2 hws. one is 8 sentences other is 400 words

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Vol. 27, No. 4: 573± 582 October 2001

Transnationalism and identity

Steven Vertovec

Abstract Transnationalism and identity are concepts that inherently call for juxtapo- sition. This is so because many peoples’ transnational networks of exchange and participation are grounded upon some perception of common identity; conversely, the identities of numerous individuals and groups of people are negotiated within social worlds that span more than one place. In this introductory article, the transnational perspective on migration studies is ® rst discussed, followed by some critiques and outstanding questions. The ® nal section summarises points raised by the contributing authors of the main articles in this themed issue of JEMS, especially with regard to various ways transnational settings and dynamics affect the construction, negotiation and reproduction of identities.

KEYWORDS: TRANSNATIONALISM; IDENTITY; MIGRATION

The increasingly invoked notion of `transnationalism’, referring to various kinds of global or cross-border connections, currently frames the view of numerous researchers concerned with migrants and dispersed ethnic groups. Ìdentity’, although it has long been one of the slipperiest concepts in the social scientist’s lexicon, can suggest ways in which people conceive of themselves and are characterised by others. Transnationalism and identity are concepts that inher- ently call for juxtaposition. This is so because, on the one hand, many peoples’ transnational networks are grounded upon the perception that they share some form of common identity, often based upon a place of origin and the cultural and linguistic traits associated with it. Such networks are marked by patterns of communication or exchange of resources and information along with partici- pation in socio-cultural and political activities. On the other hand, among certain sets of contemporary migrants, the identities of speci® c individuals and groups of people are negotiated within social worlds that span more than one place. This special issue of JEMS is devoted to articles that provide detailed case studies and theoretical assessments of transnational spaces, groups and practices and the identities that both precede and arise from them.

In the ® rst section of this introductory article, some key features of the transnational perspective in migration studies are discussed. Despite its current popularity and uptake by numerous scholars of migration and ethnicity, there remain many critiques and outstanding questions surrounding the notion of transnationalism. These are outlined in the second section. The ® nal section includes a run-down of the contributing articles, pointing out ways in which the authors regard transnational settings and dynamics along with their effects on the construction, negotiation and reproduction of individual and group identi- ties.

ISSN 1369-183 X print/ISSN 1469-9451 online/01/040573-1 0 Ó 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltd DOI: 10.1080/1369183012009038 6 Carfax Publishing

574 S. Vertovec

Migration and transnationalism

Researchers on migration have almost always recognised that migrants maintain various forms of contact with people and institutions in their places of origin. This has been observed, for instance, through the scale of migrants’ correspon- dence and remittances at the end of the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth centuries. Since the early sociology of migration in the 1920s± 1930s, however, most migration research has generally tended to focus upon the ways in which migrants adapt themselves to, or are socially excluded from, their place of immigration.

The past decade has witnessed the ascendance of an approach to migration that accents the attachments migrants maintain to families, communities, tradi- tions and causes outside the boundaries of the nation-state to which they have moved. In the early 1990s the shift in perspective arose through a set of key texts in anthropology (Basch et al. 1994; Glick Schiller et al. 1992a; Rouse 1991); the transnational approach has been subsequently embellished throughout the 1990s (see for instance, Kearney 1995; Portes et al. 1999a; Smith and Guarnizo 1998; Vertovec and Cohen 1999). Observing this substantial change of approach, in 1995 Roger Rouse wrote:

While, a decade ago, disagreements about the frames for understanding (im)migrant experience were largely contained within the dominant models of bipolar landscapes and

localized identities, they now focus much more widely on the relationship between these models and the alternative images of transnational social spaces and multi-local af® liations.

