Immigration and Immigrant Integration

Overview

The Russell Sage Foundation/Carnegie Corporation Initiative on Immigration and Immigrant Integration seeks to support innovative research on the effects of race, citizenship, legal status and politics, political culture and public policy on outcomes for immigrants and for the native-born of different racial and ethnic groups and generations. This initiative falls under RSF’s Race, Ethnicity, and Immigration Program and represents a special area of interest within the core program, which continues to encourage proposals on a broader set of issues.

Background
For over 25 years, RSF has supported immigration research that has made significant contributions to the study of (1) immigrant integration and intergenerational mobility, (2) political incorporation, and (3) the causes and consequences of immigration to new areas of settlement. This research has shown the significant progress made by immigrants and their children, with immigrants becoming more like the native-born over time, and with second and later generations becoming more like other native-born Americans than their parents were. 

Two recent reports from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) confirm that, across all outcomes for which data are available—education, income, residential integration, English language fluency, and living above the poverty line—the children of immigrants do better than their parents and reach parity with other native-born Americans, often within a generation.  Nevertheless, the reports highlight concerns regarding the continuing importance of legal status and race, as well as political culture and policy regimes, suggesting that immigrant incorporation into U.S. society remains incomplete.

This initiative is also responsive to recent federal policy changes and emerging concerns about the resurgence of nativism and anti-immigrant sentiment –from executive orders limiting refugee resettlement to barring travel from some Muslim-majority countries.  And it invites examination of the extent to which social and political institutions reinforce (or prevent) the goals of immigrant progress and integration.

Areas of Interest
RSF and the Carnegie Corporation of New York invite proposals for new research that will strengthen the theory, methods and empirical knowledge about the effects of race, citizenship, legal status, and the interplay of politics and policy on immigrant outcomes. Because of limitations in government statistics, researchers are curating and analyzing data from both public and private sources (e.g., specialized surveys, administrative sources from tax, social security and citizenship and immigration services, as well as social media), and collecting their own data to measure the progress of the foreign-born and their children.

Many of the questions listed below are difficult to answer because of data limitations (Blau & Mackie, 2016; Duncan & Trejo, 2016; Massey, 2010; Waters & Pineau, 2015) regarding age and time of arrival, time spent in the U.S., legal status at present and upon entry, including visa type, parents’ and grandparents’ place of birth, longitudinal data, and data linked across sources.  Thus, we welcome proposals to improve the measurement of immigrant progress over time and across generations.  We are especially interested in creative uses of administrative and other data sources that enhance our ability to identify immigrants by generation and legal status.

Examples of the kinds of topics and questions that are of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

Legal Status

Legal status represents a significant barrier to integration and economic progress, exacerbated by the criminalization of undocumented status and increased deportations since 1996.  Many of the unauthorized have lived in the U.S. for at least a decade, and nearly half are the parents of minor children, most of whom are U.S.-born.  Thus, legal status affects citizen children and spouses as well, with the effects varying with geography due to different state and local laws and institutions.  

• To what extent does providing temporary legal status and work permits on the one hand (e.g., administrative relief in the form of deferred action) or increased enforcement on the other affect immigrant outcomes?  
• What is the impact of employer behavior and preferences on immigrant economic integration?  
• How do assumptions about the legal status of the foreign-born, and their variance by racial, religious and other factors, influence the attitudes and behaviors of the native-born? 
• How do legal status differences affect the extent and the pace of integration in terms of education, labor market or political outcomes?  
• What are the implications of the criminalization of undocumented status (via intensified apprehension and deportation programs) for public safety, community cohesion, workplace health and safety, civic engagement, and for the socio-economic outcomes of children and youth?
• What is the effect of the (actual or potential) loss of temporary legal status on DACA and TPS recipients?
• What does the changing demographic composition of the undocumented mean for the future of immigrant integration?

Naturalization and Citizenship

Millions of immigrant residents are eligible to become citizens, but naturalization rates in the U.S. are low compared to similar immigrant-receiving countries like Australia and Canada.  

• Why are naturalization rates so low and what factors explain who, among the eligible, naturalizes?  
• To what extent does naturalization contribute to better social, political and economic integration of immigrants?  
• To what extent does immigrant collective action advance integration?
• How do institutions foster civic engagement?

Mixed-Ancestry, Ethnic Identity, and Integration

A pan-ethnic label and identity (for example, African American, Latino/Hispanic, Asian American) includes many ethnicities, national origins and languages for groups that differ greatly in their economic and social status.  

• What determines the emergence of a pan-ethnic identity?  
• To what extent does having mixed-race (or mixed-ethnicity) parents affect the identities, inter-group attitudes, and the integration outcomes of these multi-racial children?  
• To what extent does selective attrition through intermarriage lead higher achieving descendants of immigrants to stop identifying as ethnics or as members of a pan-ethnic group?  

Race, Religion, Legacies of Exclusion, and Inequality

A recent NAS report on immigrant integration found that patterns of immigrant integration differ by race, with Black immigrants and their descendants experiencing a slower rate of integration than other immigrants. 

• To what extent are the pathways to integration of immigrants from countries in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean, and Latin America affected by their racial status and/or by legacies of legal inclusion/exclusion?
• To what extent do race, immigration status, and stereotypes affect public opinion about various immigrant groups, and how do these opinions affect immigrant and second-generation outcomes? 
• What are the effects of economic disparity between immigrant groups, and between immigrant groups and native minorities, on inter-group relations?
• Since 9/11, both Muslim immigrants and American-born Muslims have been the target of increased hostility and intolerance. Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by an increase in anti-Asian animus and a rise in reports of hate crimes, xenophobia, and violence.
• What factors are associated with these forms of prejudice and discrimination? Are some subgroups more affected than others? 
• How does this prejudice affect immigrant and second-generation economic, political, and social integration? For example, does this increase rates of naturalization or other forms of civic engagement? Does it create an opportunity for cross-racial mobilization?
• In what ways, and with what consequences, are asylees and refugees changing public opinion about immigrants and immigration?

Politics, Political Culture, and Public Policy

Both politics and immigration policies affect the lives of immigrants. For example, pandemic era policies, such as Title 42 (a federal law meant to prevent the spread of communicable disease) and Migrant Protection Protocols (i.e., the Remain in Mexico program) justified expulsions, especially at the southern border.

• To what extent does the treatment of immigrants by the various levels of government affect public support for immigrants and immigration policy? 
• What is the effect of refugee resettlement policy on the economic integration of refugees and asylees in contrast to those of other immigrants? 
• What is the long-term impact of initial conditions (a detention camp, a common location, or a dispersion policy) on integration outcomes for refugees and their dependents?
• What is the effect of immigrants’ experiences with government and the quality of the interaction on their attitudes towards government and government policies?

All applicants (both PIs and Co-PIs) must have a doctorate. In rare circumstances, RSF may consider applications from scholars who do not hold a doctorate but can demonstrate a strong career background that establishes their ability to conduct high-level, peer-reviewed scholarly research.

LOIs are required.

Trustee Grants are generally capped at $200,000. Presidential Grants are capped at $50,000, but PIs may request up to $75,000 when the proposed research project has special needs for gathering data (e.g., qualitative research) or gaining access to restricted-use data, or when the proposal budget includes salary support for multiple assistant professor PIs.

RSF receives so many applications for its limited funding that it no longer considers submissions that make use of publicly available data, such as the Current Population Survey, American Community Survey, Panel Study of Income Dynamics, National Longitudinal survey of Youth, etc. However, if the project addresses a pressing issue or uses these data in an innovative way, RSF may consider such proposals as Presidential grants with a maximum budget of $50,000.