The Age of Migration
Note: Submitted as an assignment for Indepth Course in International Relations, 05th June 2006
The Age of Migration: A Review of Theoretical Perspectives
International population movements, though an age-old phenomenon, increasingly define the dynamics of contemporary global politics and society. Transnational networks in the forms of trade and investment, ideas and people, with nodes of control in multiple locations, are recasting states and societies in distinctive and important ways. The Age of Migration deals with three key issues: it explains the complexities of contemporary international migration; explores political and social problems of ethnic diversity resulting from settlement of migrants in host communities; and finally links the two discourses of migration and ethnic diversity to address this ‘transnational revolution’ comprehensively.
In explaining the migratory process and the formation of ethnic minorities Castles and Miller draw from several theoretical perspectives. The authors insist upon the need for interdisciplinary approaches. The phenomenon can be analysed from several angles, including Liberalist, Structuralist and Social Constructivist perspectives. At another level, applying Feminism and Postmodernism can unearth fascinating insights, about the way in which the book handles its subject matter. The authors are quick to point out the weaknesses of standpoint explanations and call for a more integrated approach in dealing with the issue. This lifts the discussion into a superior footing, which enables the reader to reflect on the global patterns in their historical contexts and modern evolutions. Thus I will analyse the book at two different levels, and with several perspectives while giving prominence to Social Constructivism.
From a Liberalist viewpoint, the book introduces neo-classical economic models to explain the process of migration. According to Steans and Petiford, Liberals believe that all human beings are rational and value individual liberty above all else. In terms of economics, the global market for labour thus decides the flow of migration. Neo-classical models explain migration through ‘push-pull theories’, where “individuals ‘search’ for the country that maximises their well-being”. Constraining factors such as government restrictions on immigration or emigration are seen as market distortions that should be removed. Castles and Miller point out that though in the long run such flows should help to equalise wages and conditions in developed and underdeveloped regions creating equilibrium, the empirical studies contest these assumptions. Thus the authors argue that the push-pull theories cannot explain why a certain group of people go to one country instead of another: for example, why have most Algerians migrated to France and Turks to Germany. Liberal explanations of free individuals making utilitarian and rational choices may thus be rendered too simplistic and ahistorical.
The Historical-Structural approach provides an alternative explanation: Migration is seen as a way of mobilising cheap labour in the context of an unequal global economic system. The process in turn perpetuates uneven development and is seen as important as military dominion that structurally links the First and the Third world, making the latter dependent on the former. While the ‘push-pull’ theories tended to focus on mainly voluntary migrations of individuals, like that from Europe to the USA before 1914, the historical-structural accounts looked at mass recruitment of labour by capital. The availability of labour was both a legacy of colonialism and the result of war and regional inequalities within Europe.
Nevertheless, the authors reject this approach for being one-sided as much as Liberal accounts are. Castles and Miller point précis:
The neoclassical approach neglected historical causes of movements, and downplayed the role of the state, while the historical functional approach often saw the interests of capital as all-determining, and paid inadequate attention to the motivations and actions of the individuals and the groups involved. (Castles and Miller 2003:26)
Migration systems theory arises out of this critique to avoid extremes of structuralism and agency centred theories. It tries to find an inclusive middle-ground approach to studying the population movements. From a Social Constructivist point the focus is on the interplay of the structure and agency in the process of migration. Steans and Petiford point out that Constructivism ‘rejects any social features as given and places human beings in particular contexts’, which inform their actions as they reproduce social realities. In this respect the migration systems theory suggests that migratory movements generally arise from the existence of prior links between sending and receiving countries based on colonisation, political influence, trade, investment, or cultural ties. For example Castles and Miller point out that migration from India Pakistan and Bangladesh to Britain is linked to the former colonial presence in the sub-continent.
Similarly, Social Constructivism holds that the process of construction is a ‘social’ process that cannot be done by a single person alone. The process of migration according to the discussion of Castles and Miller is likewise:
International migration is hardly ever a simple individual action in which a person decides to move in search of better life-chances, pulls up his or her roots in the place of origin and quickly becomes assimilated in the new country. Migration is a collective action, arising out of social change and affecting the whole society in both sending and receiving areas. (Castles and Miller 2003: 21)
The main assumptions put forth in the book reflects the influence of a middle ground approach. The stance on human nature is contextual. The book stresses the importance of culture and community in the migratory process. A suitable illustration is provided from migration research in Asia, where migration decisions are usually made not by individual but by families. In an Asian setting the elders of a family (often male) may decide to send one of the daughters to another region or a country in order to cope with the pace of socio-economic change. The motivation from the family-unit perspective is that the females are more reliable in sending back remittances. On the other hand, the authors point out how these patterns may correspond with global phenomenon such as the increased feminisation of migration.
