{ "items": [ "\n\n
This paper explores the absence of migration and different frameworks for analysing it. The aim is to move beyond a sedentary perspective, which does not problematise immobility because it is considered to be the norm and therefore, not something to be explained or scrutinised. The paper starts with a discussion of the terminology denoting the absence of migration. Two opposed interpretations of different examples of the absence of migration are then presented, based on a functionalist and conflict approach, respectively. Finally, the paper discusses post-structuralist approaches, particularly addressing the role of power and hegemony in determining who does and should move. Throughout the text, various empirical cases are discussed, mainly drawn from contexts of transnational migration in West Africa.
\n \n\n \n \nAlthough the cross-border engagements of immigrants have received an increasing attention since the 1990s, the role of migrant organisations in this process has spurred comparatively little interest. As a consequence, efforts to conceptualise migrant organising in the transnational sphere have been relatively scarce. This paper seeks to contribute to this effort by proposing a more systematic definition and use of the concept of transnational organisational fields. This endeavour is illustrated by two case studies based on research carried out within the TRAMO project (Diffusion and Contexts of Transational Migrant Organisations): Indian and Polish organisations in the UK. The intent is to show that much can be gained by adopting a bird\u2019s-eye view on the networks that bind together migrant organisations within and outside the country of settlement. The two case studies display two opposite forms of structuring. In the Polish case, the formation of the field was managed by a central institution (the Polish government in exile) while, in the Indian case, there was a decentralised process. These discrepancies have consequences on the shape and contents of cross-border activities of migrant organisations.
\n \n\n \n \nIn recent years the volume and dynamics of migration from Africa to Europe have come under increasing study. The resulting breadth of research is impressive and includes such topics as gender and migration, migration and development, refugees and transnationalism. However, this work still suffers from the limitations imposed by existing migration theories that privilege the host context over the sending context focusing on linear processes and bounded conceptual frameworks. Through field work with Ugandan migrants and their descendants in Britain, this paper challenges existing theoretical limitations by proposing an inter-disciplinary approach that draws on transnationalism, diaspora and cultural geographical perspectives on landscape. Through this lens the concept of diasporic landscape emerges as an innovative contribution to migration theory as it highlights the embeddedness of migrants\u2019 lives, within processes of production and reproduction of a discursive terrain that straddles Uganda and Britain. It captures the multi-faceted physical and symbolic impacts of migrants\u2019 lived realities and privileges the continued impact of the sending context, cultural and temporal dimensions. The contours that emerge through migrants\u2019 everyday practices of \u2018belonging\u2019 highlight asymmetric power relations. These shift in complex patterns disrupting such bounded notions as migration, immobility, the migrant, non-migrant, refugee, citizen or undocumented person.
\n \n\n \n \nThe argument developed in this paper holds that critical realism is stronger than many other forms of post-positivism but that it is itself open to criticism. While critical realists are polemical about positivism they do share with positivism the concern positively to develop knowledge. This stands in contrast to social constructionism which embraces relativism and scepticism in an attempt to delegitimize knowledge claims by exposing them as symptoms of underlying discursive power relations. For critical realists we need to defend knowledge from relativist and sceptical challenges while seeking to avoid the empiricist theory of knowledge that underpinned positivism. To do this critical realists turn from empiricism \u2013 and epistemology more generally \u2013 to ontology, and argue that the natural and social sciences need to be based on a coherent definition of reality. As regards the social sciences, critical realists argue that a meta-theory which defines social reality in terms of agents interacting with structural emergent properties is required to underpin empirical research. This non-positivist emphasis on generating knowledge about causal processes in society is stronger than social constructionism, which cannot move beyond the purely negative position of scepticism. However, we may consider problem-solving challenges to critical realism. These focus on the need for conceptual revision in contrast to the critical realist argument that the meta-theory of structure and agency is the condition of possibility of a mature social science.
