In his thesis paper, Scholten argues that it is impossible to say whether the Dutch integration policy is a success or a failure. The policy has changed too much in the last thirty years. In the seventies, the politicians viewed the migrants as temporary guests, and in the eighties; a multicultural perspective was on the rise, in which migrants were seen as permanent ethnic minorities. Later, the emphasis was placed more on citizenship and participation. The last few years gave rise to an assimilationist image: integration became connected to big words like national standards and values.
The PhD student suggests that reflection on these different frames, as he names them, would have been useful. A measure that is made from only one model is, from a different perspective, suddenly negative. `And so you get people talking to deaf ears. People don't understand each other, because they think from different frames. Thinkers from one model find that integration is at times a success, when labor participation and educational achievements are high, yet other people argue from a different frame that the small adaptations in social and cultural themes indicate how integration has failed.' Scholten thinks that scientists should have had a role in this process. `Researchers haven't contributed enough to the debate. They were too close to the dominating policy, and there was not enough critical reflection on alternative policy models. I think scientists should look for the truth. Most people aren't aware of the frame from which they reason or from which measures are made. When you know what the deeper images of integration are then you can bridge those controversies.'
And if not, an integration policy is doomed to fail, says the PhD student. `It's been on the agenda for over thirty years. But nothing has come of it. What is the framework? Who needs to integrate? Are they migrants, citizens, non-natives or minorities? Do we want them to integrate culturally or economically? When is the integration a success? When they work here? Or when they accept our standards and values?'
Dutch policy makers are not actually working towards solving the problem, thinks Scholten. `Even worse: they don't even know what the problem is. Nowadays, the integration question is too broad. Big symbolic themes such as, being Dutch, national standards, and values are all a part of the discussion. Scientists can help to discover the actual problem.'
Scholten writes in his thesis that the relationship has become more cynical between scientists and policy makers. `People used to think that science would have all the answers, but with these difficult problems, that's impossible. That view leads to a cynical view on science from the eyes of policy makers. Both visions are not correct. Research doesn't speak an objective truth, nor is it relative. I try to find the middle ground. Policy makers and scientists should be conscious that difficult controversies, such as an integration policy, are characterized by multiple truths, and that research can play a significant role to help clarify certain issues.'
After his doctorate, Scholten plans to continue his public administration research on minorities as a university lecturer. The subject has fascinated him since the time that he was a public administration student, and met his wife. She is from Morocco. `That opened my eyes to the current problems.' Personally, he dislikes the broad debate on integration. `Too many big words are used that only help to worsen the problem; I fear. Integration is connected to many things. The current integration debate is not as much about integration of migrants, but - as the recent book by Paul Scheffer, `Het land van aankomst' strikingly illustrates - more on re-imagining of the Dutch community. The Dutch feel uncertain and seek a foothold. Who are we and who are they? But we shouldn't think of that gap. I think someone is integrated, when he or she feels a certain level of solidarity with the Netherlands. I think the discussion on standards and values is belittling and oppressive, and I honestly don't understand why the Dutch don't revolt against it. The Dutch-as I know them-don't feel at home in that discussion.'
