to integration
The second definition of ‘integration’ relates to the creation of networks. Since birth, our feelings and lives are shaped by our social environment, especially by our families that influence the development of our personalities and our ‘’social functioning’’ (Xie et al., 2016, p. 71). Hence, as this case study focuses on youth activities, as a team, we noticed the importance of workshops observation in order to figure out the influence of the organisers on the youth, in terms of how these activities contribute to young people's sense of belonging.
The importance of networking
Interaction with society, can reflect positively or negatively on ourselves. In particular, this occurs when one is connected almost entirely with the ones closest to him/her and disconnects from those that are more distant. The latter category therefore risks becoming dehumanised (Waytz & Epley, 2012, p. 70). As our case study highlights the feeling of belonging among youth, we felt it was necessary to observe the role of networking in strengthening this feeling.
A key element in the networking process
As human beings, our identities, which tend to be perceived as stable throughout our lives, are in fact flexible and sensitive to the various contexts that we are exposed to (Raj, Fast & Fisher, 2017, p. 773). Therefore, networking can create a common identity for all group members to strengthen the feeling of belonging.
Networking among our observed youth groups
Our behaviors as individuals are influenced by our societal roles and expectations (Madera & Hebl, 2013, p. 4), hence, we devoted this part to observe the networking role within the context of our observed leisure organisations, with the aim of achieving a deeper understanding from the context of the work taking place, and the relationships between the organisers and the participants.
Connection as an element in working with youth represented through different aspects:
According to Jasper from Burn, ‘’networking is important for people to have opportunities and it can also help to improve skills’’. While for Jeroen, networking is an essential element in his work to reach young people and keep the group going. Smooth networking among youth in order to promote mutual respect and help each other without tensions and clashes, is one important part of his job.The success of what Jeroen is doing rests on his knowledge about the group that he is working with, especially in terms of the identity background of the group.
From what we observed it seems knowing your group is a key element for the creation of a successful network, and in Jeroen’s case, he has known many in his group for several years. The information that he gained during all these the years, he invested in developing the trust of the group and the latter’s coherence in front of challenges. He ended up with a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the needs and expectations of the group that he has been working with.
Through our observations we saw that supporting the creation of networking among youth leads to the establishment of more youth projects and promotes a collective identity among the participating youth, such the case of hip hop group. For Laura, the hip hop dance trainer, the connection that was built between her and the group was developed by the initial group members reaching out to their friends to join the group. Laura’s group example mirrors the role and the power of networking between youth, which lead to building a full project-based networking among youth that relies on:
1) Trust by knowing each other
2) Common identity and interests.