Olet sivulla: Home « Ministry « Publications « Monitori « Back issues « Monitori 1/2002 « RESEARCH (theme), The Progress of Multiculturalism Studies in Finland
Particularly over the last ten years there has been a considerable increase in multiculturalism research in Finland. In this article I will sketch the general trends in this multiculturalism research over the period from 1980 to 2001. We can examine the quantitative progress of research into multiculturalism using a provisional multiculturalism research bibliography.
The multiculturalism research bibliography comprises published research reports, surveys, student theses (both published and unpublished), monographs and compilations on multiculturalism that have appeared in Finland and are listed in the LINDA Database of Finnish University Libraries. The keywords for this search were multiculturalism (monikulttuurisuus), interculturalism (kulttuurienvälisyys), cultural differences and contacts (kulttuurierot ja -kosketukset), multicultural education (monikulttuurinen koulutus), discrimination (syrjintä), gender equality (tasa-arvo), ethnic relations (etniset suhteet), marginalisation and social exclusion (syrjäytyminen), immigrant integration (kotoutuminen, kotouttaminen), acculturation (akkulturaatio), racism and racialism (rasismi), intolerance (suvaitsemattomuus), tolerance (suvaitsevuus), ethnic minorities and groups (etniset vähemmistöt ja -ryhmät), ethnic identity (etninen identiteetti), immigrants (maahanmuuttajat), refugees (pakolaiset), migrants (siirtolaiset) and migration policy (siirtolaispolitiikka). The search was supplemented in December 2001 following the combination of the LINDA and Fennica databases. These new materials have not yet been included in the analysis.
There is no uniform classification for defining the notion of multiculturalism research, because the terminology of the subject suffers from both intra-disciplinary and interdisciplinary variation and instability. This means that the database itself and the keywords used restrict and specify the perspective of multiculturalism research and its development. The main point in the investigation is to compare the progress of multiculturalism research within the same materials in sectoral public administration and various academic disciplines. Even though the quantitative and qualitative progress of multiculturalism research has been rapid, rather little meta-analysis of multiculturalism research has been done in Finland that takes a perspective broader than that of an individual inquiry. Instead there have only been somewhat incommensurable bibliographical research data.
The field of multiculturalism research has the form of various partnership networks and projects engaged in broad research into such aspects as culture, immigration, ethnic relations, attitudes, integration, discrimination, values and ideologies. This renders unsatisfactory any effort to restrict multiculturalism research to some single academic discipline or administrative domain. Any successful exercise in multiculturalism research will nevertheless be mediated by these various institutional practices.In this article I also assess the specification of the administrative and scientific status of multiculturalism research within the field of minority and scientific policy in the light of the research policy discourse of scientific and minority policy publications. The first field is that of the official minority policy administered by the State public authorities and politicians that are responsible for integrating refugees and other immigrants. A policy pertaining particularly to migration, refugee and immigrant research has been created in this field. The second field, on the other hand, is that of academic policy, encompassing the institutions that are actively involved in the national scientific policy discourse of multiculturalism research, such as the Ministry of Education, the Academy of Finland, the university and polytechnic sector, and researchers working in the sector.
Figure 1. Number of university and administrative publications on multiculturalism - 1980-2000.
The bibliographical analysis classifies research publications by publication forum into (1) university publications and (2) administrative publications. According to the bibliography, the number of multiculturalism research publications produced in the universities nearly doubled in the 1990s by comparison with the preceding decade (see figure 1). Considering that the Ministry of Education task force on ethnic group research expressed the view (report no. 1991:24, 23) that there was very little multiculturalism research going on in the universities and higher education sector at the beginning of 1990, the overall situation has thus changed rapidly in this respect.
