Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorÖzçürümez, Saime
dc.contributor.authorÇavuş, Nermin Aydemir
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-04T06:45:45Z
dc.date.available2016-05-04T06:45:45Z
dc.date.copyright2015-08
dc.date.issued2015-08
dc.date.submitted07-09-2015
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11693/29059
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 164-177).en_US
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph. D.): Bilkent University, Department of Political Science and Public Administration, İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University, 2015.en_US
dc.description.abstractThis research aimed to analyze how often, in what ways and under which conditions MPs of migrant origin addressed the cultural and religious rights and freedoms of ethnic and religious groups. A content analysis was conducted on parliamentary questions to achieve this aim. The cases of the Netherlands and the UK are analyzed within a time period between 2002 and 2012. The research follows the ‘political opportunity structures’ approach in analyzing available opportunities and constraints of political and institutional environments in the above-mentioned two cases. Taking recent trends in the neo-institutionalist understanding into consideration, the study also incorporates the idea of ‘discursive opportunities’ into the general frame of political opportunity structures. The holistic approach incorporates political parties as a dimension of institutional approaches and makes space for individual and group related factors such as gender identity and ethnic backgrounds of minority representatives. The content analysis combines qualitative and quantitative techniques to provide an in-depth understanding of the subject area on the one hand, and formulate generalizable patterns on the other. Comparing the British and the Dutch cases reveals to what extent, if any, the opportunity structures differ across Britain and the Netherlands; the latter showing a clear shift towards a more integrative approach, whereas Britain would still seem to be attached to multiculturalism even debating it loudly in recent years. Findings of the qualitative content analysis reveal suppressive framings as well as messages supporting cultural and religious rights. The quantitative content analysis challenges the profound role attributed to the citizenship regime and media discourse. Political party membership appears to be the most significant factor in explaining a variance in framing cultural and religious rights and freedoms in the parliament. The roles of ethnic background and gender identity are also significant. However, their impacts differ across the two cases.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Nermin Aydemir Çavuş.en_US
dc.format.extentxviii, 203 leavesen_US
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectPolitical representationen_US
dc.subjectImmigrant minoritiesen_US
dc.subjectContent analysisen_US
dc.subjectThe Netherlandsen_US
dc.subjectThe UKen_US
dc.titleMigrant representation within british and dutch political systemsen_US
dc.title.alternativeHollanda ve ingiltere siyasal sistemlerinde göçmenlerin temsilien_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.departmentDepartment of Political Science and Public Administrationen_US
dc.publisherBilkent Universityen_US
dc.description.degreePh.D.en_US
dc.identifier.itemidB151238
dc.embargo.release2017-08-31


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record