(1995: 355)

While noting the similarities to long-standing forms of migrant connection to homelands, the current transnational approach underscores numerous ways in which, and the reasons why, today’ s linkages are different from, or more intense than, earlier forms (see Foner 1997; Morawska 1999; Portes et al. 1999b). This obviously includes the rapid development of travel and communication tech- nologies. The nature of contemporary transnationalism among migrants has also evolved in recent years in light of shifting political and economic circumstances in both sending and receiving countries. These have affected a range of develop- ments such as migrants’ capacity for political organisation in relation to both sending and receiving contexts, sending countries’ more positive views of their emigrants, and the impact of migrant remittances on local economies and labour markets. Heightened attention to these kinds of phenomena and processes has marked, for many scholars, a signi® cant shift in the ways contemporary inter- national migration is understood. As described by Ayse Caglar in her article in this special issue, transnationalism represents `a new analytic optic which makes visible the increasing intensity and scope of circular ¯ ows of persons, goods, information and symbols triggered by international labour migration’ .

The emergent approaches in migration theory describe ways in which contem- porary migrants live in t̀ransnational communities’ . Such types of migrant community, according to Alejandro Portes, comprise

¼ dense networks across political borders created by immigrants in their quest for econ-

omic advancement and social recognition. Through these networks, an increasing number of people are able to live dual lives. Participants are often bilingual, move easily between

different cultures, frequently maintain homes in two countries, and pursue economic, political and cultural interests that require their presence in both. (1997: 812)

Newer, cheaper, and more ef® cient modes of communication and transportation

Transnationalism and identity 575

allow migrants to maintain transnationally ± effectively both `here’ and `there’ ± their originally home-based relationships and interests.

Transnational connections have considerable economic, socio-cultural and political impacts on migrants, their families and collective groups, and the dual (or more!) localities in which they variably dwell. The economic impacts of transnational migrant communities are extensive. The most signi® cant form of this is to be found in the massive ¯ ow of remittances that migrants send to the families and communities in the sending countries (see for instance Conway and Cohen 1998; Massey et al. 1998; Waller Meyers 1998). Substantial ¯ ows of remittances ± currently far exceeding US$60 billion globally each year ± may have positive and negative effects on speci® c places and groups (Vertovec 2000). The economies of numerous developing countries are increasingly highly reliant upon them as remittances reach amounts comparable to exports, development aid or tourism. The money migrants send not only critically supports families, but may progressively rework gender relations, support education and the acquisition of professional skills and facilitate local community development through new health clinics, water systems, places of worship and sports facili- ties. Remittances may also undermine local labour markets, fuel price increases, create new status hierarchies and generate patterns of economic dependence.

The social and cultural impacts are considerable and varied, too. Many migrant communities maintain intense linkages and exchanges between sending and receiving contexts including marriage alliances, religious activity, media and commodity consumption. As described throughout this special issue of JEMS, transnational connections affect migrants as never before with regard to prac- tices of constructing, maintaining and negotiating collective identities (see also Hannerz 1996; Portes et al. 1999a; Smith and Guarnizo 1998). This has signi® cant bearing on the culture and identity of the so-called second generation, or children born to migrants.

The political impacts of transnational phenomena surrounding contemporary migration are also of far-reaching consequence. This takes many forms, es- pecially with regard to questions of citizenship (e.g. BauboÈ ck 2002; Fitzgerald 2000; Labelle and Midy 1999) and homeland politics (e.g. Itzigsohn 2000; é stergaard-Nielsen 2001). The global ¯ ows and cross-border networks repre- sented by transnational migrant communities critically test prior assumptions that the nation-state functions as a kind of container of social, economic and political processes. For Ulrich Beck, in fact, the most interesting features sur- rounding globalisation involve processes through which s̀overeign national states are criss-crossed and undermined by transnational actors with varying prospects of power, orientations, identities and networks’ (2000: 11).

The `portability of national identity’ (Sassen 1998) among migrants has com- bined with a tendency towards claiming membership in more than one place. `Multiple citizenship is the most visible illustration of overlapping membership in political communities’, notes Rainer BauboÈ ck (2002). In many countries, heated public debates concerning dual citizenship and dual nationality have been matched by considerable academic rethinking of rights and obligations surrounding migration, transnationalism and national identity (see Castles 2000a; Castles and Davidson 2000; Faist 1999, 2000). Among other issues cur- rently raised in this ® eld, one view holds that transnational ties weaken immigrants’ integration in the receiving country. Another view suggests that democracy is actually enhanced by public recognition and representation of

576 S. Vertovec

migrants’ transnational, multiple identities (Castles 2000b; Vertovec 1999b, c). In order to recognise the reality and prevalence of the phenomenon, some theorists have described issues surrounding `¯ exible’ (Ong 1999), `post-national’ (Soysal 1994), `diasporic’ (Laguerre 1998) or `transnational’ (BauboÈ ck 1994) frameworks of citizenship. Questions concerning transnational migrants and citizenship ± and the sometimes ® erce political debates they have stimulated ± underscore the need for more research and empirical data on the intersection of existing state policies, actual patterns of multiple membership, and long-term strategies of belonging among migrants and their families.