In keeping with the role of norms and institutions in Social Constructivism, the main tenet of the migration theory is one of particular strength: it sees migratory movements as a result of interacting macro- and micro-structures. Macro-structures refer to large-scale institutional factors such as political economy of the world market, interstate relationships, the laws, structures and practices established by the state, etc. The microstructures are the informal social networks developed by the migrants themselves, in order to cope with migration and settlements. These two levels, according to Castle and Miller, are linked by a number of intermediate structures, which are referred to as meso-structures.
The formations of migration chains explain relationship between actors and processes. Castles and Miller argue that migratory chains are started by external factors, such as recruitment or military service, or by initial movement of young and often male pioneers. This also indicates the relationship between domestic and international politics. Once a movement is started the others will follow, establishing social networks that cope with bureaucratic procedures, finding shelter and employment and overcoming personal difficulties. Thus, the book indicates that migratory processes once started become self-sustaining social processes.
If migration systems theory focuses on unravelling the structural processes of migration, transnational theory emphasises human agency. The authors recognise that migration, in an age of globalisation, where rapid improvements of global transport and communication technologies create circulatory and repeated mobility and lead to the formation of transnational communities. Arguments of the ‘deterritorialised nation-states’ imply serious consequences to the ideas of national identity and international politics. Halliday’s presentation of globalisation and nationalism as contradictory processes deserves to be examined at this point, in order to grasp the effect of migration and formation of ethnic minorities. Halliday views migration, travel and tourism, employment abroad and worldwide communication as factors opposing nationalism whereas, hostility to immigration, fears of unemployment, xenophobia and dislike of alien cultures can promote nationalism. Transnational business communities, political and cultural communities are seen as developing countervailing power to contest the power of corporations and governments.
In this respect the book addresses themes of state and power, institution and world order, identity and community, inequality and justice, conflict and violence from a Social Constructivist, Feminist and Post-modern perspectives. According to Steans and Pettiford, from a social constructivist perspective, states behave the way they do because they are socialised into the institutions of internal politics. Large-scale migration and growing ethnic diversity pose dilemma of integration for political entities based on the notion of modern nation-states. Though most modern states have made conscious efforts to achieve cultural and political integration of minorities, this process is never simple as seen in the example of – to quote one out of many – Australia’s immigration panic and the Tampa affair. Thus, the authors show how especially in the era of globalisation the nexus between power and nation-state is declining, which implies multiple directions for policy decisions: ‘…it seems likely that increasing ethnic diversity will contribute to changes in central political institutions, such as citizenship, and may affect the very nature of the nation-state.’
Identity becomes a locus of meaning in the crossroads of these global processes. Formation of ethnic communities or minorities are presented as a product of ‘other definition’ and ‘self definition’ by the host community and the immigrant settlers. From a Social constructivist point groups tend to distinguish between insiders and outsiders and gain their identity and sense of belonging from this distinction. The authors’ discussion of ethnicity, class, gender and life cycle as markers that crosscut and interact, affecting life chances, lifestyles, culture and social consciousness is refreshingly constructive. Analysing the formation of ethnic minority identity from a feminist perspective enriches the arguments presented in the book. Gendered racism and gendered embodiment of culture and nation can be seen as specific forms of social normalisation and exclusion. Women of ethnic minorities not only become the easiest targets of racial discrimination of the dominant group, but also become the cultural symbols to their own community, where nationalist discourses construct the notions of national unity and distinctiveness on feminine symbology. Thus, for ethnic minorities culture becomes a source of identity and focus for resistance to exclusion and discrimination. From a post-modern perspective, the authors argue that the immigrants and their descendents do not have static homogenous identities but instead dynamic multiple identities with fluid boundaries. The same applies for the dominant group, whose notions of a homogenous nation prior to the arrival of the migrants can be deconstructed to show exactly the opposite. Thus the concepts of national culture and identity become highly questionable. The authors go on to deconstruct ideas of not only culture and community but also nation-state and citizenship, which add important dimensions to the arguments. According to Linklater exponents of new conceptions of citizenship advocate that the differences between citizens must be reflected in public policy. Minority groups throughout the world should be recognised through minority/ group rights and cosmopolitan democracy.
