Ethnic, national, and cultural identity of
second generation (ex-)Yugoslavian migrants
in Reutlingen, Germany
Graduate School of Social SciencesJune 2016 Name Student number Program 1st Supervisor 2nd Supervisor
Vera Caroline Brand 11124164
Master of Science Sociology Track Migration and Ethnic Studies Academic year 2015-2016
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Dr. Simona Vezzoli Dr. Sonja Fransen
Abstract... 2
Introduction... 3
1 Previous studies... 6
1.1 Integration and socio-economic factors...6
1.2 Personal relations...7 1.3 Discrimination...8 1.4 Co-ethnic environment...9 2 Theoretical framework...11 2.1 Identity theories...11 2.2 Ethnicity theories...13 2.3 Integration theories...16 3 Research context... 18 3.1 Yugoslavia... 18 3.2 Reutlingen... 19
3.3 Methodology and methods...21
4 Research results... 26
4.1 Reutlingen... 26
4.2 Family influence...30
4.3 Personal migrant characteristics...32
4.4 Identification... 36
4.5 Discussion... 42
Summary and conclusion...49 References... Annex I: Detailed statistics of Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen... Annex II: Participants' societal characteristics... Annex III: Participants' (dis-)identification and reasons for it...
Abstract
This master's thesis examines which ethnic, national or cultural identity second generation mi-grants develop as they are situated in-between two different affiliations – on the one hand their migration background and the other the majority society they were born into. Additionally, the aim is to find out what kind of internal (personal) and external (societal, parental) factors shape the identity formation process. As a specific example, this research concentrates on young adults who have grown up in the German city of Reutlingen in the Southern federal state of Baden-Württemberg and are descendants of immigrants from the present-day successor states of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The migration backgrounds include Bos-nians, Kosovars, Croatians, MacedoBos-nians, Montenegrines, Serbians, and Slovenians. The study has its basis in constructivist theoretical knowledge about identity, ethnicity, and integration, as well as background information about the complex ethnic and national situation in the recent history of Yugoslavia and migrant statistics in Reutlingen. The qualitative research method was conducted in the form of 15 in-depth interviews with participants from the unit of observation.
The findings show that second generation Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen identify primar-ily with their specific ethnic, national, and cultural migration background. Some may additionally weakly identify as nationally German or culturally Yugoslavian. A strong identification with the migration background is due to internal motives of bilingualism, ethnic descent, culture, and tra-ditions, and external factors of social relations. The weak German identification can be ex-plained by the limitation and attractiveness of available identities. An ethnic German identity is not ascribed to them externally and a national German identity is not a personal preference of migrants. Yugoslavian identification is likewise weak because Yugoslavia itself does not exist any more – neither in national nor in ethnic terms – and it is oriented at cultural elements shared together with the co-ethnic community in Reutlingen. However, enduring ethnic tensions exhib-ited by the first generation have a negative external influence on the Yugoslavian identification of the second generation. Finally, the research findings contribute significantly to current soci-ological literature as they reveal profound differences to previous studies and introduce new knowledge about the factors which shape the formation of identities.
Keywords: Baden-Württemberg; discrimination; constructivism; culture; ethnicity; Germany; identification; identity; integration; migrant; migration background; qualitative research; Reutlingen; second generation; young adults; Yugoslavians
Introduction
Within sociological studies about identity formation, second generation migrants take a spe-cial place. They do not have their own migration experience and they are born into a world in which their parents are or used to be foreigners. As the second generation may be socialised under the influence of two or more completely different cultures, their ethnic or cultural identity may be profoundly different from their parental generation. Additionally, not all children of immig-rants develop the same identity. Identities can differ. They may differ among the single persons and among the migrant groups as well as among the different societies receiving the migrants. There are varying aspects as to what kind of identity descendants from immigrants develop. Thus, identity studies have to account for all these varying aspects. The question is not only which individual identity is developed but whether this individual identity matches the group identity. Furthermore, the point of interest is the specific reasons that are guiding the identity formation process in a certain direction. It is a complex puzzle which needs to be deconstructed into all of its single fragments to be understood comprehensively.
Previous research has made great advances in this field, however, some issues are still unre-solved. Identity studies of migrants in Germany mostly consider the result of the process but they do not observe the process itself. Indeed, they reveal which identity – on a macro-level – applies to specific second generation migrant groups. The studies show us that there is a con-siderable difference between migrant groups. In their identity, Yugoslavians are much more ori-ented towards Germany than for example the Turkish. A lot of explanations are discussed – in-cluding discrimination, language, and co-ethnic relations as the most plausible ones. It is also known that identity formation is a dual process, influenced by internal and external factors which seek a balance between the identity ascribed by others and their own self-identification. How-ever, it is still unclear exactly when, how, and why in some instances there is stronger associ-ation with the parent's ethnic or cultural identity than in others. So far, we do not fully understand the process of identity formation and cannot explain it with prevailing empirical knowledge.
This circumstance is surprising, considering that identity of migrants' and their succeeding generations are of great sociological relevance. It not only informs us about the majority society but also has consequences for it (Platt 2014: 46). Recently, Germany has officially been de-clared by Chancellor Angela Merkel as an immigrant country. Migrants' role in society is an is-sue which definitely deserves more academic attention. How migrants and their descendants in-tegrate and identify with their receiving society presumably may have great consequences on Germany's societal, economic, and political future. With profound theoretical and empirical knowledge there is a possibility to exert influence on the situation in a positive way for both
mi-grants and the receiving society.
For this reason, this master's thesis aims to obtain more detailed information about the pro-cess and reasons that lead to a certain formation of identity among second generation migrants in Germany. This research examines the case of a specific second generation migrant group in a distinct regional area – young adults of Yugoslavian descent in the city of Reutlingen in the federal state Baden-Württemberg. Reutlingen shows quite exceptional migrant statistics for a city of its size – in federal as well as in national comparison. With just somewhat more than 100,000 inhabitants, 37,5% of the whole population are migrants. This is a figure which could be expected to be found for a larger city like Stuttgart, the capital of the federal state. Moreover, Reutlingen is extraordinary when it comes to the composition of migrants. Yugoslavians and their descendants are, in terms of numbers, the dominant group in the city – slightly more than the Turkish (Stadt Reutlingen 2015: 42). Taking Reutlingen with its exceptional characteristics as a field of research gives new empirical evidence as the existence of a large co-ethnic com-munity adds a new dimension to previous research.
The study does not only focus on the society of Reutlingen with its external influences on identity formation but also on the internal factors which are obtained through the individual mi-gration background. The research includes descendants from immigrants who left the respect-ive successor states of the former Republic of Yugoslavia when the Republic fell apart as a res-ult of internal conflict. This time saw the emergence of diverging and heightened notions of dif-ferent ethnic, national, religious, or collective forms of Yugoslavian identities, which may have strongly influenced how children were educated. Different family backgrounds and personalities may result in certain cultural identities, deviating from the ones of their cohorts who actually ex-perience the same societal environment. Also, the relations among different second generation Yugoslavian nationalities or ethnicities are to be observed in order to find out if they are still con-flict ridden, indifferent, or marked by a notion of group membership. The characteristics of these relations may give valuable clues to understand how or to which extent the connection to other Yugoslavians leads to an active identification with Yugoslavia.