For all these reasons, within the ® eld of migration studies (through several of its constituent disciplines including Sociology, Anthropology, Geography and Politics) an increasing number of researchers have developed keen interests in the transnational aspects of migrant phenomena (while recognising, of course, that not all migrants engage in such activity). Still, there is a need for much more empirical research in this area, while methodologies must be realigned and key areas of social and political theory must be rethought. Yet as Alejandro Portes, Luis Guarnizo and Patricia Landolt (1999b) stress, in order for the notion of transnationalism to be a truly useful analytical device for social scientists, it must be delimited and rigorously appraised as to whether it is really adding anything new to the ® eld. With such a goal in mind, the following section includes some outstanding areas of criticism that currently remain around transnationalism.

Some critical appraisals

The following brief points represent some of the main critiques that should be born in mind concerning the current shift to a transnational approach toward migration processes and migrant communities.

· Transnationalism does not represent an altogether new theoretical approach, but one that inherently builds upon a number of preceding ones (including those of the Chicago School of Sociology and the Manchester School of Anthropology). Differences and similarities with prior theories of migration and immigrant experience should be elucidated so that we can realise whether theoretical advances are really being achieved, or whether we are merely pouring old wine into new bottles.

· Transnationalism is a notion that has become over-used to describe too wide a range of phenomena (from speci® c migrant communities to all migrants, to every ethnic diaspora, to all travellers and tourists; cf. Vertovec 1999a). It is clear that transnational patterns among migrants take many forms in socio- cultural, economic and political arenas. Further, each form may be `broad’ or `narrow’ (Itzigsohn et al. 1999), and may vary over time, depending on intensity of exchanges and communication. Rather than a single theory of transnationalism and migration, we may do better to theorise a typology of transnationalisms and the conditions that affect them.

· In much of the currently burgeoning literature on the subject, it is often unclear or undemonstrated just `how new’ transnational networks are among migrants. An historical perspective is often largely lost. Research needs to detail the current extent, structural and technical capacities, and migrants’ own desires, strategies and practices of remaining connected around the

Transnationalism and identity 577

world, and exactly how these are continuous with, or distinct from, earlier patterns of linkage.

· Is contemporary transnationalism among migrants wholly attributable to shifts in technology? That is, are advances in transport and, particularly, telecommunications (from telephones and faxes through the Internet and satellite TV) ± not least their relative inexpensiveness ± largely responsible for the creation of today’ s transnational migrant communities? Technological determinism is not a very strong argument. We need to understand the ways in which technology has combined with and perhaps facilitated or enhanced, rather than caused, transnational networks (cf. Castells 1996).

· It is open to debate whether migrants’ maintenance of transnational ties does or does not represent a distinct alternative to other social forms, processes and programmes of immigrant incorporation (cf. Castles 2000b). The ® eld of transnational migration is not yet very well theorised in relation to preceding concepts and policies surrounding assimilation, acculturation, cultural plural- ism, integration, political inclusion and multiculturalism.

· It has been variously suggested that transnationalism among migrants can be understood as either a mode of resistance to, or in contrast as a pattern of incorporation into, shifts in global capitalism. Much further detailed research remains to be done here in case-by-case fashion, and it is unlikely that a single overall theory will emerge to demonstrate one argument or the other.

· While social scientists working in the ® eld commonly agree that contemporary patterns and processes of transnationalism among migrants are both new to the last 10 years or so and a development of earlier forms of connection among migrants, the question remains: how exclusive is transnationalism to the ® rst generation of migrants? Will the so-called `second generation’ (chil- dren of immigrants born and raised in host countries) also maintain socio-cul- tural, economic and political ties of some kind (if so, what kind?) with homelands and with co-ethnic members around the world? Processes and patterns conditioning the intergenerational succession and reproduction of transnational ties remain largely under-researched and under-theorised.

