The increase in migratory movements and, in particular, forced displacements since 2015 has led to a significant increase in the number of third-country nationals seeking protection in different European countries, which, together with the uncertainty that characterises the reception and asylum process in the receiving communities, requires studies that, from the educational and social field, show potential courses of action in the face of such genuine circumstances (ACNUR, 2020; Cernadas et al., 2019; Donato & Ferris, 2020; Iglesias-Martínez & Estrada, 2018; Iglesias et al., 2016; Pace & Severance, 2016).

This is why understanding the various factors that condition the integration of third-country nationals is key to the effectiveness of policy interventions. Policy-makers need to know which categories of participants are involved in the integration process and what their specific characteristics are. Furthermore, they must examine the role of the different social fields, institutions and entities involved in integration. On this basis, we must highlight the indicators and determining factors for achieving integration, as well as the problems or difficulties in this process (Hynie, 2018; Wolffhardt et al., 2019).

Therefore, we start from the ‘two-way process’ approach to the concept of integration, applied mainly in the field of forced migration and refugee status. (Ager & Strang, 2008; Castles et al. 2002; Iglesias-Martínez & Estrada, 2018; Klarenbeek, 2021; Strang & Ager, 2010). Specifically, we refer to the connection between "belonging" and rights and values, the role of social capital in integration processes, and the dynamic interconnectedness of the dimensions that constitute integration as a ‘two-way process’.

In this sense, in our study, we follow the ten core domains identified by Ager and Strang (2008), which reflect normative arrangements, while providing a potential structure for the analysis of integration processes. Specifically, they consider the successful attainment of and access to education, employment, health and housing; processes of social connectedness within and between community groups; barriers arising from lack of cultural and linguistic competencies, and from fear and instability; and assumptions and practices about citizenship and rights. Beyond identifying possible 'indicators', we based the paper on a conceptual framework that encompasses the key components of integration.

This model incorporates common elements found in other research attempting to define and measure integration (Berger-Schmitt, 2002; Cantle, 2005; Sigona, 2005), as it bring together perceptions of the key challenges that determine the integration of refugees in disparate contexts. Furthermore, these indicators form the basis of subsequent studies (Bakker et al., 2016; Correa-Velez et al., 2015; Fozdar & Hartley, 2013; Grzymala-Kazlowska & Phillimore, 2018; Hynie, 2018), as they explore social capital as an explanatory concept for integration processes.

In a context in which the growing social and educational interest in attending to intercultural coexistence is more than evident, the aim of this paper focuses on the importance of examining integration and the factors that condition it. Specifically, the main objective of this research is to analyse the process of integration of refugees, asylum seekers, applicants for asylum, subsidiary or international protection in the educational, social and labour fields in Spain. More specifically, we study which variables influence the integration of refugee families and which can enhance this process fully in a society characterised by uncertainty.

We have opted for a non-experimental research of an exploratory and descriptive character, under a quantitative methodological approach, while the data were obtained through the Integration Questionnaire for Refugee Families (CIFRE)*, from which we have been able to identify socio-educational variables that influence the integration process. Specifically, the CIFRE is made up of 28 questions grouped into 6 central blocks. In addition, it includes 5 scales designed to measure the opinion of families in relation to: family involvement in the education of their children; satisfaction with the host country; the importance given to and fulfilment of expectations for the future in the host community; the procedures followed for the resolution of problems encountered in the integration process; and the assessment of the situation experienced so far in the host country. With regard to the selection of participants, we opted for a non-probabilistic purposive sample, locating participants through organisations that work with forcibly displaced persons in Spain. More specifically, ten (10) organisations provided us with access to their users. In addition, we used the snowballing procedure, progressively expanding the participants through contacts facilitated by other subjects who are in the same or a nearby social network, thus increasing the sample with families located in different areas of the national geography. The sample is made up of 157 refugees, asylum seekers, subsidiary protection or international protection residing in Spain. Specifically, they are mothers (40.7%) or fathers (32%), although we also have a considerable number who are included in a category that we call others (27.3%), which includes legal guardians, members of the extended family or adults who indicate that they do not have children. These are young people, aged between 25 and 37 (M=36.30; SD = 10.01), and mostly asylum seekers (74.7%). * The design of the CIFRE Questionnaire is carried out in the context of the research carried out in the UNINTEGRA Project (2017-2019) funded by the European Commission's Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) (https://unintegra.usc.es/).

