Integration policies reflect a certain vision of nationhood, of who should legitimately take part in the national society and how such inclusion must be achieved. Theoretical and political redefinitions of these terms have taken place in response to the new dynamics associated to the state-context, international migration and an apparent convergence among European countries. The perceived homogenization of integration policies might be challenging traditional national paradigms under which countries frame their integration policies. Despite what the new trends suggest the official discourse might still be perceived as a mode of inclusion - unique to a country - by the people that is been directly affected by integration policies. Academics and politicians rarely take a look at the way in which the citizenry understands integration policies. This paper wishes to contribute to a better understanding of the concept of integration from a bottom-up perspective. The aim is to explore until what extent national discourses frame people’s perceptions of integration and their role as citizens in the national society. The results of this study show that there is still a national imprint in the understanding of integration on an individual level. In this paper the perception towards integration and other elements associated to the concept are described and compared taking into account empirical material collected through survey questions and in-depth interviews. The narratives of the so-called second generation immigrants are compared to the individuals with a native origin in countries with a very different approach towards integration and diversity: Sweden and France. Such a comparison indicates, not only a potential difference in the discourse about integration but also a possible influence of ethnicity over the perception of integration and the positioning of people in that process.
