Two Concepts of Integration: Integration as a Thick Normative Concept

Much has been written about integration and refugees, nevertheless this topic remains one of the most intensively debated issues of recent years. The unprecedented influx of refugees into Europe has resulted in the so-called “refugee crisis”. This has led many scholars in different countries to debate and rethink the concept of integration. In this context, this paper aims to contribute to the debate by arguing that integration should be treated as a “thick concept” involving both descriptive and evaluative components. Indeed, although the concept of integration should have rather positive connotations, it has increasingly acquired negative connotations. Integration has gained such a bad reputation that many people now avoid using the term altogether. The division between what it is supposed to mean and how it may be used may justify the distinction between two concepts of integration: on one hand, a positive concept of integration that is more likely to refer to the term “inclusion”, on the other hand, a negative version more akin to the term “assimilation”. The question arises as to how we can understand and explain this radical difference between two concepts of “integration” or between its positive significations and negative connotations. To answer this, it is important to conduct: (1) a conceptual analysis of “integration”, “inclusion” and “assimilation”; and (2) a critical analysis of the official and unofficial public discourse on integration in the mass media in Europe. The importance of these analyses lies in their ability to reveal the ambivalence and ambiguity of the term “integration”, not only in theory, but also in the way it is used in practice. In conclusion, the term “integration” should be understood as a “thick concept” that carries both descriptive and evaluative components. Thus, in order to fully understand integration, its study should consider both its descriptive and normative content.