Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia

Colleen Ward, Anita MAK

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

Abstract

Australia and New Zealand share a common history involving the colonization of indigenous peoples (see Chapter 7) and a past and present emphasis on attracting and retaining skilled migrants from international sources to meet labor market demands. As such, both countries have become culturally plural nations that are struggling with issues of multiculturalism and national identity and how to deal with diversity in ways that maximize its benefits and minimize its risks for both social cohesion and individual well-being. Despite sharing a common history and contemporary goals, New Zealand and Australia have approached sociopolitical issues pertaining to culture and diversity in somewhat different ways. Australia, for example, has more multicultural policies in place (Multicultural Policy Index, 2010) whereas the symbolic status of indigenous peoples (e.g., te reo Māori recognized as an official national language) and the importance of their contribution to defining a national identity (e.g., implicit associations including both Māori and Europeans in defining nationhood) appear more favorable in New Zealand (Sibley & Barlow, 2009; Sibley & Liu, 2007; Ward & Liu, 2012). There are also differences in views on how best to accommodate refugees due in part to easier illegal access to Australia by “boat people.” New Zealand appears to take a more humanitarian approach as evidenced by the willingness to resettle refugees rejected by Australia (e.g., the Tampa affair) at the same time that Australia introduced the “Pacific Solution” to transport asylum-seekers to detention centers in small Pacific island nations. In this chapter we update the chapter by Sang and Ward (2006) in the first edition of the Handbook and review theory and research on acculturation in New Zealand and Australia with emphasis on work done in the last decade. We rely on the framework provided by Berry and Sam in Chapter 2 of this volume to organize this material. The framework spans cultural and individual levels, recognizing the impact of intercultural contact on changes in both the cultures and the individuals in contact. With respect to individual-level changes emphasis is placed on behavioral shifts, the management of acculturative stress and the preference for and implementation of acculturation strategies and their respective consequences for adaptation in sociocultural, psychological and intercultural domains.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition
EditorsDavid L. Sam, John W. Berry
Place of PublicationUnited Kingdom
PublisherCambridge University Press
Pages314-336
Number of pages23
Edition2
ISBN (Electronic)9781316219218
ISBN (Print)9781107103993
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2016

Fingerprint

Acculturation
New Zealand
Refugees
Research
Morus
History
Pacific Islands
Cultural Diversity
Ships
Fruit
Language
Psychology

Cite this

Ward, C., & MAK, A. (2016). Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia. In D. L. Sam, & J. W. Berry (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition (2 ed., pp. 314-336). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019
Ward, Colleen ; MAK, Anita. / Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia. The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition. editor / David L. Sam ; John W. Berry. 2. ed. United Kingdom : Cambridge University Press, 2016. pp. 314-336
@inbook{1fd34b023c5043aa81c4375b82b8da8e,
title = "Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia",
abstract = "Australia and New Zealand share a common history involving the colonization of indigenous peoples (see Chapter 7) and a past and present emphasis on attracting and retaining skilled migrants from international sources to meet labor market demands. As such, both countries have become culturally plural nations that are struggling with issues of multiculturalism and national identity and how to deal with diversity in ways that maximize its benefits and minimize its risks for both social cohesion and individual well-being. Despite sharing a common history and contemporary goals, New Zealand and Australia have approached sociopolitical issues pertaining to culture and diversity in somewhat different ways. Australia, for example, has more multicultural policies in place (Multicultural Policy Index, 2010) whereas the symbolic status of indigenous peoples (e.g., te reo Māori recognized as an official national language) and the importance of their contribution to defining a national identity (e.g., implicit associations including both Māori and Europeans in defining nationhood) appear more favorable in New Zealand (Sibley & Barlow, 2009; Sibley & Liu, 2007; Ward & Liu, 2012). There are also differences in views on how best to accommodate refugees due in part to easier illegal access to Australia by “boat people.” New Zealand appears to take a more humanitarian approach as evidenced by the willingness to resettle refugees rejected by Australia (e.g., the Tampa affair) at the same time that Australia introduced the “Pacific Solution” to transport asylum-seekers to detention centers in small Pacific island nations. In this chapter we update the chapter by Sang and Ward (2006) in the first edition of the Handbook and review theory and research on acculturation in New Zealand and Australia with emphasis on work done in the last decade. We rely on the framework provided by Berry and Sam in Chapter 2 of this volume to organize this material. The framework spans cultural and individual levels, recognizing the impact of intercultural contact on changes in both the cultures and the individuals in contact. With respect to individual-level changes emphasis is placed on behavioral shifts, the management of acculturative stress and the preference for and implementation of acculturation strategies and their respective consequences for adaptation in sociocultural, psychological and intercultural domains.",
author = "Colleen Ward and Anita MAK",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781107103993",
pages = "314--336",
editor = "Sam, {David L.} and Berry, {John W.}",
booktitle = "The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
address = "United Kingdom",
edition = "2",

}

Ward, C & MAK, A 2016, Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia. in DL Sam & JW Berry (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition. 2 edn, Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom, pp. 314-336. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019

Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia. / Ward, Colleen; MAK, Anita.