The main research question can be formulated as following. What kind of cultural and ethnic identity do second generation Yugoslavians in Reutlingen belong to? I have to distinguish not only between Germany and their parents' country of origin but also I have to consider a third possibility – a collective Yugoslavian identity. The sub-questions concern the motives influencing the identity formation process. What are the external factors of the societal environment in Reut-lingen that are affecting the second generation identities? It includes not only the majority soci-ety with the other second generation Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen and their relations among each other, but also the influence of the family. Secondly, which factors of their personal
characteristics and migration background shape their identity formation process from the intern-al perspective?
As a basis for the research, the first chapter reviews previous studies that have been done about migrants', respectively second generation Yugoslavian migrants', identity in Germany pre-viously. These studies shed light on which results can be expected and which aspects should be considered, as there are factors such as integration and socio-economic factors, personal rela-tions, discrimination, and the co-ethnic environment. On the basis of previous findings, I con-structed a theoretical framework for the thesis research in the second chapter. The framework refers to sociological theories about identity, ethnicity and integration which are based upon modern constructivist perspectives on the topic.
Before the results are presented, the third chapter at first depicts the context of the research. This includes a short portrayal of the complex ethnic situation Yugoslavia features, as well as a brief description of the city of Reutlingen with its migration characteristics. Furthermore, the chapter specifies the methods and methodology. The research was conducted in form of 15 an-onymous interviews with second generation Yugoslavian migrants – young adults who have grown up and are still living in Reutlingen. The qualitative interviews allowed an examination of the topic in great detail in order to figure out exactly which reasons are influencing the identity formation process.
The fourth chapter comprises the main part of this thesis – the research analysis. It shows the main findings about external influences through living in Reutlingen – including the societal en-vironment of the city, experiences of discrimination and whether a Yugoslavian community ex-ists and in form of social contacts such as daily encounters, friendships, and relationships. Fur-ther possible external influences are their families because of different migration experiences and ethnic thinking. Internal factors are portrayed with the personal characteristics of the mi-grants, where I observe participants' connection to their parents' country of origin, their official nationality, language skills, cultural activities, as well as their religious affiliation. The next part of the fourth chapter depicts how the participants identify themselves and which of the following reasons are prevalent – German (dis-)identification, (dis-)identification with the migration back-ground, and Yugoslavian (dis-)identification. Lastly, the discussion compares the findings of the research with previous studies using the theoretical framework to analyse and interpret, and to eventually answer the main research question and the sub-questions in the last chapter.
1 Previous studies
There is already a wide range of scientific studies about migrants in Germany which are use-ful to draw comparisons from regarding this thesis research about second generation Yugoslavi-ans' identity in Reutlingen. However, a closer examination of existing studies revealed a lack of academia, to be closed by this research and to enrich empirical academic knowledge in the field of cultural and ethnic identity. In the following, the previous studies are classified into different factors which stand in causality to migrants' identity: Integration and socio-economic factors, personal relations, discrimination, and the co-ethnic environment. It is important to choose soci-ological theories which are of importance to the topic from these four different strands of stud-ies. Together, the first chapter about previous studies and the next chapter of the theoretical framework build the basis for the thesis research.
1.1 Integration and socio-economic factors
The most recent integration research published six years ago by the German government about the largest immigrant groups demonstrates a positive trend for Yugoslavians. In comparis-on to Turkish, Italians and Greeks, Yugoslavian naticomparis-onals score quite well or even better in rank-ings about school education, vocational training, average earnrank-ings or German language skills. Identification with Germany was revealed to be strongest among Yugoslavians with about 75% of the respondents indicating that they feel a strong sense of belonging. Accordingly, Yugoslavi-ans also presented the migrant group which feels the least attached to the country of origin – only 73% indicated a strong feeling of belonging. Yet it is unclear if the weak attachment may be due to the choice of term, because the publication only uses “Former Yugoslavia“ instead of the particular Yugoslavian countries. The numbers furthermore show that both identifications with either the country of origin or the receiving country are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Also, Yugoslavians often have a sense of well-being in Germany and being in a cultural association relating to the country of origin is less common for them than for other migrants (BaMF 2010: 155, 165, 169ff., 244ff., 249). This publication gives valuable information about the subject mat-ter, although the unit of analysis is incompatible to this thesis research. Besides, the fact that it is based on a broader level, focusing on whole Germany, the government study does not ad-dress the second generation exclusively but targets all migrants with foreign nationality. Less than 10% of them have already been born in Germany and the average age of the respondents with 42 years much higher than in this thesis research (BaMF 2010: 14, 41 242).
ob-serves the relation between social status and transnational ties among all immigrant groups in Germany. The findings indicate that the upper social category of migrants is more transnational. This means that higher economic, cultural and social capital is connected to a tendency for a stronger identification with the country of origin. Unfortunately it remains unclear whether this knowledge can be applied to the thesis research. Fauser only included the first generation of immigrants of every background which included 14% Yugoslavians. Also, the average age of re-spondents is 49 years old and so is not comparable to this thesis research, as well.
The cultural change in the process of integration among Yugoslavians in Germany is well ob-served by Constant et al. (2012) in data from 2005-2007. Societal characteristics like marriage age, family structure, birth behaviour, female labour force participation, or political interest alter from first to second generation becoming closer to the characteristics of natives. Yugoslavians are much better integrated than the Turkish who find themselves the least integrated. The second generation identifies more with Germany than the first generation and this change is slightly more significant for male than for female Yugoslavians. Correspondingly, for men more than for women, the identification with the country of origin decreases. Interestingly, the identific-ation with Germany is in a medium range between the identificidentific-ation of Turkish, Greek, Italian, or Spanish migrants with Germany while the identification with the country of origin is for Yugoslavians much less than among the other groups. It applies to both generations of migrants (Algan et al. 2012: 91, 93, 95, 100, 102, 108f, 111). Does that mean Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen indeed feel less sense of belonging to the country of origin but the emotional belong-ing to Germany does not get equally stronger at the same time?