Similarly there has also been a seven-fold increase in the number of administrative publications on multiculturalism over the same period. The arrival of immigration affairs in the administrative mainstream during the 1990s is also reflected in administrative publication statistics as a growth in the number of administrative sectors producing such publications. Differences in publication activity arise between administrative sectors according to which of them has been primarily responsible for co-ordinating the reception of refugees and other immigrants at any given time. The social welfare administration was an active producer of publications on multiculturalism in the 1980s. In their day these publications took a comprehensive approach to refugee adjustment, and they also transgressed administrative boundaries by examining in detail aspects such as refugee education and employment. The educational administration, on the other hand, joined the employment and social welfare administrations as the most active producer of sectoral administration publications in the 1990s. The number of multiculturalism publications produced by provincial administrative boards, local government and public organisations and associations has also increased considerably.
Figure 2. Multiculturalism research by scientific discipline 1980-2000.
The growth of interest of the higher education sector in multiculturalism has been manifest not only in the rising number of publications, but also as an increase in the number of scientific disciplines involved in this publications surge. In the 1980s research into multiculturalism mainly occurred in the fields of culture, languages, history, law, education and social sciences, but by the end of the year 2000 there were 16 academic disciplines involved in multiculturalism research (see figure 2). An examination of the publication forms indicates that multiculturalism had been of particular interest to students as a subject for a master's thesis in almost all disciplines. About 20 university student theses on this subject (doctoral dissertations, licentiate and master's theses) were published in the 1980s, compared to nearly 200 during the following decade. The clearest growth in interest in multiculturalism as a research topic has occurred in education, as was also shown in Helander's analysis (1999) of publications on ethnic relations. The bibliography indicates that the number of compilation works on multiculturalism doubled in the approach to the year 2000 and there was a six-fold increase in the number of other scientific publications during the 1990s.
Figure 3. Points of emphasis in multiculturalism research in university and administrative publications.
Figure 3 seeks to give a broad outline of points of emphasis in multiculturalism research, which have been: attitude research, research into ethnic relations, research into intervention in minority policy, research into the integration process for ethnic minorities (including marginalisation and social exclusion), research into service systems lying between them, and research into ethnic minorities. Most of the university publications are studies of various minority groups, while the administrative publications tend to focus on the effectiveness of service systems. After this comes research into minority groups and integration research.
As multiculturalism research goes on mainly in academic institutions or in the branches of public administration that are responsible for immigration affairs, these research activities depend on the practices of these organisations and their development. Where public authorities in charge of refugee policy focused in the 1980s on establishing and reforming the reception system, multiculturalism research was dominated by an atmosphere of expectation. Both civil servants and researchers were seeking means and forums to promote research in the field. However, in its two welfare programmes (1980, 1990) the general refugee policy passed over research activities. Even though refugee research was done at that time, it is typical of the research policy dialogue of the 1980s that there was no trace of this in administrative documents or academic policy programmes. Some differences did arise, however, between academic disciplines whereby, for example, Finnish as a second language began to emerge as a clearly defined field of research in its own right. Besides the support for this new field provided by the Academy of Finland, the development of research into Finnish as a second language was assisted in the higher education policy of the early 1990s by establishing two professorships in the subject, one in Helsinki and the other in Jyväskylä.
The multiculturalism research of the 1990s was characterised by efforts to focus refugee and migration research on planning. The target group for refugee research grew rapidly and broadened in conceptual terms into a notion of immigrant character encompassing not only refugees but also others who had come to Finland as migrants. The target group growth and the regional dispersal of immigrants were also manifest as an increase in the volume of research and its decentralisation into local authorities, universities and other centres of higher education, research facilities and sectors of public administration throughout the country. Concern for the decentralisation of research activities was expressed by appointing working groups on planning. The new increased diversity also stimulated thinking in the fields of minority and academic policy stressing areas of emphasis seeking to direct work in the field into thematic research programmes. It is worth noting that one result of the efforts of these various working groups was the endeavour to rectify inadequacies in the co-ordination of research in the field and its decentralised human and financial resources by proposing the establishment of a research institute or unit in Finland to co-ordinate multiculturalism research.