Following the theoretical-conceptual framework proposed by Ager and Strang (2008), which provides structure to the analysis of integration processes by identifying its determinant dimensions, such as education, employment, housing, health, social connections, language skills, security, and rights and citizenship, we have carried out bivariate correlations between all variables, as a preliminary step to proposing an explanatory model of the integration of people benefiting from protection. The data from this first analysis allow us to affirm that the variables employment (r=.177, p=.000), education (r=.188, p=.000), health (r=.160, p=.001), security (r=.437, p=.000) and rights (r=.781, p=. 000) correlate significantly with the integration variable (dependent variable), but in addition many independent variables correlate with each other (accommodation, language, stability and support), indicating the existence of a probable mediation between what are theoretically considered independent variables and the dependent variable. Therefore, the model we propose shows that the variables access to employment, having a support network, satisfaction with one's own and family members' health, feeling of security and having rights as a citizen directly influence the integration process, but also many independent variables correlate with each other. In addition, we report a good fit of the model (χ2 =1.7; GFI=.98; RMSEA=.040 [.019-.059]; and SRMR=.050). In short, the bidirectional and multidimensional character of the integration of third-country nationals in host communities is therefore evident, with a multitude of dimensions mediating and directly influencing the integration process. We therefore highlight the need to promote mechanisms and actions that involve the refugee and indigenous population in the integration processes through intercultural education, drawing up lines of educational exploration that address the challenges involved among the host communities.

ACNUR. (2020). Tendencias Globales. Desplazamiento forzado en 2020. https://www.acnur.org/60cbddfd4 Ager, A. & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166–191. Bakker, L., Cheung, S. Y. & Phillimore, J. (2016). The Asylum-Integration Paradox: Comparing Asylum Support Systems and Refugee Integration in The Netherlands and the UK. International Migration, 54(4), 118-132. Cantle, T. (2005). Community Cohesion: A New Framework for Race Diversity. Palgrave Macmillan. Castles, S., Korac, M., Vasta, E., & Steven Vertovec, S. (2002). Integration: Mapping the Field. Home Office, Immigration Research and Statistics Service (IRSS). Cernadas, F. X., Lorenzo Moledo, M. M., & Santos Rego, M. A. (2019). Diversidad cultural y escenarios migratorios. Un estudio sobre formación de profesores. Educar, 55(1), 19-37. Correa-Velez, I., Giffordb, S. M., & McMichaelc, C. (2015). The persistence of predictors of wellbeing among refugee youth eight years after resettlement in Melbourne, Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 142, 163-168 Ferris, E. G. & Donato, K. M. (2020). Refugees, Migration and Global Governance. Negotiating the Global Compacts. Routledge. Fozdar, F. & Hartley, L. (2013). Refugee Resettlement in Australia: What We Know and Need to Know Get access Arrow. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 32(3), 23–51. Hynie, M. (2018). Refugee integration: Research and policy. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 24(3), 265–276. Grzymala-Kazlowska, A. & Phillimore, J. (2018). Introduction: rethinking integration. New perspectives on adaptation and settlement in the era of super-diversity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(2), 179-196. Iglesias-Martínez, J. & Estrada, C. (2018). ¿Birds of passage? La integración social de la población refugiada en España. Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios de Desarrollo, 7(1), 144-167. Iglesias, J., Fanjul G., & Manzanedo, C. (2016). La crisis de los refugiados en Europa. En A. Blanco y A. Chueca (Coords.), Informe España 2016 (pp. 137-182). Universidad Pontificia Comillas. Klarenbeek, L. M. (2021). Reconceptualising ‘integration as a two-way process’. Migration Studies, 9(3), 902–921. Pace, P. & Severance, K. (2016). Migration terminology matters. Revista Migraciones Forzadas, 51, 69-70. Sigona, N. (2005). Refugee Integration(s): Policy and Practice in the European Union. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 24, 115-122. Strang, A. & Ager, A. (2010). Refugee Integration: Emerging Trends and Remaining Agendas. Journal of Refugee Studies, 23(4), 589-607. Wolffhardt, A., Conte, C., & Huddleston, T. (2019). The European benchmark for refugee integration: A comparative analysis of the national integration evaluation mechanism in 14 EU countries. Institute of Public Affairs y Migration Policy Group.