Different approach to sustainability between first and second generations of immigrants

The fear of the first generations
According to certain study there is a variation in recycling attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours between first and second/third generation ethnic minorities. For example, Macias (2016) discovered that first-generation of Mexicans in the United States are more inclined to embrace sustainable behaviours and more willing to make sacrifices to protect the environment than second generation of Mexicans or white Americans. This attitude is not always linked to economic motivation. In fact, Macia’s (2016) study controlled for the household income variable and found it to be “remarkably unimportant” in terms of sustainable behaviour and willingness to sacrifice. Thus, money is not the center of everything. The desire of the first generations to preserve the customs and values that define their own identities as well as the nation in which they were born and reared. One of their main worries is that they won’t be able to impart these values, which are frequently characterized by a significant social and ecological impact. As Carter et al.’s (2013) research on Mexican families in the United States shows, parents are concerned that their children spend so much time at home, connected virtually with friends, rather than playing outdoors as they used to. Some parents, especially those who grew up in rural settings, point out that their children lack the experience of the strenuous physical labour associated with farm life and the development of intuitive relationships with plants and animals.

The first generations have always practised sustainability

There are numerous international and European programmes and policies that advocate the goal of ‘educating’ the first generations on a ‘green’ lifestyle to better ‘integrate’ them into an increasingly cosmopolitan western society. In fact, much research shows that immigrants do not necessarily need to be educated on sustainable lifestyle, as some already possess it due to their cultural-ecological perspective present in their back society, which educates children from birth to respect the environment and its limited resources. These studies contributes to the goal of disrupting the prevailing social dominance theory in some Northern countries, which assumes that newcomers from ‘less developed countries‘ must be socialized into green practices.
First-generation ethnic minorities are highly good at reusing and reducing waste, and this is most likely because they couldn’t afford to waste resources due to the extreme poverty, they faced both in their home countries and in the host country. Clothing, for example, was extensively distributed to other members of the society until it could no longer be reused. Indeed, first-generation try to be return or shipping clothing to their home country for reuse. Households were also more willing to reuse items like bottles and plastic bags because they saw them as resources that could be used elsewhere. The lack of plastic, glass, and cans in the trash called into question the use of recycling systems for first-generation ethnic minorities, who would benefit more from composting or green waste collection. Waitt et al. (2016) research on people of Chinese origin in Sydney (Australia) also explains the sustainable lifestyle pre-migration well. Many of them consistently used public transportation and drive less than Anglo-European Australians. It demonstrates how Chinese migrants brought their pre-migration transportation practices and tastes with them and purposefully linked their lifestyles in Sydney with rail lines to continue using public transportation. Many of the Chinese migrants interviewed were afraid of and despised driving, but the nature of this “car-mobilized city” made it hard to go without a car totally. They have dissatisfaction with Sydney’s public transit system, which made multi-stop trips (such as grocery shopping or kid-friendly events) problematic. The difference in approach to lifestyle in the majority world demonstrated that change or transition is not a simple matter of timing; rather, “acculturation is a complex, nonlinear, and variable process [that] can be understood in part as adaptation to new social norms” (Carter et al., 2013).

“Ecological assimilation” among the second generation

Second/third generation ethnic minorities, on the other hand, had sentiments remarkably like the white community. They are environmentally conscious and reuse objects by donating them to charities, although not to the same level as the first generation. This behaviour can be explained by Macias’s (2016) “ecological assimilation”: “by and large, migrant groups and their descendants follow a pattern of ecological assimilation, caring less about the environment over time and generations”, in part because their socioeconomic position improves.
Education plays a key role in improving the socio-economic position of second generations. Want to know more about this?
Read on for my next articles ….