Despite these shortcomings surrounding the notion of transnationalism, there has nevertheless emerged a considerable and growing body of empirical studies that contribute to expanding our understanding of relevant concepts and pro- cesses. Turning to the topic of this JEMS special issue: how has the concept of transnationalism contributed to the study of social and ethnic identities?

Transnationalism and identity: nine case studies

A massive body of social and social psychological theory addresses the ways in which people conduct their everyday lives in terms of their identities. According to most prevailing theories (neatly summarised by Richard Jenkins (1996), who draws especially upon George Herbert Mead, Erving Goffman and Fredrik Barth), identities are seen to be generated in, and constructed through, a kind of internal (self-attributed) and external (other-ascribed) dialectic conditioned within speci® c social worlds. This holds for both personal and collective identi- ties, which should be understood as always closely entangled with each other (while recognising the serious theoretical problems debated around notions of self, personhood and collectivity; see for example Rouse 1995).

578 S. Vertovec

The literature on transnationalism generally underscores the fact that large numbers of people now live in social worlds that are stretched between, or dually located in, physical places and communities in two or more nation-states. Ulf Hannerz (1996), for instance, discusses people who live in diverse `habitats of meaning’ that are not territorially restricted. The experiences gathered in these multiple habitats accumulate to comprise people’ s cultural repertoires, which in turn in¯ uence the construction of identity ± or indeed multiple identities. Each habitat or locality represents a range of identity-conditioning factors: these include histories and stereotypes of local belonging and exclusion, geographies of cultural difference and class/ethnic segregation, racialised socio-economic hierarchies, degree and type of collective mobilisation, access to and nature of resources, and perceptions and regulations surrounding rights and duties.

Together the multiple contexts create what some have called a t̀ransnational social ® eld’ (Glick Schiller et al. 1992b), t̀ransnational social space’ (Pries 1999), t̀ransnational village’ (Levitt 2001) or `translocality’ (Appadurai 1995). However termed, the multi-local life-world presents a wider, even more complex set of conditions that affect the construction, negotiation and reproduction of social identities. These identities play out and position individuals in the course of their everyday lives within and across each of their places of attachment or perceived belonging. Transnational(ised) identities may also, indeed, form the basis of homeland or receiving country-focused political engagement.

The contributions to this special issue of JEMS present case studies exemplify- ing diverse approaches to transnational in¯ uences on identity construction and expression. Differing migration processes, group and individual experiences, policy contexts, institutional settings, organisational developments and cultural ¯ ows are recounted by way of suggesting ways in which local identities are shaped by transnational factors.

In the ® rst piece, Bruno Riccio describes the complex experiences and multiple self-representations evident among Senegalese Mourides in and between Italy and Senegal. These coincide with, and help account for, the very differing trajectories and strategies among the transnational Senegalese. One key strategy identi® ed by Riccio is the `dynamic process of constant networking within transnational spaces’ , a process both based on and reinforcing Mouride identity and practice.

Ayse CË agÏ lar follows with an article suggesting ways in which certain forms of transnationalism signi® cantly challenge German of® cial discourses concerning AuslaÈ nder (foreigners). Turkish-German transnational practices, images and cues ± observed in places like the new cafe -bars in Berlin ± challenge the implicit membership models and narratives of incorporation pervasive in German public debates and policy. This is mainly because the conventional s̀cripts of belong- ing’ in the public sphere are based on ethnic/national exclusivism, whereas the transnational experiences lead to more cosmopolitan senses of participation and belonging.