\n \n\n \n \nIn this paper I propose a generic conceptual model for conducting qualitative research within the meta-theoretical premises of critical realism. I also make an effort to demonstrate the advantages of such a framework using examples from migration studies. Qualitative methods are predominately linked with meta-theoretical commitments related mainly to interpretivism, social constructionism, post-structuralism and post-modernism. Influenced by \u2018cultural/linguistic turn\u2019, qualitative research has followed a path towards discursive reductionism and relativism. I contend that this path circumscribes the inherent strengths of qualitative methods and limits their explanatory power. Recently however, there have been calls for other \u2018turns\u2019 which are more or less compatible with a critical realist alternative to strong social constructionism, post-structuralism and post-modernism \u2013 namely ontological, practice, complexity and materiality \u2018turns\u2019. \r\nDrawing on these developments, I propose a generic model for doing qualitative research the realist way. This model is based on ways of researching real causal powers (structural, ideational and agential) and their \u2013 synchronic and diachronic \u2013 interplay, in a qualitative manner. The model views qualitative methods as powerful means for the identification of complex, causal generative mechanisms which produce certain effects and (re)connect qualitative inquiry and research with reality and, especially, with the depth investigation of its intransitive dimension. It does that by utilizing the realist concepts of \u2018emergence\u2019, \u2018emergent properties\u2019 and \u2018substantial relations\u2019, which are predominantly concerned with qualitative changes and real connections characterized by causal powers of their own. \r\nThe advantages of adopting such a model are shown by discussing its potentials for conducting qualitative migration research. More specifically, I use four examples from Greece which concern migration-related processes and phenomena. These examples concern informal immigrant employment in Athens, social mobility of immigrants in Greece, social capital and social incorporation of Albanian immigrants in Athens and the evolution of citizenship regime in the country. Through these examples I intend to demonstrate why merging realist meta-theoretical commitments with the inherent strengths of qualitative methods can result in more thorough and comprehensive understandings and explanations of migratory phenomena. \r\nThe last part of the paper concerns a brief discussion of the urgent need to re-orient migration theory and research practice away from empiricist and relativist inclinations, and the central role that realist qualitative research can and should play in meeting this need.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper contests some and reconciles other disagreements between the structuration and morphogenesis theories \u2013 two approaches in present-day sociology which aim at bridging the macro\u2013micro gap in social theorizing, but whose advocates have been either indifferent to or openly at odds with each other, instead of engaging in a close intellectual collaboration. The empirical illustrations of my arguments come from local statistical surveys and ethnographic studies conducted in Polish villages from the onset to the decline of mass transatlantic migration in the period 1870s\u20131930s.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper investigates the relationship between structural change, labour market imbalances and labour migration from the eight Central and Eastern European (CEE/EU8) economies during the transition and after their accession to the EU. The new accession states experienced markedly different migration patterns after 2004 enlargement which, given their similar wage differentials with the West, cannot be explained by the neoclassical framework. The paper deals with this puzzle by developing conceptual and empirical links between different transitional paths of CEE countries and varied migration rates. It argues that structural change that characterized their transition created different labour market imbalances across the CEE economies, hence creating different structures of employment and unemployment and varied risks and opportunities for workers of different demographic and skill profiles. These imbalances and labour market mismatches have in turn induced some workers to seek migration as an exit option more than others, and led to differences in migration rates and in the composition of migrants. In terms of theory, this paper contributes to literature which call for integrated approaches to researching migration that take into account social transformation, pointing out the limited ability of the neoclassical framework to understand migration patterns in their complexity.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper analyses the role of welfare systems in shaping migration patterns in Central and Eastern Europe over the transition process and after EU accession. It argues that states have played a crucial role in affecting migration by creating and widening opportunities for potential and actual migrants through welfare system policies. This explains why CEE countries where social spending figures have been lower, unemployment benefit schemes less extensive, and where labour market mismatches remained unaddressed, experienced greater out-migration. Investigating the role of sending states\u2019 institutions in a comparative framework and over time, this paper analyses migration as part of broader social and economic processes and contributes to our understanding of how sending countries\u2019 institutional factors affect out-migration.