1.2 Personal relations
Other studies concerning both generations of immigrants showed positive relations between having inter-ethnic friendships and belonging to the receiving society. In comparison to Turkish or Polish migrants, Schulz and Leszczensky (2015) proved that Yugoslavians have a higher identification with Germany when they have native friends than Turkish or Polish migrants do. However, the Yugoslavian respondents had a low share of native friends just like Turkish. Al-though the authors do not have an explanation for the causes, they interpret the causality with ethnic boundaries. These boundaries are either prominent or more blurred among different mi-grant groups. Between Yugoslavians and Germans, ethnic boundaries are less defined and therefore allow a new identification more easily. In addition to Schulz and Leszczensky, the causality between inter-ethnic relations and identification is examined by Schacht et al. (2014). They also show that identification is an after effect resulting from increasing inter-ethnic
friend-ships. However, native friendships increase with the succeeding generations, and are higher among Yugoslavians than other migrant groups. This fact is also confirmed by Esser (1990), who says that second generation Yugoslavians cultivate less intra-ethnic contacts than Turkish migrants. These findings may imply for my research that national identification with Germany should be higher for the second generation Yugoslavians. Again, the authors do not give explan-ations for this causality. Concerning the theory of blurred boundaries, the study of Schacht et al. (2014) can be interpreted in a way that says discrimination is not as strongly correlated with dis-identification from the host society. Second generation Yugoslavians are said to experience more discrimination than the same generation of Italians or Greeks, but they simultaneously identify themselves more as German and less with the original identity than Italians and Greeks do (Schacht et al. 2014: 453).
As noticeable, the previous studies partly differ in their findings. Esser and Schacht et al. dis-covered that Yugoslavians have more native friends while Schulz and Leszczensky do deny this circumstance. It becomes clear how it important it is to specify the field of research on a more locally limited level. Generalisations on a broader societal level are difficult and the previous studies do not reveal any information about the specific characteristics of migrants in Reut-lingen. Also, the situation of “blurred boundaries” (Schulz and Leszczensky 2015) between Yugoslavian migrants and natives is in contrary to a high level of discrimination Yugoslavians re-portedly face (Schacht et al. 2014).
1.3 Discrimination
While Schacht et al. (2014) stated that discrimination is not of significance for identification, Celik (2015) reported the complete opposite for second generation Turkish youth in Germany. Celik reported that discrimination and social exclusion by natives leads to a strong dis-identifica-tion with Germany. The confrontadis-identifica-tion leads to the adopdis-identifica-tion of an opposidis-identifica-tional identity called re-active ethnicity. It is a kind of coping strategy. The official nationality the Turkish migrants obtain is not important hereby; their perceived discrimination does not change with a German citizen-ship. For this reason, giving up their Turkish nationality in order to achieve the German one can be described as a sacrifice of their identity. It seems like Turkish second generation migrants as-sign an important meaning to their official citizenship. Thus, does official nationality also has a strong strong emotional relevance for Yugoslavians' identification?
Admittedly, Turkish migrants are recognised as more disadvantaged as Yugoslavians in Ger-man society – but how can a second generation migrants' background be defined as disadvant-aged? Are Yugoslavian immigrants who came to Germany during the war better situated than
the Turkish immigrants? Studies about the Turkish in Germany often focus on their disadvant-aged situation because of their Muslim religion. As Fleischmann and Phalet (2012) suggest, reli-giosity of second generation Turkish in Berlin is incompatible with integration. The German soci-ety is more anti-Islamic than some other Western European countries' capital cities, as Islam is not institutionally recognised. However, one has to bear in mind that Yugoslavians can have an Islam faith as well. Are Muslim Yugoslavians with a strong belief less well integrated than other Yugoslavians? Or does this finding in fact not arise from religious affiliation alone, but also de-pends on the ethnic or national difference in the migration background? Discrimination and so-cial exclusion should be a very important aspect of this thesis research.
1.4 Co-ethnic environment
Uslucan (2008) shows how important it is to see identification with Germany and identification with the country of origin as two aspects independent from each other. In contrast to other stud-ies, Uslucan finds that the second generation Turkish showed that they do not feel belonging to a German identity at all because they had to choose between two possibilities. If the question would have addressed both identifications separately, the respondents may have given different and more exact information. The important findings of her study are related to the theory of sym-bolic ethnicity1. Uslucan shows that some persons may feel belonging to an ethnic group al-though they do not obtain the same culture anymore, and neither do they have personal contact to this ethnicity. For Turkish in Germany, point of reference for collective Turkish identity is often the Turkish community in Germany. Even when they still have contact to the country of origin, the lived and shared experiences of daily life in the Turkish community within Germany has more influence on their identity formation. This orientation at other Turkish in a German context does not establish a stronger German identification though. Eventually, the collective identity within the migrant community is for the majority not mutually exclusive with a positive orientation towards the German society.
The study which is most comparable to the thesis research, is the one of Sürig and Wilmes (2011). They observe the second generation of Yugoslavians of an age between 18 and 35 years and compare them to their Turkish and native cohorts in their ethnic and cultural belong-ing. The field of research is the two German cities of Berlin and Frankfurt. Their question for identification with Germany is strongly affirmed among Yugoslavians, much more so than amongst the Turkish and almost is almost as high as amongst native Germans. While the Turk-ish tend to conform to TurkTurk-ish identity, Yugoslavians rather reject Yugoslavian identity – no mat-ter whether specific or general Yugoslavian identity. When deciding between the specific
Yugoslavian national or ethnic identities, the collective Yugoslavian belonging is less often rejec-ted than the specific Yugoslavian belongings. The authors mention language as probably the most influencing factor. When talking to parents, friends or partner, German is more commonly used among Yugoslavians than among Turkish. The less German oriented identity of Turkish migrants is mainly explained with the fact that they are the largest migrant group and therefore have more opportunities to continue their own ethnic practices and to interact in their native lan-guage. The Yugoslavians are automatically more oriented to the German context. Considering this fact is true for Berlin and Frankfurt but not for Reutlingen where the Yugoslavian community is slightly bigger than the Turkish one (Stadt Reutlingen 2015: 42), different findings may occur among different regional fields of research.
Previous research gives a range of possibilities for reasons that foster identification or dis-identification with the receiving society and the country of origin. Yet it is still unclear which one is actually of relevance for second generation Yugoslavians in Reutlingen, and also to which ex-tent. Indeed, existing academic research in this field gives valuable insight and advises which aspects are important to observe. No previous study focuses on the specific unit of observation or on the same societal environment though. They consider all generations or only the first gen-eration, different or all migrant groups mixed, and different age groups. Causes are not pro-foundly explored and societal characteristics are nearly impossible to compare when studies are done at state level or for different regions. Therefore, no comprehensive or accurate information can be extrapolated about ethnic and cultural identities of second generation Yugoslavians in Reutlingen. This specific group in this distinct German society has to be studied exclusively to find out about the detailed processes and causes of ethnic, cultural, and national identity forma-tion. As this thesis research is not comparable to previous studies, this new empiric knowledge can be attributed to academic sociological literature. Additionally, the next chapter adds a theor-etical framework about identity, ethnicity, and integration which expands on the background knowledge given by previous studies.
2 Theoretical framework
The theoretical framework is based on three sets of sociological theories which are of use for the research. These theories are about identity, ethnicity, and integration. Discussing them re-veals significant insights and also interferences among them. The combination of identity, ethni-city, and integration theories contributes to another dimension which is of importance to under-stand the process of identity formation of second generation migrants more accurately.