Even though a focus on planning reformed the administration and organisation responsible for immigration in Finland, the degree of institutionalisation of research activities remained a low one in relation to planning during the 1990s. When comparing multiculturalism research to women's studies, for example, it is clear that the latter has achieved independent status in the higher education system as a specialised field of research in its own right, while multiculturalism research continues to function largely from project to project becoming annexed to the work of various academic establishments or working on their fringes (the exception to this being research into Swedish-speaking Finns and the Sámi of Finland).
The research policy role of the Academy of Finland in guiding multiculturalism research has become a leading one during the 1990s, with multidisciplinary research programmes serving as guidance mechanisms. The research needs arising from social developments, international research policy influences and the research emphases arising from the academic community itself (Academy of Finland 1/1999) may all be viewed as contributing to the background that provides a renewed impetus for academic policy programmes to promote multiculturalism. The systematic academic policy took concrete form in the implementation of the 1992 cultural traditions and globalisation research programme and in the SYREENI research programme (2000-2003), for which preparations began in autumn 1997 as an investigation into the need to improve research into racism and xenophobia.
Multiculturalism research has become commodified in the competition based on project form. The measurable products of research are publications, the number of international projects, international relations and further qualifications in the field. This emphasis on commodification has, on the other hand, tended to exclude certain matters of significance from the point of view of social progress in multiculturalism, such as the rise of an academic generation that is familiar with multiculturalism, career development and employment in the sector. Even though the research programmes of the Academy of Finland (1992, 1999) have given researchers engaged in post-graduate studies in the field an opportunity to work in relevant research teams and working collectives, these programmes have not met the need for basic studies and tutoring in multiculturalism. The rapid growth in academic student theses in the sector already suffices to raise questions regarding the practices that guide research. Multiculturalism research is currently project research without training, as there are, for example, absolutely no sectoral lectureships emphasising multiculturalism, even in teacher training focusing specifically on teaching. It is a further consequence of this that, following the doctoral degree, the current project-centred character and public service structure of the multiculturalism field offer very little by way of work and career development prospects.
Project-centred work is an essential aspect of the organisation mechanism directing Finland's multiculturalism research in the spheres of both multiculturalism policy and of academic policy. The field has developed a porous infrastructure as research work has progressed, in the form of a continuum based on various habits, networks and projects. While there are certain advantages in structural flexibility, the continuum of multiculturalism research that is based only on projects is also fragmentary and largely at the mercy of trends in research and academic policy, which in turn are regulated by market interests, Europeanised guidance mechanisms and a globalised academic policy with its accompanying quality criteria. Science requires a continuous character, and to ensure this consideration must also be given to reconstructing the present context of multiculturalism research, not merely through academic policy but also through higher education policy extending to the level of public appointments.
When considering the institutionalisation of multiculturalism research we should ask why and when the institutional framework of multiculturalism research and the factors bearing on its organisation will become important factors in developing research work in the field. It will then be worth remembering that the character of the stakeholders in multiculturalism research also has an influence in research and academic policy. In an age when research is increasingly performed under conditions of market competition, is research into the situation of socially less powerful stakeholders such as immigrants, and the independent objectives of such research, becoming marginalised?
Helander, M. (1999). Publications on Ethnic Relations in Finland 1991-1996. Svenska social- och kommunalhöskolan vid Helsinfors universitet. Rapporter och diskussionsinlägg 1/99. Helsingfors University Press.
Research policy publications on multiculturalism research:
The author is a Doctor of Psychology and special researcher working at the University of Jyväskylä Clinic for Multicultural Counselling. This article is based on the presentation "A review of progress in multiculturalism research in Finland", delivered in Finnish at the multiculturalism workshop of 28 September 2001 as part of the Culture 2001 scientific review by the Academy of Finland. Further details of the current state of multiculturalism research are available from the website of the University of Jyväskylä Clinic for Multicultural Counselling www.jyu.fi/mclinic/tutkimus.html
Printer-friendly version