People in disadvantaged communities have more negative attitude towards immigration, ESRI report finds
immigration
, particularly in areas where there has been an increase in migrants, new research has found.
The study by the
Economic and Social Research Institute
(ESRI) looked at how different types of communities shaped people's attitudes towards immigration in Ireland.
The analysis is based on a 2023
Department of Equality
survey on Irish attitudes towards migration and is combined with 2022
census
data on the characteristics of communities.
The study defines disadvantaged areas as places with higher proportions of households headed by lone parents, the unemployed and those with a low education level or semi-skilled/unskilled jobs.
READ MORE
People living in these areas are less positive about immigration, with researchers quoting previous studies that found there is a 'greater perceived resource threat' among people in these areas, 'given more economically precarious individuals are likely to feel immigration is a particular threat to their position and resources'.
While this negative attitude towards immigration in disadvantaged areas increased when the share of migrants went up, the paper also found that migrants are not more likely to live in these disadvantaged communities.
It found the largest increase of migrant share between 2011 and 2022 happened in areas that are the least disadvantaged.
The research also found that those living in rural areas had more negative attitudes towards immigration, compared with those living in urban areas.
However, rural areas with high percentages of migrants had similar attitudes toward immigration as those in urban areas.
The research also found that people living in more segregated areas, where migrants are living in clusters, have more negative attitudes towards immigration.
The paper says this may reflect the importance of social contact with migrants for fostering more positive attitudes.
'This has important implications for policies aimed at improving migrant integration, but also indicates that broader economic and social policies and factors play a key role in social cohesion and attitudes towards immigration,' the paper says.
There was no link between people living in areas with greater pressure on services such as health, housing and education and holding a more negative attitude towards immigration.
This indicates that it may not be direct local experiences that affect attitudes but may instead be 'concern about pressure on services in Ireland as a whole', the paper says.
Report author Fran McGinnity said the research 'shows that local communities can generate both obstacles to, but also opportunities for, social integration between non-migrants and migrants'.
'Communities are spaces where migrants and non-migrants not only encounter each other but can also form lasting social ties. This could be as next-door neighbours, as parents of children going to the same school, or in community groups.
'This kind of positive social contact between migrants and non-migrants can go a long way to generating positive relations between groups as well as building stronger, more cohesive communities in the long run,' Ms McGinnity said.
Meanwhile, co-author of the report Keire Murphy said the research gives 'important insight into what makes anti-immigrant sentiment more likely'.
'Echoing international findings, socioeconomic factors like community-level disadvantage seem to matter, implying that the broader social and economic context is important for attitudes towards immigration,' Ms Murphy said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
35 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Cyprus wildfires: 'We'll no longer have this paradise'
Locals in Dungloe have nicknamed a local abandoned housing estate as "the Titanic", as it has been sinking since being completed in 2007. Video: Joe Dunne
Irish Times
6 hours ago
- Irish Times
I've seen men watch porn in my workplaces. I reported it and was called ‘a prude'
The age of the topless Page Three girl in newspapers, and calendars featuring naked women in workplaces, is long gone but has been replaced by some men and boys openly viewing online pornography at work or on public transport. Last week it was revealed that more than 28 per cent of women in the UK have been shown pornography at work by a manager, colleague or customer. The union Unite , which surveyed 300,000 women in 19 different sectors, said that construction, aviation, transport, food and drink, farming, trucking, warehousing and logistics all suffered from significant rates of harassment. We're not immune from this behaviour in Ireland and it's not limited to certain sectors either. Over the last 20 years a banking chief executive was dismissed for viewing escort services at work. Also, two media employees were dismissed by their employers for having child sexual abuse imagery in their possession. Personally, I've witnessed several men watching porn in my workplaces – with the knowledge of senior management – as well as experiencing this on a plane and the Dart. When I reported it to a senior manager at work he laughed and said: 'Don't be such a prude.' READ MORE Sadly, such attitudes persist. A quick scan of Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) decisions