2.1 Identity theories
Identity “can suggest ways in which people conceive of themselves and are characterised by others" (Vertovec 2001: 573). This specification is of importance for this sociological elaboration – the fact that a distinction must be made between two analogue processes that influence the formation. "Identities are seen to be generated in, and constructed through, a kind of internal (self-attributed) and external (other-ascribed) dialectic conditioned within specific social worlds." (Vertovec 2001: 573). This notion implies that identities given to the individual or the group do not have to be congruent with the identity of one's own choice. It raises the question what kind of consequences the discrepancy between the different identity ascription has on the internal, personal process of identity formation.
Ben-Rafael and Sternberg (2015: 158f.) point to the fact that other external factors have signi-ficant influence on the emergence, retention or weakening of ethnicity. As the most important criteria they name the socio-economic conditions of the ethnicity member within the receiving society, including politics and the mainstream societies' approach to the minority group. Ger-many is often used as an example and described as a society with a völkisch understanding of ethnicity. This mentality depicts immigrants with another cultural or ethnic background as out-siders from the dominant culture. Former Yugoslavian guest worker immigrants have been at-tached with a permanent ethnic minority identity by the mainstream society, without the possibil-ity to become German. Because of external forces, migrants' options for or attractiveness of identities are heavily influenced and restricted (Nagel 1994: 156, 161). Identity is not only the balance between self-identification and external identification though. For migrants, ethnic iden-tity is additionally the balance between self-identification with the ethnic origin, and the self-iden-tification with the culture of the receiving society (Constant et al. 2012: 72). Migrants have to ad-just their identity to different ethnic or cultural possibilities of belonging, and this situation may apply to the first as well as to the second generation.
one has to be aware that the term identity is not always used unambiguously. Migrants' identity is either described or even interchangeably used with ethnicity and culture. In the case of the second generation who do not have a migration experience themselves, the issue of nationality is problematic as well. The identity of the first generation may be congruent in nationality and ethnicity, while the succeeding generation who were not born in the country the nationality and ethnicity originally belongs to may not be. The situation requires making distinction between eth-nicity and nationality. While the parental generation is not directly confronted with identity change in terms of nationality after migration, the offspring has never experienced living in an-other nation-state from the one she or he was born into. They have the option between various identities. Of course, nationality is defined by rules of law which can be different in each country, and is ultimately defined by the official passport the respective person possesses. However, na-tional identity is also based on the feeling the individual perceives. It is not only the affirmation written on paper, but in the sociological context of this study it is more the emotional belonging the person ascribes to her- or himself. In Germany, children of immigrants usually can decide between the nationality of their parents and the German one, as they have acquired their par-ents' nationality by birth and are allowed to obtain the German one after growing up in Germany. Thus, their official nationality is mostly dependent on the one they chose. As this choice can be done either rationally or emotionally, or by their parents, the official nationality is not considered as crucial for this distinction. The focus of this thesis relies on the nationality the migrants emo-tionally belong to.
Concluding, I observe identity as a mix of cultural, national and ethnic feelings of belonging. Indeed, identity is defined by further features such as character, gender, occupation, or social status as well. However, these features can be ascribed to any person. German natives without migration background do not have the option to decide between different ethnic, national or cul-tural identities. In the case of second generation migrants, issues of culture, ethnicity, and na-tionality are more conspicuous. This is an important aspect which deserves greater attention when studying this group in the German context. The aim is to find out whether nowadays the völkisch interpretation of ethnicity still applies to the second generation to understand how they are positioned in society and which external ascriptions they face. Are they, or do they feel cat-egorized as different; and what kind of consequences does this circumstance have on their self-identification? Also, the question arises how second generation Yugoslavians in Reutlingen counterbalance the situation between different possibilities of cultural identities. To which iden-tity do they feel more attracted? Respectively, to which extent do they feel attached to it and are both identities mutually exclusive or not? It will be also interesting to see what the personal reasons are for identification and whether these reasons are universal or profoundly different
from person to person.
2.2 Ethnicity theories
Ethnicity is a commonly used term in scholarly work – though the meaning and interpretation is multiple and ambiguous. In sociology, Barth's Ethnic Groups and Boundaries (1969) marked an important turn in the discourse away from primordialist and perennialist approaches which differentiated distinct social groups among cultural attributes such as a common language, des-cent, religion, history or certain habits. Those characteristics, given by birth and depicting the social world (Wimmer 2008: 971) were perceived as "something relatively or firmly stable, per-sistent and exact" (Malesevic 2004: 3). This view forms the hypothesis of the existence of sev-eral unique groups with enduring ethnic-related phenomena over the course of time (Ben-Rafael and Sternberg 2015: 157). Barth made a break in this traditional understanding for a more mod-ern sociological approach which focuses on the social relations. Differences between social groups become visible only by interactions between those social groups or individuals. Cultural characteristics cannot be ascribed without having a connection to an opposed comparison. Also, attributes are changing precisely because of the established contact between different groups. In the end, social relations result in the eventual product of ethnic boundaries, categor-ising us and them (Malesevic 2004: 2f.). This relational approach is also called circumstantial-ism or constructivcircumstantial-ism. It focuses on ethnicity as a product, socially constructed through labelling due to interactions. In this view, ethnicity is not automatically given by birth but rather a process, respectively a choice. By extension, individuals are not limited to only one identity. The instru-mentalist or situationalist approach indicates that it is possible to choose between various iden-tities, depending on which one serves the individual's particular self-interest in the certain situ-ation. Ethnic group formation may change, as it can be constantly de-constructed and re-con-structed (Ben-Rafael and Sternberg 2015: 157; Nagel 1994: 152; Wimmer 2008: 971).
Hall (1990) also stresses the fact that a cultural identity is not a reference which is completely persistent. It is a rather unstable construct, which constantly transforms over time and within his-torical and cultural discourse. Precisely in the context of Yugoslavia, Hall's theory is a very im-portant point. The region has undergone major changes during the recent history. Nations were founded or re-founded, and relations between the countries or ethnicities have been shaken up profoundly. These varying belongings and relations in a complex and shifting historical dis-course could result in identity constructions which are completely demarcated from identity con-structions of other immigrants' descents from different migration backgrounds.
groups are not only evolutionary but they can also emerge in a completely new form without re-lying on ancient distinctions. This process may be given in the situation of migration, as former cultural structures are abruptly interrupted. Immigrants' children all at sudden have to adjust to a new social environment with different relations and processes shaping their identity – pulled out of the original context which has shaped this ethnic identity before. Nagel (1994: 154) also shows another possibility of how immigrants' descendants can form their identity, drawing back on Gans (1979) with his term symbolic ethnicity. It is a rather contradictory process, in which ethnic boundaries get blurred and practice of the cultural heritage is lost even though the identi-fication with the family background is heightened. Symbolic ethnicity is "characterized by a nos-talgic allegiance to the culture of the immigrant generation, or that of the old country; a love for and pride in a tradition that can be felt without having to be incorporated in everyday behaviour" (Gans 1979: 205). Identification with the parents' ethnicity can be simply an emotional attach-ment without the person portraying any of the ethnic group characteristics themselves.