\n \n\n \n \nIncreased population mobility has confronted the Western welfare states with various flows of immigrants varying from labour migrants to destitute refugees. A special category of migrants is formed by the immigrants from former colonies settling in their former mother countries. Welfare states have tried to keep control over immigration by implementing an increasingly refined set of laws regulating entry, residence and work of foreigners. The Netherlands have been no exception to this general trend. Moreover, immigration was a sensitive political issue in the Netherlands because the country was generally considered to be densely populated. In this context, the post-colonial migration from Suriname became an important theme in Dutch politics in the 1970s. The number of immigrants from Suriname was in fact small, but had increased from 13,000 in 1966 to 51,000 in 1972. The Surinamese immigration was a special case because the migration laws did not apply to Dutch citizens, and the Surinamese had been Dutch citizens since 1954. In 1973 Joop den Uyl, the leader of the Dutch labour party, became prime minister, and curbing the flow of Surinamese immigrants through independence was one of his top priorities. However, the results of his policy measures were contradictory. They caused a panic in Suriname and led to an unprecedented flow of immigrants. In 1975 the number of Surinamese in the Netherlands had already increased to 110,000. Den Uyl\u2019s policy proved to be based on a total misunderstanding of the nature and dynamics of this migration flow.
\n \n\n \n \nThe notion of a migration system is often invoked but it is rarely clearly defined or conceptualized. De Haas has recently provided a powerful critique of the current literature highlighting some important flaws that recur through it. In particular, migration systems tend to be identified as fully formed entities, and there is no theorization as to how they come into being. Moreover, there is no explanation of how they change in time, in particular how they come to decline. The inner workings \u2013 the mechanics \u2013 which drive such changes are not examined. Such critiques of migration systems relate to wider critiques of the concept of systems in the broader social science literature, where they are often presented as black boxes in which human agency is largely excluded. The challenge is how to theorize the mechanics by which the actions of people at one time contribute to the emergence of systemic linkages at a later time. This paper focuses on the genesis of migration systems and the notion of pioneer migration. It draws attention both to the role of particular individuals, the pioneers, and also the more general activity of pioneering which is undertaken by many migrants. By disentangling different aspects of agency, it is possible to develop hypotheses about how the emergence of migrations systems is related to the nature of the agency exercised by different pioneers or pioneering activities in different contexts.
\n \n\n \n \nWhat drives international migration? Theories of migration networks, migration culture, migration systems and cumulative causation suggest that once a critical threshold level of migrants have settled, migration tends to stimulate the creation of social and economic structures that make the process of migration self-perpetuating (cf. Massey et al. 1987; de Haas 2010). One important aspect of the theory is that the more migrants from a particular locality settle in one place, their presence, assistance and established structures in the destination country act as incentives for others to follow in their footsteps, which emphasizes the instrumental role of pioneers\u2019 agency in influencing others to follow suit. A historical perspective on the migration from Ukraine to the United Kingdom and the Netherlands challenges this assumption. While substantial numbers of migrants have settled in those destinations, migration, especially in the last 20 years, has not developed into large, self-sustaining migration systems (in comparison to the dynamic migration linkages between Ukraine and Southern European countries such as Portugal, Italy and Greece). Trying to understand why migration has not taken off, we argue that the role of settled pioneer migrants and their community structures in assisting others to follow in their footsteps should not be taken for granted. We argue that the role of pioneers is much more ambiguous and complex, and the relevant question about \u2018bridgeheads\u2019 and \u2018gatekeepers\u2019 (cf. B\u00f6cker 1994) should not be that of \u2018either/or\u2019 but \u2018how much\u2019, \u2018to what extent\u2019 or \u2018under what conditions\u2019.