Muslim integration is measurable through residential settlement and identity attitudes.

Evidence

If we turn away from the discursive accounts towards a more applied analysis of Muslim integration, we should ask: what indicators are best suited to measuring success and failure of Muslim integration? The indicators identified by the commentators above combine behaviour (in this case residential settlement – or where people chose to live and form communities) and attitude (in terms of how people identify, and how strongly). Using these two indicators, what can we say about patterns of Muslim integration in Britain? — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 461

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Offers the chapter’s operative definition of the integration indicators: behaviour (residential settlement) plus attitude (strength of identity).
  • SEED: The explicit two-indicator framework is a potential spine for an essay critiquing how definitions of integration silently decide which outcomes count as success.
  • XREF: connects to: Muslims prefer mixed neighbourhoods more than other groups do. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 466; Pew and Gallup data show Muslim Americans are fully integrated into US society — Green, Todd H, The Fear of Islam_ An Introduction to…, 673; Aggregate housing statistics mask sharp variation among different Muslim groups. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 256 (+1 more)

Broader Connections