The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition. ed. / David L. Sam; John W. Berry. 2. ed. United Kingdom : Cambridge University Press, 2016. p. 314-336.

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia

AU - Ward, Colleen

AU - MAK, Anita

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Australia and New Zealand share a common history involving the colonization of indigenous peoples (see Chapter 7) and a past and present emphasis on attracting and retaining skilled migrants from international sources to meet labor market demands. As such, both countries have become culturally plural nations that are struggling with issues of multiculturalism and national identity and how to deal with diversity in ways that maximize its benefits and minimize its risks for both social cohesion and individual well-being. Despite sharing a common history and contemporary goals, New Zealand and Australia have approached sociopolitical issues pertaining to culture and diversity in somewhat different ways. Australia, for example, has more multicultural policies in place (Multicultural Policy Index, 2010) whereas the symbolic status of indigenous peoples (e.g., te reo Māori recognized as an official national language) and the importance of their contribution to defining a national identity (e.g., implicit associations including both Māori and Europeans in defining nationhood) appear more favorable in New Zealand (Sibley & Barlow, 2009; Sibley & Liu, 2007; Ward & Liu, 2012). There are also differences in views on how best to accommodate refugees due in part to easier illegal access to Australia by “boat people.” New Zealand appears to take a more humanitarian approach as evidenced by the willingness to resettle refugees rejected by Australia (e.g., the Tampa affair) at the same time that Australia introduced the “Pacific Solution” to transport asylum-seekers to detention centers in small Pacific island nations. In this chapter we update the chapter by Sang and Ward (2006) in the first edition of the Handbook and review theory and research on acculturation in New Zealand and Australia with emphasis on work done in the last decade. We rely on the framework provided by Berry and Sam in Chapter 2 of this volume to organize this material. The framework spans cultural and individual levels, recognizing the impact of intercultural contact on changes in both the cultures and the individuals in contact. With respect to individual-level changes emphasis is placed on behavioral shifts, the management of acculturative stress and the preference for and implementation of acculturation strategies and their respective consequences for adaptation in sociocultural, psychological and intercultural domains.

AB - Australia and New Zealand share a common history involving the colonization of indigenous peoples (see Chapter 7) and a past and present emphasis on attracting and retaining skilled migrants from international sources to meet labor market demands. As such, both countries have become culturally plural nations that are struggling with issues of multiculturalism and national identity and how to deal with diversity in ways that maximize its benefits and minimize its risks for both social cohesion and individual well-being. Despite sharing a common history and contemporary goals, New Zealand and Australia have approached sociopolitical issues pertaining to culture and diversity in somewhat different ways. Australia, for example, has more multicultural policies in place (Multicultural Policy Index, 2010) whereas the symbolic status of indigenous peoples (e.g., te reo Māori recognized as an official national language) and the importance of their contribution to defining a national identity (e.g., implicit associations including both Māori and Europeans in defining nationhood) appear more favorable in New Zealand (Sibley & Barlow, 2009; Sibley & Liu, 2007; Ward & Liu, 2012). There are also differences in views on how best to accommodate refugees due in part to easier illegal access to Australia by “boat people.” New Zealand appears to take a more humanitarian approach as evidenced by the willingness to resettle refugees rejected by Australia (e.g., the Tampa affair) at the same time that Australia introduced the “Pacific Solution” to transport asylum-seekers to detention centers in small Pacific island nations. In this chapter we update the chapter by Sang and Ward (2006) in the first edition of the Handbook and review theory and research on acculturation in New Zealand and Australia with emphasis on work done in the last decade. We rely on the framework provided by Berry and Sam in Chapter 2 of this volume to organize this material. The framework spans cultural and individual levels, recognizing the impact of intercultural contact on changes in both the cultures and the individuals in contact. With respect to individual-level changes emphasis is placed on behavioral shifts, the management of acculturative stress and the preference for and implementation of acculturation strategies and their respective consequences for adaptation in sociocultural, psychological and intercultural domains.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048541605&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/acculturation-theory-research-new-zealand-australia

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019

DO - 10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781107103993

SP - 314

EP - 336

BT - The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition

A2 - Sam, David L.

A2 - Berry, John W.

PB - Cambridge University Press

CY - United Kingdom

ER -

Ward C, MAK A. Acculturation theory and research in New Zealand and Australia. In Sam DL, Berry JW, editors, The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology, Second Edition. 2 ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. 2016. p. 314-336 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316219218.019