In the book, inequality is seen as an inevitable consequence of government policies and in the formation of ethnic minorities. This is manifest around the world in different cities through the development of ethnic neighbourhoods, the distinctive use of urban space and ethnic associations. The authors argue that racism, marginalisation and social exclusion is present in all host countries to varying degrees, as well as the segmentation of labour market on ethnic and gender lines. In the UK, for instance, immigrants from the commonwealth became concentrated in the least desirable jobs and youth from ethnic minorities suffered high unemployment rates. The authors argue that certain social policies that were designed to reduce ethnic concentrations and ease social tensions achieved absolutely the opposite!
Likewise, the increased salience of racist violence and social tensions is addressed as a reaction to the growing insecurity resulting from rapid socio-economic change for peoples and their communities. Racist campaigns, harassment and violence are seen as important factors in the process of minority formation and political mobilisation. Castles and Miller highlights that growth of anti-immigration extremism on one hand and the importance of immigrants as ethnic voting blocs on the other. This duality of the migrants as political actors and targets of politics is the key to understanding migration security in the context of modern political terrorism.
The authors argue that government policies that deny the reality of immigration lead to marginalisation, separatism and racist violence. They propose that the best way to prevent marginalisation and social conflicts and uphold peace and security is to grant permanent immigrants full rights in all social spheres, especially with regard to political participation – the lack of which could lead to immigrant militant activities:
Globalisation is leading to multiple identities and transnational belonging. Exclusionary modes of immigrant rights and nationhood are questionable, because they lead to divided societies. Similarly, assimilationist models are not likely to succeed, because they fail to take account of the cultural and social situation of the settlers. Multicultural citizenship appears to be the most viable solution…(Castles and Miller 2003: 253, 254)
In summing up, the authors argue that more broad based world development is needed, in order to cope with problems such as illegal migration, since migration is not a solution for bridging the North-South gap, unemployment in Africa or rural poverty in India. In a structural discussion of the current world order, they show how development of the third world, though fairly utopian, can lead to a decrease in migration in the long run but admit that the results will not be of short term. The authors rest some hope on globalisation that makes cultural interchange inescapable, where fusion of old civilisations has the potential of creative redefinitions and solutions for nation-states in future.
Bibliography
Castles, S and Miller, M J, 2003, The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the modern World. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Steans J and Pettiford L, 2001. International Relations: Perspectives and Themes, London: Longman
Baylis J and Smith S 2004. tehGlobalization of World Politics: an Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press (3rd ed.)
Hasini Apsara Haputhanthri
MA in Asian Studies
Centre for East and Southeast Asian Sudies
Lund Unversity
Sweden
The Age of Migration: A Review of Theoretical Perspectives
International population movements, though an age-old phenomenon, increasingly define the dynamics of contemporary global politics and society. Transnational networks in the forms of trade and investment, ideas and people, with nodes of control in multiple locations, are recasting states and societies in distinctive and important ways. The Age of Migration deals with three key issues: it explains the complexities of contemporary international migration; explores political and social problems of ethnic diversity resulting from settlement of migrants in host communities; and finally links the two discourses of migration and ethnic diversity to address this ‘transnational revolution’ comprehensively.
In explaining the migratory process and the formation of ethnic minorities Castles and Miller draw from several theoretical perspectives. The authors insist upon the need for interdisciplinary approaches. The phenomenon can be analysed from several angles, including Liberalist, Structuralist and Social Constructivist perspectives. At another level, applying Feminism and Postmodernism can unearth fascinating insights, about the way in which the book handles its subject matter. The authors are quick to point out the weaknesses of standpoint explanations and call for a more integrated approach in dealing with the issue. This lifts the discussion into a superior footing, which enables the reader to reflect on the global patterns in their historical contexts and modern evolutions. Thus I will analyse the book at two different levels, and with several perspectives while giving prominence to Social Constructivism.
From a Liberalist viewpoint, the book introduces neo-classical economic models to explain the process of migration. According to Steans and Petiford, Liberals believe that all human beings are rational and value individual liberty above all else. In terms of economics, the global market for labour thus decides the flow of migration. Neo-classical models explain migration through ‘push-pull theories’, where “individuals ‘search’ for the country that maximises their well-being”. Constraining factors such as government restrictions on immigration or emigration are seen as market distortions that should be removed. Castles and Miller point out that though in the long run such flows should help to equalise wages and conditions in developed and underdeveloped regions creating equilibrium, the empirical studies contest these assumptions. Thus the authors argue that the push-pull theories cannot explain why a certain group of people go to one country instead of another: for example, why have most Algerians migrated to France and Turks to Germany. Liberal explanations of free individuals making utilitarian and rational choices may thus be rendered too simplistic and ahistorical.
