French integration model is in many ways controversial. Due to long history of immigration and the construction of the nation from different regions11, the national population is an outcome of assimilation. Differences in religious or cultural identities as well as the possible claims for regional independence were overcame by transforming individuals into French citizens i.e. creating an universalistic view on citizens (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 15). While following the Republican values inherited from her political tradition, integration is seen rather universalist than assimilationist. Since the state does not formally recognize ethnic or racial groups, migrants and minority groups are seen equal on the basis of citizenship and thus emancipated through universalistic program (Bertossi 2011: 1565-1566).
The conceptual controversy derives from contrasting the republican universalism and assimilationist model: belief in integration based on values as freedom, equality and fraternity on the one hand (Sommaire 2006: 14) and seeing integration as one-sided process in which immigrants and their descendants give up their culture and adapt completely to the society they have migrated to on the other (Heckmann & Bosswick 2006: 4). Placed in specific historic setting of national public philosophies, France has followed a strong path dependency since 1789 i.e. integration refers to community of citizens (Bertossi 2100: 1563). Therefore France is a prototype for assimilationist policy
11 For example Burgundy, Brittany, and Provence.
18 that is related to the republican and universalist tradition, in which the model of political assimilation translates into national unity (Heckmann & Bosswick 2006: 21). According to Roger Brubaker, assimilation is seen in terms of similarity and not identity. To assimilate means to become similar, make similar or treat as similar (Brubaker 2001:
534). Since France became a terre d’immigration much earlier than (in the mid-19th century) most of her European neighbours (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 17), it needed a wide capacity to assimilate. The strong national identity encouraged individuals to become French (Sommaire 2006: 14). Therefore the controversy is hidden in the republicanism itself – according to Bertossi “/…/the Republic organizes the separation between public and private realms through a strict colour-blind approach to ethnicity and race, and between the state and the church (the concept of laïcité)”
(Bertossi 2011: 1562). In other words, it follows strictly political definition of immigrant incorporation and seems to show that the country has overcame its colonial past and ethnic or racial divisions (Amiraux & Simon 2006: 192). Therefore, any differentiation such as cultural, religious or ethnic background should remain in the private sphere.
The integration policy can be divided according to four fundamental indicators: the role of schools, urban planning policy i.e. housing, anti-discrimination laws, and lastly nationality laws (next chapter). Firstly, French integration policy has focused on the integration of migrants’ children rather than on the migrants themselves. The concept of l’école républicaine is the carrier of universal principles, such as equality and secularism, for integrating the descendants of immigrants into cohesive French nation despite their real origin (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 23). This “colour-blind”
approach is supposed to enhance the homogeneity. The school system expects the children of immigrants to join the mainstream system as soon as possible through specific encouraging measures such as special classes12 and special training or information centres supporting their education13 (Borkert, Maren et al. 2007: 12). Every
12 There are different welcoming and reception classes for immigrant children and non-native speakers.
13 Academic Center for the Schooling of Newly Arrived and Travelling Children Centre (CASNAV Académique pour la Scolarisation des enfants allophones, Nouvellement Arrivés et des enfants issus de familles itinérantes et de Voyageurs).
19 child, despite the residential status of its parents, has the right to education and is therefore seen as equal with French child i.e. he/she is treated in the same (Heckmann &
Schnapper 2003: 24). The socialization and acculturation in schools is closely tied with becoming a citizen – automatic access to citizenship is provided after fixed years of residence and attendance to school or university.
Secondly, urban planning or public housing reveals the risk of segregation and the fine line between the formation of ethnic groups and maintaining social cohesion. With the increasing demand for social housing under the guest workers scheme France started with a housing policy called HLM (Habitation à loyer modère) i.e. low-rent housing.
Even though until the 1970s the amount of foreign workers living there compared to natives was relatively low14, the share of immigrant residents has since grown rapidly (Verdugo 2011: 178-180). Most of the buildings provided are either collective buildings, individual apartments in a block of individually owned flats or private housing estates (Fougère 2011: 9). Any family is eligible for residing if the head of the family is legally allowed to live in France and if the family income is below a fixed threshold. HLM is provided in most of the cities in France and it houses more than 12 million residents (Fougère 2011: 4). However, in order to avoid ghettoization, the threshold for eligibility is far from being low meaning that theoretically up to 70% of the French population can be eligible to reside in a social housing (Fougère 2011: 9). In order to avoid social unrest, potential conflicts, and the emergence mono-ethnic ghettos the policy tries to implement unofficial quota system in the allocation of housing (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 27). Yet, in 2007 almost two-thirds of African and Turkish immigrants were concentrated in three regions: more than 40% in the Paris region (Ile-de-France), one-tenth in the Rhône-Alpes region (Lyon), and a similar share in the Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur region (Marseille). Studies have also shown that segregation is slowly increasing (Pan Ké Shon 2011: 2).
Thirdly, in keeping with the principle of universalism, all forms of discrimination are forbidden in France. The preamble of French constitution of 1958 - quoting from the 1789 Human Rights Declaration - highlights the equality of all men and women before
14 For example: in 1968 the percentage of foreign workers living in Paris’ social housing was 5,5%
against 15,3% of native workers.
20 the law and through the ‘sameness of treatment’ prohibits discrimination on the basis of one’s origin, race or religion. Since 1990, this applies to all foreign nationals within the national boundaries and offences against one’s ethnic belonging or religion have been put into the category of crimes against humanity (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 27-28). Independent law enforcement authority called HALDE (Haute Autorité de Lutte contre les Discriminations et pour l’Égalité15) is rapidly developing a comprehensive case-law touching on different issues16 relating to race discrimination (O’Cinneide 2011: 11). Since France is diverse society particularly in religious terms, the idea of laïcité poses a strong controversy between the republican values of freedom and the expression of individualizing religious identities. In the light of secularism, a law that bans wearing explicit religious symbols publicly17 was enforced in 2004. This is one of the best examples of how strongly religion is believed to be part of individual’s private life when school or work place is considered. Therefore the key for understanding restrictive laws on religion derives from the minimalist perspective on individual rights (Frégosi & Kosulu 195-197). Thus, because France does not officially recognize ethnic statuses, races and religions, racism and discrimination mainly derive from economic and social problems (Heckmann & Schnapper 2003: 38). Studies have shown that non-native groups suffer from large ethnic disadvantages (Lefranc 2010, Brinbaum &
Cebolla-Boado 2007, Aeberhardt & Pouget 2006).