involving pornography shows similar managerial reactions in some cases and the dismissal of employees and managers who viewed, disseminated or condoned the viewing of pornographic images in others. Complainants were awarded damages of up to €40,000. The daily commute is another hotspot for public porn, with passengers unwillingly subjected to it on buses, trains and planes. According to news reports from all over the State, some male passengers watch porn on their mobiles or computers, often without headphones, so anyone nearby is either forced to confront them or witness it too. Not the best way to start or end your work day. What is the impact of this behaviour on women and men in the workplace and how can employers address it? What should you and your employer do if a colleague is watching pornography at work? Employers have an obligation to provide a safe environment for their workers and this includes freedom from sexual harassment, intimidation and bullying. A workplace that allows, or chooses to ignore, these behaviours is putting itself at great risk legally, culturally, financially and reputationally. [ Men who watch pornography have poorer wellbeing, ESRI study finds Opens in new window ] Openly viewing pornography at work may be considered sexual harassment and a form of discrimination, making it illegal in the workplace under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 and 2004. Additionally, the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020 strengthens the laws against harassment, including sexual harassment, both online and offline. Sexual harassment is any form of unwanted words or physical actions of a sexual nature which deliberately or unintentionally violate your dignity, make you feel degraded and create an intimidating, hostile, humiliating or offensive environment for you. The unwanted actions may either deliberately aim to violate your dignity or unintentionally have that effect. David McWilliams on how 'big incentives' to build could save Dublin city Listen | 36:51 Employers may be held legally responsible for workplace harassment, even though they did not personally carry it out. This is called 'vicarious liability'. It applies where an employer has some control over what happens at the workplace, even if they do not directly employ the person who harassed you. Sexual harassment has a corrosive impact on workplace attitudes, behaviours and culture and creates a disconnect between women and men who work together. It's also bad for business. The workplace is a reflection of society, both positive and negative, and employers need to recognise how current trends impact on their culture. Research in the Journal of Business Ethics by NW Mecham found that pornography has permeated the work environment. Regular exposure to pornography increases the likelihood of impulsive or risky behaviour, according to the study. 'Consuming pornography causes individuals to be less ethical. We find that this relationship is mediated by increased moral disengagement from and dehumanisation of others due to viewing pornography. Combined, our results suggest that choosing to consume pornography causes individuals to behave less ethically.' [ What are the new online safety regulations that Big Tech is unhappy about – and will they work? Opens in new window ] 'Because unethical employee behaviour has been linked to numerous negative organisation outcomes including fraud, collusion and other self-serving behaviours, our results have implications for most societal organisations.' Irish and international research has found that mainstream pornography does not just depict consensual sex between adults, it promotes violence. Facing Reality: Addressing the Role of Pornography in the Pandemic of Violence against Women and Girls by the Sexual Exploitation Research and Policy (SERP) Institute says 'there is an urgent need to comprehend and address pornography for what it truly is – the sexual violence, torture and degradation of real women and girls on film.' 'Scholars have argued that as pornography has become increasingly normalised and socially conceptualised as 'sexually explicit material', in fact contemporary pornography does not depict 'sex' in itself, but rather sexual violence masquerading as 'sex'.' 'Amongst men, higher pornography consumption has been found to be associated with views and attitudes towards women that amount to 'hostile sexism',' the report continues. 'A detailed review of studies on men's attitudes and behaviours found a significant positive association between the consumption of violent pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women.' What does all this mean for workplace culture? Businesses cannot afford to ignore the impact of the 'normalisation' and pervasiveness of porn. It is training men and boys to dehumanise half the population and signalling to women and girls that they are less valued than men at work. Regular pornography viewers tend to think negatively about women – or see them primarily as sex objects – so they're unlikely to want to work on an equal footing with them, or to help support women colleagues or promote them to managerial roles. Dehumanising co-workers in this way might also lead to sexual harassment or contribute to a hostile work environment, which not only decreases organisational productivity but might spark expensive litigation, according to Mecham's research. [ Pornography website access could be restricted by passports under new proposals Opens in new window ] In addition, these attitudes can impact on customer relationships and retention levels. 