The constructivist approach on ethnicity was fundamentally advanced through the cognitive perspective by Brubaker (2002, 2004) who made a very important contribution to the under-standing of the term. Brubaker (2004: 332) describes ethnicity not as “a thing in the world, but a perspective on the world”. A cognitive perspective enriches the sociological understanding of ethnicity, because it avoids to fall in the trap of groupism which leads back to the now obsolete approaches that preceded constructivism. Groupism categorises abstract social entities into bounded and persistent groups by ascribing them common characteristics. On the ground of constructivism, Brubaker again focuses on the social relations inbetween. The difference is to be found in the way the social world is experienced, seen, and interpreted. The cognitive ap-proach works with mental schemas. These are culturally shared mental structures which func-tion automatically, outside the conscious awareness. Constructivism seeks to explain why ethnic identity is constructed, that is to say as a result of the interactions. Cognitivism, on the other hand, seeks to explain how identity is constructed, namely because of mental schemas which are influencing the way the relations are unconsciously interpreted. Theoretical knowledge about cognitivism will be useful to find out whether identity formation is a deliberate action due to a thoughtful decision making process or rather an unconscious emotional attachment in con-sequence of a cognitive process.
Interestingly, Brubaker simultaneously does not deny the importance of the ability to classify or categorise ethnicity because it is simply a basic necessity for an individual to function in everyday social life. Indeed, artificial reification is a human habit. The need to ascribe distinct groups with a perceived collective identity is a common social practice. Yet this ingrained every-day practice should not be used in scholarly work. Academics have to avoid acting like an
eth-nopolitical entrepreneur to not confirm already existing and not to create new artificial boundar-ies (Brubaker 2002: 166, 175; Brubaker et al. 2004: 41, 43ff.). Another remark Brubaker (2002: 177) makes is the fact that groupness does not remain at a constant high level if it is not en-forced any more. Groupness, he argues, is the intensity and phases of ethnic cohesion that maintains the belonging to a group. Accordingly to the constructivist approach which says that identity is not necessarily persistent over time, an individual's identification with a certain ethni-city, nationality or culture needs to be enforced through some factor in order not to get lost. Brubaker stresses the importance of this process, yet it is less often studied scientifically – a gap in the literature this thesis research may be able to fill.
When it comes to second generation immigrants, it becomes clear that traditional perspect-ives are even less applicable. One is not born with a distinct array of ethnic descriptions but in-fluenced by relations with the surrounding society. As the society changes due to migration, the relational processes shaping identities change as well. These constructivist processes are to be observed among the second generation in Reutlingen. Is their ethnicity influenced by a historical discourse, taking on a completely new shape, or just a symbolic image of their migration back-ground? Also, according to Brubaker, the research does not generalise characteristics about the receiving majority society. Here, the focus lies on a smaller scale, the city of Reutlingen, without universalising characteristics to Germany. Of course, a single city could be defined as a group as well, but the boundaries are very blurred as the population is not enclaved in this limited urb-an area. Ethnopolitical reification is a particularly sensitive topic in the case of Yugoslavia with its recent violent past. Though Yugoslavia does not exist as an associated nation-state any more, the decision was not to pick out a single nationality or ethnicity but rather to include all former Yugoslavian entities. Before any research took place, it was quite unclear whether it would be at all possible to speak of different groups with each a shared identity. Yugoslavia is a complex mosaic of ethnicities, nationalities, religions and cultures - often not clearly separated from each other. Therefore it is a reasonable decision not to accentuate a single Yugoslavian country, which follows the approach of Brubaker to avoid groupism.
2.3 Integration theories
Sociological discourse about immigrant integration is almost as indistinct as the ones about identity. There is a wide range of theoretical knowledge – about classic or contemporary mod-els, micro- and macro-sociological concepts as well as different kinds of definitions in ideology and empiricism. In academic literature, integration is often mixed up, explained by, or inter-changeably used with other terms such as assimilation, acculturation, multiculturalism, adaption, or absorption (Hamberger 2009: 2-4; Schunck 2014: 9-11). Speaking about the second genera-tion of migrants, integragenera-tion may become an even more complex and debatable issue. The per-sons concerned in this research do not have a migration experience themselves, yet they may be in the same position between different identities which was comparable to first generation im-migrants. The major difference between first and second generation, however, is that second generation migrants usually do not differ from natives in their mother tongue, natural familiarisa-tion with the cultural environment of the receiving society, as well as in their civic rights2. As the second generation is already born into the receiving society, they may not make active, rational choices about some issues concerning integration. For example, they do not choose between learning, or how well to learn the native language; or they may not always be able to distinguish exactly where the boundaries between minority and majority cultural habits are set.
A clear definition for the purpose of this study is given by Constant et al. (2012: 73) who define integration as "an amalgam of both dedication to and identification with the origin and commitment and conformity to the host society". Whereas assimilation is defined by them as "a pronounced identification with the host culture and society, coupled with a firm conformity to the norms, values, and codes of conduct of the host country. Self-identification with the country of origin is almost wiped out". Platt (2014) describes the inevitable process of assimilation towards identification with the majority society, but also points out that identification with the majority and identification with the minority can be two different processes running independent from each other. In her study, Platt found that a hostile environment indeed influences assimilation negat-ively, but it does not push towards identification with the ethnic origin. Portes and Zhou (1993) enhanced the assimilation theory towards segmented assimilation. They showed that a select-ive adaption into the mainstream society is a strategy for the second generation resulting in higher social mobility. Yet the success of this strategy depends on the context, on the hostility faced from the receiving society or the social capital provided by the co-ethnic community, it can result in either upward or downward mobility. These definitions of integration and assimilation are of course not the only possible characteristics the relationship between migrants and society can take shape. Another possibility could be the case of marginalisation, where there is neither
an identification with the majority nor the minority culture, and the case of separation, where the migrants exclusively feel attached to the identity of their ethnic origin (Constant et al. 2012: 73).
Another definition I would like to include is about acculturation, which is described as a sub-process rather than an actual status. " [...] immigrants experience cultural change" and "begin to take on the cultural elements of the receiving society: language, style of dress, diet, religion, val-ues, and taste of music" (Hamberger 2009: 7). During this transition, the elements which are less significant for cultural identification within the minority are being abandoned earlier while the more important cultural traits endure (Hamberger 2009: 7). Of course, this process is not limited to the lifetime of a single migrant, but endures over generations. Possibly, the succeed-ing generations are more intensively affected by the process because the change could be quicker with the appearance of a new generation which is more exposed to the culture of the re-ceiving society as the previous one was. According to Rose (1969: 33), it is also important to consider three different factors which can determine the course the process takes. It is the dif-ference between the majority and minority culture, the openness of the receiving society, as well as the degree of commitment to the country of origin migrants feel. In the unit of observation, this consideration is particularly complex as there are a variety of different religions, ethnicities, or physical appearances at hand. It will remain to be seen, if disparities among different Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen are observable. Perhaps, any visible disparities may offer valuable clues to what factors are of particular importance to the formation of distinct identities.