The Historical-Structural approach provides an alternative explanation: Migration is seen as a way of mobilising cheap labour in the context of an unequal global economic system. The process in turn perpetuates uneven development and is seen as important as military dominion that structurally links the First and the Third world, making the latter dependent on the former. While the ‘push-pull’ theories tended to focus on mainly voluntary migrations of individuals, like that from Europe to the USA before 1914, the historical-structural accounts looked at mass recruitment of labour by capital. The availability of labour was both a legacy of colonialism and the result of war and regional inequalities within Europe.
Nevertheless, the authors reject this approach for being one-sided as much as Liberal accounts are. Castles and Miller point précis:
The neoclassical approach neglected historical causes of movements, and downplayed the role of the state, while the historical functional approach often saw the interests of capital as all-determining, and paid inadequate attention to the motivations and actions of the individuals and the groups involved. (Castles and Miller 2003:26)
Migration systems theory arises out of this critique to avoid extremes of structuralism and agency centred theories. It tries to find an inclusive middle-ground approach to studying the population movements. From a Social Constructivist point the focus is on the interplay of the structure and agency in the process of migration. Steans and Petiford point out that Constructivism ‘rejects any social features as given and places human beings in particular contexts’, which inform their actions as they reproduce social realities. In this respect the migration systems theory suggests that migratory movements generally arise from the existence of prior links between sending and receiving countries based on colonisation, political influence, trade, investment, or cultural ties. For example Castles and Miller point out that migration from India Pakistan and Bangladesh to Britain is linked to the former colonial presence in the sub-continent.
Similarly, Social Constructivism holds that the process of construction is a ‘social’ process that cannot be done by a single person alone. The process of migration according to the discussion of Castles and Miller is likewise:
International migration is hardly ever a simple individual action in which a person decides to move in search of better life-chances, pulls up his or her roots in the place of origin and quickly becomes assimilated in the new country. Migration is a collective action, arising out of social change and affecting the whole society in both sending and receiving areas. (Castles and Miller 2003: 21)
The main assumptions put forth in the book reflects the influence of a middle ground approach. The stance on human nature is contextual. The book stresses the importance of culture and community in the migratory process. A suitable illustration is provided from migration research in Asia, where migration decisions are usually made not by individual but by families. In an Asian setting the elders of a family (often male) may decide to send one of the daughters to another region or a country in order to cope with the pace of socio-economic change. The motivation from the family-unit perspective is that the females are more reliable in sending back remittances. On the other hand, the authors point out how these patterns may correspond with global phenomenon such as the increased feminisation of migration.
In keeping with the role of norms and institutions in Social Constructivism, the main tenet of the migration theory is one of particular strength: it sees migratory movements as a result of interacting macro- and micro-structures. Macro-structures refer to large-scale institutional factors such as political economy of the world market, interstate relationships, the laws, structures and practices established by the state, etc. The microstructures are the informal social networks developed by the migrants themselves, in order to cope with migration and settlements. These two levels, according to Castle and Miller, are linked by a number of intermediate structures, which are referred to as meso-structures.
The formations of migration chains explain relationship between actors and processes. Castles and Miller argue that migratory chains are started by external factors, such as recruitment or military service, or by initial movement of young and often male pioneers. This also indicates the relationship between domestic and international politics. Once a movement is started the others will follow, establishing social networks that cope with bureaucratic procedures, finding shelter and employment and overcoming personal difficulties. Thus, the book indicates that migratory processes once started become self-sustaining social processes.
If migration systems theory focuses on unravelling the structural processes of migration, transnational theory emphasises human agency. The authors recognise that migration, in an age of globalisation, where rapid improvements of global transport and communication technologies create circulatory and repeated mobility and lead to the formation of transnational communities. Arguments of the ‘deterritorialised nation-states’ imply serious consequences to the ideas of national identity and international politics. Halliday’s presentation of globalisation and nationalism as contradictory processes deserves to be examined at this point, in order to grasp the effect of migration and formation of ethnic minorities. Halliday views migration, travel and tourism, employment abroad and worldwide communication as factors opposing nationalism whereas, hostility to immigration, fears of unemployment, xenophobia and dislike of alien cultures can promote nationalism. Transnational business communities, political and cultural communities are seen as developing countervailing power to contest the power of corporations and governments.
In this respect the book addresses themes of state and power, institution and world order, identity and community, inequality and justice, conflict and violence from a Social Constructivist, Feminist and Post-modern perspectives. According to Steans and Pettiford, from a social constructivist perspective, states behave the way they do because they are socialised into the institutions of internal politics. Large-scale migration and growing ethnic diversity pose dilemma of integration for political entities based on the notion of modern nation-states. Though most modern states have made conscious efforts to achieve cultural and political integration of minorities, this process is never simple as seen in the example of – to quote one out of many – Australia’s immigration panic and the Tampa affair. Thus, the authors show how especially in the era of globalisation the nexus between power and nation-state is declining, which implies multiple directions for policy decisions: ‘…it seems likely that increasing ethnic diversity will contribute to changes in central political institutions, such as citizenship, and may affect the very nature of the nation-state.’