'Dehumanisation may adversely impact an organisation's ability to attract, develop and retain talented women employees, especially when people in leadership positions are using pornography and aggressively engaging in dehumanising behaviour.' It's often said that workplace culture is dictated by the worst behaviour we allow. Businesses and organisations cannot divorce themselves from what's happening in wider society and they are required to take steps to protect workers from harm, no matter what form it takes. Under Irish law, 'Employers must have comprehensive, accessible, effective polices that focus on prevention, best practice and remedial action. They must also have an accessible complaints procedure,' according to the Code of Practice on Sexual Harassment and Harassment at Work from the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission. Employers are also required to take action if they become aware of an issue even if no complaint is filed. The existence of a policy document is not enough. 'Employers will not be able to rely on an excellent policy document if it is not implemented.' So, the next time you hear about someone viewing pornography at work or on public transport, don't just laugh it off, report it. Margaret E Ward is chief executive of Clear Eye, a leadership consultancy. margaret@
Irish Times
21 hours ago
- Irish Times
Galway farmer granted permission to challenge Greenway purchase decision ‘splitting' his farm
A Galway farmer has been granted permission to challenge a compulsory purchase order (CPO) made by An Coimisiún Pleanála (ACP) to construct a cycleway that he says would run across his land and 'split' his farm. He has claimed the route built under the Connemara Greenway Project would make his farmlands – in his family since the 1940s – 'unmanageable and landlocked'. At the High Court, lawyers for Oliver Joyce, of Emloughmore, Clifden, Co Galway, successfully applied to Ms Justice Emily Farrell to challenge the ACP's decision to grant a May 2025 compulsory purchase order (CPO) to Galway County Council relating to lands he owns at Doireliagh, Doireclunlaigh, Clifden, in Co Galway. The project aims to install a cycle and walkway going from Galway city to Clifden over 76km (47 miles) that would go through 'the backbone' of Mr Joyce's property along the old Galway-to-Clifden railway line, he claimed. READ MORE Mr Oliver has taken the challenge against ACP's decision to approve the compulsory acquisition, with Galway County Council named as a notice party. In court papers, Mr Oliver said he was conscious that his farmlands were located in a 'highly sensitive environment', which includes marshland and hilled areas that form part of the Connemara Bog Complex SAC, a conservation area. The plaintiff submitted the practice of farming the lands through generations of his family was done 'in perfect symmetry with the environment' and that he is 'very passionate and concerned about this'. Mr Oliver claimed that when the project was first proposed by the council, it was to be carried out on a permissive basis such that the council would be facilitated in accessing the lands, but the lands would remain in his ownership and open so stock could travel across both sides of the farm. He submitted that his lands have a mix of soil types and this variety was essential, in that each part is integrated and grazed with the marshy area providing water during dry periods and the hilly areas providing respite during inclement weather conditions. Mr Oliver said the project, as approved by the granting, was different from the original, in that it now envisages a wider walk and cycleway. He submitted that he was assured by the council that the lands would remain open for stock to travel and that any fencing would only be constructed when they were required by the landowner and that the application to ACP was one based on his permission. Mr Oliver claimed he understood the project to initially comprise of a 2.5m-wide (8.2ft) 'informal track of a type that one would see in the countryside', but that the more recent, larger scheme now involved a 3.5m-wide (11.5ft) asphalt track with full fencing involving 'sheep wire and barbed wire'. The plaintiff said he was 'shocked' that after an initial agreement on the scheme, Galway County Council then said they would 'accept nothing less than full ownership' and sought the CPO. Mr Oliver argued that the 'fundamental basis of the scheme has been turned on its head' by the CPO and that the decision to do so was 'taken without cause or justification'. He further claimed that environmental assessments carried out and submitted to ACP related to the original scheme and that the new elements that arose in the CPO scheme were not previously considered for environmental impact. Ms Justice Farrell granted leave for the judicial review to Michael O'Donnell BL, instructed by Harrington & Co solicitors – for Mr Oliver – and adjourned the matter to September.