This sub-chapter shows the relevance of the integration debate for this research because the process of integration or assimilation is directly linked to identity. From this perspective, integra-tion theories can be seen as intimately connected with changing ethnic or cultural identificaintegra-tion. These perceptions are building the theoretical basis for the research. According to the previous definitions, integration is a condition resulting out of the process of acculturation, respectively it is the gradual vanishing of an ethnic minority identity. The eventual result may be assimilation, though it is disputable when or whether at all this status is attained. Is the process inevitable, as stated in sociological theory (Hamberger 2009: 7; Zhou 1997: 976)? How do second generation migrants in Reutlingen embody the acculturation process and in which state are they to acquire – integration or assimilation? Or are approaches to marginalisation and separation more suit-able? As the research only addresses one generation, the process will be difficult to observe be-cause the information about the parental immigrant generation relies on the personal state-ments given by the second generation. Yet it will be interesting to find out which elestate-ments are of intrinsic importance for the cultural and ethnic identification as perceived by Yugoslavian parti-cipants in Reutlingen. To help answering these questions, the next chapter will give a better un-derstanding of both the unit of observation and the field of research.
3 Research context
Having clarified existing information about previous research and theory in the academic field of second generation migrants' identity, I can specify this thesis research by defining the context of the study. Firstly, this includes background knowledge about Yugoslavia and what regional information from this illustrates about the migration background of Yugoslavians in Germany. Secondly, the city of Reutlingen will be portrayed with its typical characteristics and migrant statistics, in particular statistics about Yugoslavian migrants. And thirdly, the last sub-chapter contains the methodology and methods used in the research including the specification of the unit of analysis and observation.
3.1 Yugoslavia
A prerequisite for a comprehensive understanding of identity formation of second generation migrants is a basic awareness of the cultural, ethnic, and national heritage their parents' region of origin bears. Neither Yugoslavia nor its single regions – with Slovenia being the only excep-tion – are historically completely homogeneous in their composiexcep-tion. Different tribes have settled in these areas and different empires have reigned over the territories – the Venetian, the Austro-Hungarian and the Ottoman. Those groups were often mobile and interactive on local level but not necessarily hostile. As a result of this, divisions between the empires and the ethnic groups did overlap (Hammel et al. 2010: 1099). The region was and still is a complex mosaic of multiple ethnicities, religions, languages, and nationalities. A large diaspora lives outside its native territ-ory. At some point in history, almost every nation or group has had the intention to expand or did expand its territory – forcing the others to defend their own identity. This led to several wars in the Balkan in the beginning of the 20th century (Pesic 1996: 9-13).
In 1945, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was founded under Josip Broz Tito as its authoritarian leader. It was a non-aligned federation of the six republics Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, plus the two autonomous provinces Kosovo and Vojvodina within Serbia. The federation united all the different ethnic groups. But the establishment of a Yugoslavian nation-state was not planned, as it did not fit into the communist doctrine. Sustaining strong ethnic, national, religious, or cultural identities under pan-Yugoslavian leadership later became the main cause for the weakening of the bond. This happened as soon as the socialist-communist ideology diminished with Tito's death, whose au-thoritarian rule kept Yugoslavia together (Pesic 1996: 9-13). National interests differed pro-foundly from separatism to integration and the strong nationalist rhetoric of political leaders
res-ulted in fear and mistrust between the different ethnicities. During the late 1980s and the early 1990s, Yugoslavian identity was eroded as economic and political crises caused the fall of com-munism. On 25th June 1991, Slovenia was the first republic to declare independence. Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo followed. During these times, the Western Balkan countries faced several devastating wars between 1991 and 1999 (UN ICTY n. d.).
The result of this recent historical process is that the region of Yugoslavia nowadays consists of seven independent countries: Nevertheless, a much more complex pattern of different ethni-cities and nationalities which do not conform to national borders has emerged. Yet Yugoslavia as a nation-state does not exist anymore, I draw this research on the basis of the whole region instead of just one specific country. The ethnicities and nationalities are too interwoven to separ-ate a migrant group along national demarcations.
3.2 Reutlingen
Baden-Württemberg is a federal state of Germany and located in the south-west of the coun-try. The federal state is subdivided into several administrative regions with the region of Reut-lingen in a central position. The city of ReutReut-lingen is the biggest city within the far north-west of the administrative area of Reutlingen and 31 kilometres south of Stuttgart – the capital of the federal state. In the German regional planning system, Reutlingen and the neighbouring city of Tübingen form together a double centre which is a combination of two central cities due to their close geographical distance. Both cities keep administrative independence but supplement each other in their urban functionalities. Whereas Tübingen as a University city functions mainly as an educational hub, Reutlingen serves as a strong economic centre. In 1989, Reutlingen ex-ceeded 100.000 inhabitants and became the youngest of the nine major cities of Baden-Württemberg (Stadt Reultingen n.d.). Today, Reutlingen compromises 112.452 inhabitants3 (Stadt Reutlingen 2015: 13).
Concerning migration, the region shows quite exceptional statistics what makes it especially interesting as a local case study for the research. In 2014, Germany had a share of 20,3% people of migration background (Statistisches Bundesamt 2015: 7). With 27,1%, Baden-Württemberg already has the highest percentage of population with migration background amongst the whole population in comparison to the other territorial states (Statistisches Bundes-amt 2015). Usually, German municipalities with a population of 50.000 to less than 100.000 on average have a share of 24,4% migrants and those municipalities with more than half a million inhabitants an accordingly higher share of 29,1% (BpB 2015). However, Reutlingen shows a
much higher number of 37,5% which is both above the average federal and the average muni-cipality migrant stock. This statistical characteristic is rather exceptional and comes close to the largest cities of Germany. For example, Stuttgart has about 43%4 inhabitants of migration back-ground and Frankfurt am Main almost 50%5. The capital Berlin, with 28,6% (Amt für Statistik Berlin-Brandenburg 2015: 12), has even less migrants amongst the equivalent population than Reutlingen.
Additionally to this exceptional number of migrants, the composition of the migrant population is different to the one at nation state and federal state level. Usually, the largest migrant group in Germany is represented by the Turkish. They comprise 17,4% of all migrants, followed by the Polish (9,9%), people from the Russian Federation (7,3%) and Italians (4,7%) (Statistisches Bundesamt 2015: 7). In Reutlingen, people of Turkish migration background make up only about 12,2%, those of Italian background about 7,3%, those of Polish background about 6,7%, and those from the Russian Federation 4,3% of all inhabitants of migration background. Sum-marising all persons of migration background concerning Croatia, Serbia, Kosovo, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Republic of Yugoslavia, and the former Yugoslavian Re-public of Macedonia, people of Yugoslavian migration background have a share of 13,2% of all inhabitants with migration background (Stadt Reutlingen 2015: 42)6. Therefore, and rather un-usually in national comparison, Yugoslavian immigrants and their descendants display the largest migrant group in Reutlingen.
