The differential value of symbolic capital: Occupational implications within varying social fields of practice

Background Globalization is enabling greater mobility and the associated rise of international migration contributes to social change. As people migrate, they become embedded within varying fields of practice (i.e. social spaces or settings characterized by particular norms), such as workplaces. Within these fields, forms of symbolic capital (i.e. resources and assets) such as linguistic skills or educational credentials may be more highly valued than others (Bourdieu, 1997; Moore, 2008; Thomson, 2008). Purpose To illustrate how the value of immigrants\u27 capital within the host societies\u27 fields influences their integration following migration and to examine the implications for their daily engagement in occupations. Methodology An internationally comparative study of multinational migrants residing in London, Ontario, Canada and Auckland, New Zealand was conducted using an ethnographic approach. Participants Nineteen participants were purposefully recruited. Ten respondents (5 male, 5 female) participated in London and nine respondents (4 male, 5 female) participated in Auckland. Data collection First, participants engaged in a narrative interview regarding their international migration. Second, they created an occupational map and described the occupations they engaged in within the places drawn. Finally, semi-structured interviews addressed shifts participants experienced to their occupations following migration. Data analysis We focus on findings from the theoretical analysis of the verbatim transcripts. This approach applied high-level codes from our framework including Bourdieu\u27s concepts of field and capital. Findings were generated inductively from the data themselves and from our critically informed analysis and interpretation process (Huot et al., 2013; Ryan & Russell Bernard, 2003). Results Our analysis identified a range of fields within which the participants engaged in occupation. These were categorized as economic, educational, political, religious, socio-cultural, health care, and social services. Within each, the participants described how their varied forms of objective and embodied symbolic capital were differentially valued. Economic (e.g. finances), educational (e.g. degrees) and linguistic (e.g. fluency) capital were emphasized, among other forms of symbolic capital described. Contribution to occupational science When immigrants\u27 capital was valued, it served as an enabler to occupational engagement, whereas the devaluing of capital was a barrier to meaningful occupations that led many to have to try and acquire the necessary forms of capital that would facilitate their opportunities within specific fields