Identity becomes a locus of meaning in the crossroads of these global processes. Formation of ethnic communities or minorities are presented as a product of ‘other definition’ and ‘self definition’ by the host community and the immigrant settlers. From a Social constructivist point groups tend to distinguish between insiders and outsiders and gain their identity and sense of belonging from this distinction. The authors’ discussion of ethnicity, class, gender and life cycle as markers that crosscut and interact, affecting life chances, lifestyles, culture and social consciousness is refreshingly constructive. Analysing the formation of ethnic minority identity from a feminist perspective enriches the arguments presented in the book. Gendered racism and gendered embodiment of culture and nation can be seen as specific forms of social normalisation and exclusion. Women of ethnic minorities not only become the easiest targets of racial discrimination of the dominant group, but also become the cultural symbols to their own community, where nationalist discourses construct the notions of national unity and distinctiveness on feminine symbology. Thus, for ethnic minorities culture becomes a source of identity and focus for resistance to exclusion and discrimination. From a post-modern perspective, the authors argue that the immigrants and their descendents do not have static homogenous identities but instead dynamic multiple identities with fluid boundaries. The same applies for the dominant group, whose notions of a homogenous nation prior to the arrival of the migrants can be deconstructed to show exactly the opposite. Thus the concepts of national culture and identity become highly questionable. The authors go on to deconstruct ideas of not only culture and community but also nation-state and citizenship, which add important dimensions to the arguments. According to Linklater exponents of new conceptions of citizenship advocate that the differences between citizens must be reflected in public policy. Minority groups throughout the world should be recognised through minority/ group rights and cosmopolitan democracy.
In the book, inequality is seen as an inevitable consequence of government policies and in the formation of ethnic minorities. This is manifest around the world in different cities through the development of ethnic neighbourhoods, the distinctive use of urban space and ethnic associations. The authors argue that racism, marginalisation and social exclusion is present in all host countries to varying degrees, as well as the segmentation of labour market on ethnic and gender lines. In the UK, for instance, immigrants from the commonwealth became concentrated in the least desirable jobs and youth from ethnic minorities suffered high unemployment rates. The authors argue that certain social policies that were designed to reduce ethnic concentrations and ease social tensions achieved absolutely the opposite!
Likewise, the increased salience of racist violence and social tensions is addressed as a reaction to the growing insecurity resulting from rapid socio-economic change for peoples and their communities. Racist campaigns, harassment and violence are seen as important factors in the process of minority formation and political mobilisation. Castles and Miller highlights that growth of anti-immigration extremism on one hand and the importance of immigrants as ethnic voting blocs on the other. This duality of the migrants as political actors and targets of politics is the key to understanding migration security in the context of modern political terrorism.
The authors argue that government policies that deny the reality of immigration lead to marginalisation, separatism and racist violence. They propose that the best way to prevent marginalisation and social conflicts and uphold peace and security is to grant permanent immigrants full rights in all social spheres, especially with regard to political participation – the lack of which could lead to immigrant militant activities:
Globalisation is leading to multiple identities and transnational belonging. Exclusionary modes of immigrant rights and nationhood are questionable, because they lead to divided societies. Similarly, assimilationist models are not likely to succeed, because they fail to take account of the cultural and social situation of the settlers. Multicultural citizenship appears to be the most viable solution…(Castles and Miller 2003: 253, 254)
In summing up, the authors argue that more broad based world development is needed, in order to cope with problems such as illegal migration, since migration is not a solution for bridging the North-South gap, unemployment in Africa or rural poverty in India. In a structural discussion of the current world order, they show how development of the third world, though fairly utopian, can lead to a decrease in migration in the long run but admit that the results will not be of short term. The authors rest some hope on globalisation that makes cultural interchange inescapable, where fusion of old civilisations has the potential of creative redefinitions and solutions for nation-states in future.
Bibliography
Castles, S and Miller, M J, 2003, The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the modern World. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Steans J and Pettiford L, 2001. International Relations: Perspectives and Themes, London: Longman
Baylis J and Smith S 2004. tehGlobalization of World Politics: an Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press (3rd ed.)
Hasini Apsara Haputhanthri
MA in Asian Studies
Centre for East and Southeast Asian Sudies
Lund Unversity
Sweden
posted by Unknown at
3:22 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home