The frequency of different Yugoslavian nationalities is not equally distributed though. Croa-tians are by far the most common and cover more than 40% of the Yugoslavian migrant stock. With about 12 to 14%, Serbians, Bosnians, and those from the former Republic of Yugoslavia are about of the same size. Kosovo-Albanians represent approximately 10%. Slovenians and Macedonians are rather rare, each with a share of about only 4%. Migrants from Montenegro are not listed in the statistics though. The country is quite small and was most recently founded in 2006. Probably, Montenegrines do not appear in the statistics due to a very small amount of persons from this origin in Reutlingen.
Of all people of migration background in Reutlingen, 35% were born in Germany. They are the succeeding generations of migrants without their own migration experience. Among Yugoslavians, 36% belong to the generation born in Germany (2014) (Stadt Reutlingen 2015: 42). Yet it has to be mentioned that these statistics include the third generation as well if the par-ental generation has already been born in Germany but has not acquired German citizenship. If
4 As of 2015. The number is an own calculation, see Landeshauptstadt Stuttgart (n. d.).
5 As of 31.12.2014. The number is an own calculation, see Stadt Frankfurt am Main (2015: 15). 6 Percentage numbers are own calculations.
the parental generation has immigrated but already acquired German citizenship, the second generation is not included in the statistics. Also, the numbers are applied only to the city of Re-utlingen and do not include the outskirts, surrounding villages and a few smaller cities. There-fore, the statistics should not be seen as accurate numbers fitting to the research, but rather in-terpreted in a way describing the approximate migration situation in Reutlingen. The detailed statistics about Yugoslavians in the field of research are illustrated in the table of Annex I.
3.3 Methodology and methods
Next, I will describe the methodology and methods of this research context. Previous studies on second generation identity formation and my own theoretical framework suggest that I should adopt a constructivist approach as methodology. This choice is made on the basis that this study does not intend to draw universal conclusions on a broader level but to generate a better understanding of factors and meanings associated with social phenomena related to mi-cro-level identity formation processes. Identities are not a given reality in the world, but are both distributed and chosen due to social processes of interaction. They are constantly under (de-)construction, re-construction, and modification. Taking a constructivist stance, the examina-tion of ethnic, naexamina-tional, and cultural identities becomes much more comprehensive.
The underlying methodological approach influences the methods to do gather empirical data considerably. A mixed methods approach using both quantitative and qualitative analysis gives a higher degree of confidence in the accuracy of data (Castles 2012: 24). However, such a com-prehensive elaboration is not feasible in this research due to a lack of existing quantitative data specifically about second generation Yugoslavian migrants in Reutlingen, and also restricted possibilities which do not allow large scale quantitative methods. Available data on the field of research is limited to official migrant statistics as described in the previous chapter. This data will be complemented by subjective information given by interviewees. The research includes 15 in-depth, anonymous interviews with selected participants who match the characteristics of the target group. These qualitative interviews are conducted as a guided dialogue, a problem centred interview specified by both an inductive and deductive procedure. The previous theoret-ical, empirtheoret-ical, and statistical knowledge serves deductively during the interviews as an import-ant framework for stimulating the collection of relevimport-ant inductive data. At the same time, it is ne-cessary not to impose the previous knowledge on the respondents' view. Thus, the merits of the problem centred interview is to avoid a too naïve inductive approach as well as a too preoccu-pied deductive one (Witzel 2000).
and unrestricted answer possibilities. It may serve best to reconstruct the inner perspectives of the participants and makes it more feasible for me to relate to the information. The respondents are “considered experts of their orientations and actions” (Witzel 2000), and the data gathered during the interviews depicts the most important information of the research. In a flexible way, the interviewee is given the possibility to indicate further not yet addressed aspects about the thematic.
One risk which has to be considered is the possible influence that can be made by me as a researcher on the interviewees' narration during a face-to-face interview. Myself, I am a young woman just above the upper limit of the age of the target group. I am of German ethnicity and nationality though constantly mistaken as being of Yugoslavian descent. Yet it remains my inter-pretation whether my societal characteristics are influencing the interviewees' statements. A neutral behaviour of mine is necessary so as not to bias the collected data. This risk can be widely avoided by asking closed questions, giving considered reactions to the answers given, or presenting too much information about the researched sub-questions. Concurrently, an openly conducted interview presents the challenge to identify meaningful data within a vast amount of information and to draw exact comparisons between the different interviews as each has its own individual course.
Unit of analysis
The unit of analysis are young adults born in Germany to immigrants from the former Yugoslavia and living in the city or closer region of the city of Reutlingen in Baden-Württemberg. They are of an age between 18 and 26 years at the time of the research, which means they were born between 1989 and 1998. The reasons to select for these specific characteristics are explained in the following for each attribute separately.
The research focuses on those migrants who are born in Germany because they have a mi-gration background but are without their own mimi-gration experience. They are the second gener-ation descendants of immigrants from the ngener-ation-states which formerly belonged to the Republic of Yugoslavia. These nation-states comprise Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ser-bia, Macedonia, Montenegro, as well as Kosovo. In order to speak about Yugoslavia, all the dif-ferent nation-states or ethnicities must be represented.
The age span of the target group is narrowed down to between 18 and 26 years to concen-trate on young adults. The lower limit of the age span is chosen because 18 is an age which I assumed that identity formation is rather set. Children of minor age may not be independent enough from their parents in their decisions and social actions and still in the process of finding their identity. The upper limit of the age span was not that clear to decide upon. The idea was to
focus on persons whose parents emigrated around the time of the Yugoslavian wars during the 1990s. Those parents may have been influenced by the heightened notion of the ethnic and na-tional disparities as well as the joint-Yugoslavian situation before. With these contrasting experi-ences, the education they give to their children may be different from those parents who only experienced the cohesive republic. Since the literature states that the threat of war was immin-ent years before it broke out, I decided to expand the age span of the target group to include those born shortly before 1991 as well.
To narrow the study down to a distinct social environment, the research focuses on the city of Reutlingen exclusively. The reason lies in the incomparability of Yugoslavians among different German regions. Neither the migrants can be seen as a homogeneous group with equal charac-teristics in each part of Germany, nor the structures of the receiving German society. Though it is not the aim to make generalisations from a small number of interviews, the research tries to particularise as much as possible from the unit of observation in order to obtain significant find-ings. Participants match the target group if they are living in Reutlingen or in any smaller city of the closer periphery belonging to the city district.
Unit of observation
Mostly, it was not very difficult to find participants who match the characteristics defined in the unit of analysis. As the participants were reached via a broad range of channels, the actual unit of observation ended up rather diverse in terms of societal characteristics which is important to forestall any risk of a biased data as much as possible. For each of the 15 participants in detail, the information of these paragraphs is presented in the table of Annex II.
Gender is considered almost equally, with six female and nine male persons. The participants were born between 1989 and 1997 and the average age is 22 years. Social status I decided to indicate by both occupation and highest education as most of the participants are still in educa-tional or vocaeduca-tional training, due to their young age. The distribution is quite even, with higher secondary school students, university of applied sciences students, trainees for manual, com-mercial or industrial vocations, employees with manual or industrial vocational training and long-term unemployed with manual vocational training. Not represented at all is the lowest educa-tional status of no school degree, a lower secondary school degree without following vocaeduca-tional training, as well as the highest societal status of university education.
