Therefore, the lack of state sanctioned attempts to integrate the people, led them to rely on their own personal skills in finding their way in Italian society. In the Netherlands, refugees became more adept in the economic world, while those in Italy became more involved socially, In other words, “the refugees approach integration as the process of building ‘bridging social capital’ while not abandoning the idea of nourishing ties with their native cultures or roots” …show more content…
Mainstreaming being seen as something that goes from specific to generic, looks to make migrant integration more generic and less based on each case. Therefore, “there has been a clear trend towards more mainstreamed governance and towards generic policies. However, such policies rarely involve efforts to create a generic awareness of migration-related diversity, and are often overshadowed by broader national narratives on migrant integration, and pre-existing governance structures” . Unfortunately, mainstreaming is only capable of partially explaining policy and governance trends, and may be eclipsed where pre-existing and fixed governance structures, or strong national narratives or integration models, are found. Therefore, it depends for each country how easy it is to identify the trend of mainstreaming integration, as well as how important drivers such as overcoming previous inadequacies, such as lack of diversity are seen to be. Socio-cultural integration varies widely depending on the country where the migrants arrived to, since Migration trends are highly dynamic and the recent period has seen a transformation of migration to Europe. To adequately understand the level of adaptation that the migrants have had in the receiving country, it is useful to keep data on “their language acquisition, the role of religiosity in finding a job, group differences in identification and acculturation, and