This thesis is a study of the relationship between childhood circumstances and socioeconomic outcomes in adulthood for the Second Generation; children of immigrants in the UK. Using data from the ONS Longitudinal Study it aims to answer two main questions. After controlling for a range of childhood characteristics, are there significant differences in the aggregate socio-economic outcomes of Second Generation groups and the children of UK born parents. To what extent are particular childhood characteristics associated with socio-economic outcomes among the Second Generation. The thesis analyses the experiences of the Second Generation as a whole, and a broad range of origin groups, including children of parents from: the Caribbean, Eastern Europe, India, Ireland, Pakistan, Southern Europe and 'White' English Speaking origins. Alongside a control group, of children of UK born parents, this breadth provides an important comparative perspective. The results show the Second Generation to have experienced greater upward social mobility than the children of UK born parents but to be more disadvantaged in terms of deprivation and unemployment. These patterns are exacerbated when controlling for prior characteristics. All individual Second Generation groups experience greater long range upward mobility and disadvantaged origins appear less of a risk factor for disadvantaged destinations than they do for children of UK born parents. But for some, there is greater risk of downward mobility; advantaged origins are not the protective factor, which they are for most people. The results show that for the Second Generation, socio-economic and geographical origins are important predictors of adult outcomes. However the relationship between social origins and destinations may be weaker than for children of UK born parents. It is discussed, whether factors such as greater levels of aspiration, and experiences of racism and discrimination may mediate the long term trajectories of some of the Second Generation.

No description available.

No description available.

This PhD thesis is based on a qualitative interview study of white South Africans who have migrated to the UK in the post-apartheid era, focusing on their sense of belonging and ‘racial’/ethnic boundary-processes in society. With the increasing South African emigration in the post-apartheid era, the UK has been South Africans’ primary destination. Nevertheless, this migrant group has received relatively little scholarly attention. It could seem as though South Africans have been considered less interesting for research purposes, as their typical status as white and relatively privileged migrants appears to have made them better perceived by the British state apparatus and public than many ‘non-white’ and other disadvantaged migrants (Crawford 2011). By investigating migrants’ sense of belonging, this thesis complements the traditional preoccupations with the formal rights and duties of citizenship (e.g. Marshall 1998 [1963]). Moreover, the analytical insights of ‘intersectionality’ can rectify the one-dimensional conceptualisations (e.g. Kymlicka 1995) which run the risk of labelling all members of an ethnic minority or migrant group as equally disadvantaged without considering how social categories like gender and class might position them differently in particular ‘social hierarchies’. ‘Intersectionality’ – as typically applied to reveal intersecting categorisations/oppressions affecting multiply disadvantaged groups such as black women – can therefore be employed also when demonstrating how members of relatively privileged groups may be situated differently according to ethnicity, class, gender, and so on. Noticeably, varying forms of inclusion and exclusion can be negotiated simultaneously depending on the social categories being underscored (Yuval-Davis 2011a). The psychosocial concerns affecting even relatively privileged migrant groups – as migrants in a new context – are evidenced by the ways in which white South Africans negotiate away boundaries of exclusion by drawing on the more privileged aspects of their group status in order to distinguish themselves from disadvantaged groups in British and South African society.

The aim of this research is to examine the impact of UKs immigration policies and procedures on asylum seekers and ‘illegal’ migrants. The study investigates the ways in which ‘risks’ have been proffered as a justification to contain and control this group of individuals. Those claiming asylum are increasingly subjected to a complex set of rules and legislation, and their access to the welfare state and labour market is severely restricted, if not completely denied. Individuals are increasingly pushed into a bureaucratic limbo in which they are rendered destitute and stateless. This Thesis draws upon asylum seekers’ and ‘illegal’ migrants’ experiences of living in this empty space and shows the ways in which they have used their agency to ‘resist’ and overcome the controls that render them as ‘bare-life’. The study employs a qualitative methodology which includes in-depth interviews with twenty two asylum seekers and six specialist practitioners. The conclusion reveals a constant struggle against the status quo and dissent against abusive state power.