All interview partners have their residence directly in Reutlingen or any of the smaller sur-rounding cities or villages in the closer region. They are able to make a statement about the field of research even when residing outside as the outer cities do not offer the same urban func-tions. Education, training, work place, church, or leisure activities establish the interviewees'
connection to Reutlingen. Almost everybody was born in Germany – either in Reutlingen directly or in another city in Baden-Württemberg. Only three persons were born abroad. Numbers 11 and 14 came to Germany as an infant at the age of two months and one year, respectively. Clearly, both were not acculturated in their parents' country of origin. Number 12 was born in Montenegro and left the country at the age of four. I decided to include him to the unit of obser-vation as well, as the same applies to him as to numbers 11 and 14. As it was very challenging to find enough willing participants, I did not have the opportunity to choose in respect to the par-ents' year of migration. Yet most of the years are indeed allocated during or shortly before the Yugoslavian wars, there are only a few exceptional cases. Numbers 4 and 8 each have one par-ent who emigrated in the early 1980s. Only both parpar-ents of number 7 emigrated much earlier in the 1970s.
Presenting each Yugoslavian nationality or ethnicity equally is a very important point yet it proved to be the challenging part of this research. The different Yugoslavian nationalities or eth-nicities are not present in equal size in the migrant stock in Reutlingen, as shown in the previ-ous sub-chapter about Reutlingen. Macedonian migrants are in size the smallest group of all Yugoslavians in Reutlingen and thus, I could not manage to find a person of this migration back-ground. Furthermore, the parents' migration background is often complex or different for the mother than for the father, making the categorisation of participants into different Yugoslavian belongings not always distinct. In case of doubt like mixed marriages, I chose to categorise the person according to the belonging that the person presented her- or himself as.
Croatians who represent almost half of the migrant stock in Reutlingen were easier to access, leading to a slight over-representation in the interviewee sample. Only the parents of participant numbers 2 and 6 are both Croatians from Croatia though the parents of number 6 were origin-ally born in Kosovo. Number 4's parents are both Croatian but without any connection to Croatia as they are an ethnic minority from Bosnia. Number 3 has a Croatian mother who lived in Croa-tia but was born in Bosnia and a Kosovar father born in Germany, respectively a CroaCroa-tian step-father she lives with. Number 1's mother is Croatian but his step-father is Turkish. He asserted that he is barely Turkish influenced as he did not grow up with his father. Participant number 7 has partly Croatian ancestry as he comes from a mixed marriage, but categorised himself more as belonging to Bosnia as his parents are from this country. His mother is Croatian-Serbian and his father is Croatian-Bosniac7. The other Bosnian person is number 8 whose parents are both Bos-niac Muslims from Bosnia.
7 Officially, "Bosniac' refers to the ethnicity and 'Bosnian' to the nationality. Yet most interviewees used 'Bosnian' only as the term 'Bosniac' was introduced just during or after the war. I use both here for a better differentiation.
Kosovo is represented by participants 5 and 10 though both come from an ethnically mixed marriage. Number 5's father is Kosovo-Albanian while her mother is French. The mother was already born in Germany and number 5 asserts that there is no French influence on her life. Number 10's father is Kosovo-Albanian and his mother Greek. He said he is influenced by both ancestries yet I decided to include him as the information from the interview turned out to be of great value for the research. Participants 9 and 11 represent Slovenia with both having both par-ents from this country. Admittedly, the categorisation into second generation is only restrictively applicable to them. Number 9's parents have already been born in Germany though the mother returned to Slovenia for education. Number 11's has one parent – the father – who was also born in Germany but returned for several years to Slovenia and re-emigrated to Germany with the mother who was born in Slovenia. There was no exact second generation Slovenian parti-cipant in Reutlingen to find and the interviews showed that the Slovenian parents who were already born in Germany did not have any German influence at all on their children. The next country, Montenegro is presented by number 12 whose parents have both been an Albanian minority there. Number 13's parents also come from Montenegro but are of Serbian ethnicity. The parents of participants 14 and 15 are of Serbian ethnicity from a region which was formerly populated only by Serbians and today belongs to the Croatian territory. Both 14 and 15 state not to have any connection to Croatia. Their remaining family members abroad have moved to Ser-bia.
Together, the participants represent six of the seven countries in the region of the former Yugoslavia. Ethnic backgrounds are mostly not conforming to the majority ethnicity of the coun-try their parents come from which makes the sample of interviewees very differentiated. Besides that, other characteristics such as age, gender, and educational background are equally distrib-uted. After describing the unit of observation and analysis, and depicting Reutlingen and the ethnic situation in the region of Yugoslavia, the context of this master's research is precisely characterised. The next chapter is the main part of this elaboration – the findings which were conducted in the interviews with the participants I described before.
4 Research results
To proceed, I will present the information of the interviews which represents the main part of the thesis research. It was either explicitly explained to me by the participants or I implicated some details by reading between the lines. In the following, the findings are summarised in ex-ternal factors of the living environment and inex-ternal factors of personal characteristics. The living environment is the city of Reutlingen, with its society, discrimination, the Yugoslavian com-munity, and daily encounters of any social relations, and furthermore the family influence a grant is exposed to. Internal factors are described in the third sub-chapter about personal mi-grant characteristics which depicts the participants themselves, including the connection to their parents' country of origin, their official nationality, language skills, cultural activities, and religion. The fourth sub-chapter describes the identification and respective dis-identification with Ger-many, their parents' country of origin, and Yugoslavia individually, each with the particular reas-ons for the participants' identity. Lastly, the results are compared to findings of previous studies and the theoretical framework in a final discussion.
4.1 Reutlingen
Society
All participants generally described Reutlingen as a nice place to live, and an international and multicultural city. Everyone is aware of the great share of migrants and strongly confirms this fact – three participants even thought that Reutlingen possibly could have more foreign than German inhabitants. Most of them noticed a large share of Yugoslavians yet no one knows about the official statistics that Yugoslavians represent the largest immigration group. Only one person was sure about it. Others thought the largest group are the Turkish or Greek migrants, or simply showed surprise when I mentioned it. It is possible, however, that they might also never have thought about counting Yugoslavians as one common migrant group. The society in Reut-lingen is depicted as “tolerant and disciplined” (participant 3), and all nationalities live peacefully together to a large extent which was associated with the high share of foreigners. Yugoslavians are described as firmly integrated and well received by society, hardly noticed within society. For them, Reutlingen is a nice place to live because the great amount of cohorts makes their life easier. Often it was mentioned how many possibilities Yugoslavians have to maintain their cul-tural ancestry or to get in contact with like-minded. Number 3 stated that even famous singers from Yugoslavia are common show acts in Reutlingen. The societal situation is well depicted by the following quotation.