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper draws on insights from the African Perspectives on Human Mobility research programme, which included four research teams based at universities in Ghana, Nigeria, Morocco and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The paper first provides some details on the background and findings of the projects conducted by the four teams in various African cities. It then turns to some reflections on the theoretical implications and questions raised by these research findings and presents four broad points. First, by showing African cities as a place of attraction for international migrants, these findings highlight the curious absence of other research into international migration towards other African cities. Second, the city is a zone of departure not just in terms of being a stepping stone to long-distance migration, but also in terms of being what we might call a \u2018forge\u2019 for migratory behaviour \u2013 where migration is shaped through urban life. Third, the paper draws attention to the different practices of integration and exclusion of migrants that are in evidence in these African cities, again observing the limited research in this area. Fourth, in contrast to the global cities literature, which largely bypasses the African continent, we note that the cities included in this study are clearly enmeshed in transnational and global networks, not merely as departure points for migrants, but also, significantly, as attractive spaces for migrants and mobile traders \u2013 for creativity, connections and exchange. The paper concludes by reflecting on how we might better understand the links between internal, regional and inter-continental migration in the context of Africa, suggesting that examining global African migrations in more detail may help us understand better the emergence of new migration systems.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper uses fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to investigate the relative importance of mobility in the formation and viability of the internet cafes that are responsible for most local internet access in poor countries. It is based on a study of Ghanaian commercial internet cafes, the majority located in the country\u2019s remote northern regions, with a second group of cafes studied in the capital city, Accra. The findings presented here demonstrate that while international mobility is typically a strategy available to the better-off, it nevertheless benefits younger and less advantaged entrepreneurs disproportionately in terms of their return on investment. Furthermore, both migrant and non-migrant cafe owners in Ghana are using transfers from abroad of all kinds, especially physical capital and knowledge, to create and sustain their businesses. The study also shows that for those whose presence in the sector is marginal and precarious, i.e. the owners of the smallest businesses and the younger and poorer entrepreneurs, these transfers represent an essential strategy in maintaining a viable enterprise.
\n \n\n \n \nUncertainty and risk perceptions are important elements in the decision-making process about migration. This study outlines a \u2018migration prospect theory\u2019, i.e. an application and advancement of Kahneman and Tversky\u2019s (1979; Tversky and Kahneman 1991) original prospect theory, which aims to explain short-term fluctuations of migration flows as a consequence of expectation-based adjustment about future economic prospects. I argue that individuals with migration intentions continuously assess general economic prospects, including the labour market situation, at home and abroad in order to form reference points and updates for their migration-related expectations. Consequently, deviations from reference points generate (short-term) expectation-based utility gains or losses for potential migrants, which affect the value of the migration option. This can lead to a cancellation or procrastination of the individual migration project. Based on an analysis of annual and quarterly intra-European migration inflows to Germany between 2001 and 2010, supportive empirical evidence about some key implications of this migration prospect theory is found: first, migration flows respond more strongly to negative than to equal-sized positive economic prospects, indicating loss aversion of potential migrants; second, expectation-based prospects about the future economic situation in the home and in the potential destination country can counterbalance or enforce structural economic incentives based on real economic aggregates; and third, migration flows show a diminishing sensitivity for larger fluctuations in expectation-based adjustments of economic prospects.
\n \n\n \n \nThe relationship between Israel and the diaspora has been marked by mutual accommodation. The diaspora has come to accept the fact that Israel is not exempt from the problems and pathologies of states and societies; and Israel has acknowledged the continuation of the diaspora as a centre of Jewish life. Both sides are subject to illusions. Jews in the diaspora believe that Israel will be better supported by their hostland\u2019s political right rather than its left; that Israel can be saved, despite itself, by a kind of \u2018tough love\u2019 bestowed upon it by the diaspora or its hostland governments; and that Jewish identity and survival, based on an autonomous and largely secular culture, can be assured regardless of whether Israel exists or not. Israel\u2019s illusions are that it can be \u2018like other nations\u2019; that it can replicate in short order the civic nations that France and the United States became after many generations; and that it must \u2018de-ethnicise\u2019 and de-Judaise to become acceptable to its neighbours.
