Résumés
Abstract
This article analyzes the support relationships of 10 asylum-seeking young people who fled to Germany between 2010 and 2015. It highlights their wish for reciprocity as a need in their country of destination and expands upon Sahlin’s typology of reciprocal relationships (generalized, balanced, and negative reciprocity) by the type of “refused reciprocity.” “Refused reciprocity” occurs when people are keen to reciprocate for support they have received, but they live in environments that restrict their agency. The article argues that participation means not only provision of support, but creation of opportunities for people to experience themselves as self-effective actors. They become self-effective when they can cope successfully with new and difficult situations on their own.
Keywords:
- Germany,
- Syrian refugees,
- young people,
- support,
- Coping Strategy,
- reciprocity
Résumé
Cette article analyse les relations de soutien de dix jeunes demandeurs d’asile ayant fui en Allemagne entre 2010 et 2015. Il souligne leur besoin de réciprocité dans leur pays de destination et élargit la typologie des relations de réciprocité de Sahlin (réciprocité généralisée, équilibrée et négative) avec le type « réciprocité refusée ». La « réciprocité refusée » survient dans les cas où les gens désirent rendre la pareille pour le soutien reçu, mais vivent dans des environnements qui posent des limites à leur agentivité. L’article soutient que la participation ne se limite pas à la prestation de soutien, mais comprend la création d’opportunités permettant aux gens de se reconnaître eux-mêmes comme des acteurs auto-efficaces. L’efficacité personnelle apparaît lorsque les personnes réalisent et sentent qu’elles peuvent faire face des situations nouvelles et difficiles avec succès grâce à leurs propres capacités.
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Barnes, D. M., & Aguilar, R. (2007). Community social support for Cuban refugees in Texas. Qualitative Health Research, 17(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732306297756
- Blau, P. M. ([1968] 2005). Sozialer Austausch. In F. Adloff & S. Mau (Eds.), Vom Geben und Nehmen. Zur Soziologie der Reziprozität (pp. 125–137). Campus.
- Bowling, N. A., Beehr, Terry A., & Swader, W. M. (2005). Giving and receiving social support at work: The roles of personality and reciprocity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 67, 476–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2004.08.004
- Breithecker, R., & Stöckinger, M. (2020). Ist Geben seliger als Nehmen? Die Bedeutung von Gaben und Gegengaben in den Beziehungen von bürgerschaftlich engagierten und geflüchteten Menschen. In A. Schulz & T. Schwertel, (Eds.), Der lange Sommer der Flucht – 2015 und danach (pp. 73–97). Barbara Budrich.
- Brown, S. L., Nesse, R. M., Vinokur, A. D., & Smith, D. M. (2003). Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it. Psychological Science, 14(4), 320–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467–9280.14461
- Bundesamt für Migration und Flucht (BAMF). (2019). Aktuelle Zahlen. March 2019. https://www.bamf.de/SiteGlobals/Forms/Suche/Expertensuche_Flyout_Formular.html?templateQueryString=2Aktuelle+Zahlen+zu+Asyl2&sortOrder=dateOfIssue_dt+desc&pageLocale=de
- Dunbar, M., Ford, G., &, Hunt, K. (1998). Why is the receipt of social support associated with increased psychological distress? Psychology & Health, 13(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449808407308
- Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161–178. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2092623
- Gouldner, A. W. ([1984] 2005). Etwas gegen nichts. Reziprozität und Asymmetrie. In F. Adloff & S. Mau (Eds.), Vom Geben und Nehmen. Zur Soziologie der Reziprozität (pp. 109–123). Campus.
- Hamann, U., & Karakayali, S. (2016): Practicing Willkommenskultur: Migration and solidarity in Germany. Intersections, 2(4), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v2i4.296
- Institute of Research in Social Pedagogy Mainz (ism). (2019). Entwicklung der jugendhilferechtlichen Zuständigkeit für umA im bundesweiten und rheinland-pfälzischen Vergleich. https://b-umf.de/src/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019_01_03_uma-meldung.pdf
- Jung, J. (1990). The role of reciprocity in social support. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11(3), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp1103_2
- Kohli, R. K. S. (2011). Working to ensure safety, belonging and success for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. Child Abuse Review, 20, 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.1182
- Maiter, S., Simich, L., Jacobson, N., & Wise, J. (2008). Reciprocity: An ethic for community-based participatory action research. Action Research, 6(3), 305–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1476750307083720
- Mauss, M. ([1968] 2005). Die Gabe. In F. Adloff & S. Mau (Eds.), Vom Geben und Nehmen. Zur Soziologie der Reziprozität (pp. 61–72). Campus.
- Nelson, M. K. (2000). Single mothers and social support: The commitment to, and retreat from, reciprocity. Qualitative Sociology, 23(3), 291–317.
- Neufeld, A., & Harrison, M. J. (1995). Reciprocity and social support in caregivers’ relationships: Variations and consequences. Qualitative Health Research, 5(3), 348–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239500500306
- Przyborski, A., & Wohlrab-Sahr, M. (2010). Qualitative Sozialforschung (3rd ed.). Oldenbourg.
- Sahlin, M. D. ([1965] 1999). Zur Soziologie des primitiven Tauschs. Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 9(2), 149–178. Shumaker, S. A., & Brownell, A. (1984). Toward a theory of social support: Closing conceptual gaps. Journal of Social Issues, 40(4), 11–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540–4560.1984.tb01105.x
- Siim, B., Saarinen A., & Krasteva A. (2019). Citizens’ activism and solidarity movements in contemporary Europe: Contending with populism. In B. Siim, A. Krasteva, & A. Saarinen (Eds.), Citizens’ Activism and Solidarity Movements (pp. 1–24). Palgrave Macmillan.
- Simmel, G. ([1908] 2005). Exkurs über Treue und Dankbarkeit. In F. Adloff & S. Mau (Eds.), Vom Geben und Nehmen. Zur Soziologie der Reziprozität (pp. 95–108). Campus.
- Smith, A. (2016). “They have become my family”: Reciprocity and responsiveness in a volunteer-led proram for refugees in migrants. ArtsPraxis, 3, 71–86.
- Stegbauer, C. (2011). Reziprozität. Einführung in soziale Formen der Gegenseitigkeit (2nd ed.). Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften (VS).
- Stewart, M., Anderson, J., Beiser, M., Mwakarimba, E., Neufeld, A., Simich, L., & Spitzer, D. (2008). Multicultural meanings of social support among immigrants and refugees. International Migration, 46(3), 123–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14682435.2008.00464.x
- Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1996). Grounded Theory. Beltz. Takizawa, T., Kondo, T., Sakihara, S., Ariizumi, M., Watanabe, N., & Oyama, H. (2006). Stress buffering effects of social support on depressive symptoms in middle age: Reciprocity and community mental health. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 60, 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440–1819.2006.01579.x
- UNHCR (2020). Figures at a glance. https://www.unhcr.org/figures-at-a-glance.html
- Väänänen, A., Buunk, B. P., Kivimäki, M., Pentti, J., & Vahtera, J. (2005). When it is better to give than to receive: Long- term health effects of perceived reciprocity in support exchange. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(2), 176–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.2.176
- Wellmann, B., & Wortley, S. (1990). Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 558–588. http://dx-.doi.org/10.1086/229572
- Williams, H. (1995). There are no free gifts! Social support and the need for reciprocity. Human Organization, 54(4), 401–409. https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.54.4.w233493122q420v7