\n \n\n \n \nTwo central concerns for policy makers are the manageability of the rate of migration and the qualities of incoming migrants. This paper addresses these issues by proposing a theory that links risk aversion, the size of expatriate networks, migrant characteristics and the timing of migration. As the size of networks increases over time, finding employment becomes less uncertain, inducing more risk-averse individuals to migrate. Given that recent research suggests a negative relationship between risk aversion, entrepreneurial potential and cognitive ability, the model predicts a decrease in the quality of these \u2018unobservable\u2019 characteristics as networks grow larger. In addition, the dynamic relationship between network size and uncertainty leads to the following hypotheses: when migrants are more reliant on networks for finding work, more individuals will migrate, they will migrate sooner and at a faster rate. I use German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) data to provide empirical support for the predictions of the theoretical model.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper formed the inaugural lecture at the launch of the Oxford Diasporas Programme in June 2011. It explores the contradictions and complexities of three \u2018formative binaries\u2019 \u2013 between dispersion and diaspora, the subjective and objective aspects of the diasporic experience, and the differences between home and homeland.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper analyses the relationship between migration duration and occupational changes, using the case of Indian expatriates in the Gulf States. De jure, permanent migration to a Gulf state is almost impossible, leaving a (renewable) temporary work visa the only option available for Indian migrants. De facto, however, \u2018temporary\u2019 stay can last for years or even decades, and thus, questions about the factors influencing the timing of return become relevant. This analysis, based on two rounds of the Kerala Migration Survey (KMS 2008 and 2009), aims to deepen our understanding about the relationship between return migration, labour market activity and occupational change among Indian expatriates returning from the Gulf region. In particular, we investigate whether the length of stay in the Gulf depends on migrants\u2019 occupational trajectories before, during, and after the migration experience. We find some significant effects of transitions in labour market activity on the length of stay abroad. In particular, the prospect of acquiring an occupation which entails upward social mobility (mainly in the public sector or self-employment) seems to be associated with a shorter stay in the Gulf states, whereas the prospect of post-return labour market drop-out significantly increases migration duration.
\n \n\n \n \nThis paper aims to disentangle the relationship between aspirations and migration by analysing why Indonesian internal migrants generally have higher aspirations when compared with non-migrants. We ask whether migrants have higher aspirations for improving their economic well-being, and whether this \u2018capacity to aspire\u2019 already existed before migration or is rather the result of the migration experience itself. Based on longitudinal information from three waves of the Indonesian Family and Life Survey (IFLS) between 1997 and 2007, we find robust evidence for migrants having higher individual aspirations than non-migrants already before they choose to migrate. About 70 per cent of the aspiration differential between future migrants and non-migrants can be explained by factors such as young age, education, or socio-economic background, which also affect the \u2018capacity to realise\u2019 migration; the residual, however, is due to a personal trait, i.e. a certain disposition to have higher aspirations. Beyond these systematic pre-migration differences in aspirations, we find that despite the fact that migration is economically beneficial for most migrants, migration further spurs aspiration gaps.
\n \n\n \n \nWhat is semi-legality, and why does it offer a viable alternative to the legality-illegality binary divide? The paper discusses theoretical limits to illegality with reference to migrants \u2013 especially those deemed to stand outside the state\u2019s legal system \u2013 demonstrating that the division between legal/ illegal is never black or white but woven with different shades of grey: the \u2018in-between\u2019 statuses of semi-legality. I argue that semi-legality could be viewed as a multi-dimensional space where migrants\u2019 formal relationship with the state interacts with their various forms of agency towards the law. \r\nThis paper utilizes data stemming from 360 qualitative interviews with international migrants in four European countries. Delineating the conditions of semi-legality I discuss its various empirical contexts: (1) \u2018incomplete\u2019 responses to regularisation programmes - de facto fulfilling the legalisation conditions, yet facing barriers to formally (de iure) corroborate this; (2) balancing between the temporality of residence in various EU countries: understaying in some and overstaying in others; and (3) the nexus with employment \u2013 where migrants\u2019 residence in a country is lawful, but their work exceeds the restrictions permitted by their visas. I juxtapose those against the subjective experiences of semi-legality and migrants\u2019 own interpretations of their position vis-\u00e0-vis state legal frameworks.
\n \n\n \n \n