Because migrants and migrant-origin communities have tended to be the focus of most studies of transnationalism, Nadje Al-Ali, Richard Black and Khalid Koser emphasise the need to incorporate refugees into the emergent transna- tional perspective. Such an exercise will usefully serve, among other things, to undermine the long-standing conceptual distinction between migrants and refugees (cf. Crisp 1999). In a comparative study of Bosnians and Eritreans, the authors demonstrate how refugee/asylum regimes condition and limit the

Transnationalism and identity 579

nature and extent of people’ s transnational activities. The authors innovatively employ a comparative model surrounding refugees’ capacity (or ability) to participate in transnational affairs versus their desire (or willingness) to do so. The study underscores ways in which policy interventions can productively increase refugees’ capacity to participate in both home and host contexts simultaneously.

The state’s role in shaping transnationalism, and particularly transnational identities, is rather differently addressed by Pa l Nyõ ri. Nyõ ri examines how the People’ s Republic of China continues to play a central role not only in the management of migration, but also in the reproduction of Chinese identity outside of the country. This is achieved particularly through the regulation or conditioning of migrant ¯ ows and the construction of everyday discourses. Nyõ ri demonstrates ways in which overseas Chinese are considered as part of Chinese culture and society, as well as how their depiction remains wholly in line with dominant of® cial discourses of Chineseness, cultural heritage and virtues. The process is shown to lead to an increasing standardisation of state and self-depic- tion among overseas Chinese.

The gendered nature of the nation-state, and especially of citizenship, has been subject to considerable scrutiny (e.g. Yuval-Davis 1997). Nation-states similarly shape and direct transnational practices in particularly gendered ways. In her article, Ruba Salih shows how various material and normative constraints impinge upon Moroccan women’ s transnational practices between Morocco and Italy. Their ability to move and to build their own life-worlds is highly limited or framed by culturally gendered rules that permeate their transnational social ® elds.

In the article that follows, it is speci® cally gendered experiences, along with a common legal status and shared experiences of exploitation, that provide for a common identity and mode of organisation among female migrant domestic workers in London. Described by Bridget Anderson, the United Workers Associ- ation (UWA) is comprised of women from no less than 29 ethnic and national origins. While the women simultaneously participate in distinct migrant transna- tional communities of the sort described in most of the recent literature, Anderson describes how the UWA cross-cuttingly unites them by way of a transnational movement f̀rom below’. Women in the UWA ® nd common cause by way of ensuring their rights, protecting themselves from exploitation and improving their social and legal positions within both the sending and receiving contexts.

Of® cial and popular discourses of identity are considered by Kevin Robins and Asu Aksoy. They describe how, in much public and institutional under- standing, ìdentity’ in Britain functions as `an ordering device’ or `device of cultural engineering’ which entails ®̀ xing cultures in place’ . Such a view of ìdentity’ presumes the presence of a singular and homogeneous `community’ (cf. Baumann 1996). Within such a backdrop, Robins and Aksoy suggest that Turkish Cypriots in Britain have never asserted themselves as such an ìdentity’ or `community’ . Instead, for more than 25 years, Turkish Cypriots in Britain have been subject to a constant, often very dif® cult negotiation between different cultural reference points: pre- and post-divided Cyprus, the British colony of Cyprus, contemporary Britain and Turkey, as well as the presence of Greek Cypriots in Britain. Following Robert Young, the authors propose the concept of `mental space’ as an avenue into understanding the Turkish Cypriot experience

580 S. Vertovec

in Britain. According to Robins and Aksoy (and in agreement with CË agÏ lar), transnationalism presents possibilities of un® xing identities ± particularly nation- derived ones ± and arriving at new, cosmopolitan perspectives on culture and belonging (cf. Cheah and Robbins 1998; Vertovec and Cohen 2002).

The ® nal two contributions represent novel and important takes on what we might call the transnationalisation of identities. The authors point to ways in which the transnational ¯ ow of images, practices, discourses and perspectives can have profound effect on people’ s identities vis-aÁ -vis both local and global settings. Rebecca Golbert presents the case of young Ukranian Jews who have developed t̀ransnational orientations from home’ towards the Ukraine, Israel and other Jewish communities in America, Germany and elsewhere. Such orientations are embedded in interpersonal networks and conceptual links with people, places, and histories outside the Ukraine. Drawing upon such an acquired transnational perspective from home, Golbert notes, young Ukranian Jews undertake the evaluation of `everyday experiences, the past, and the future, with a double consciousness garnered from transnational links and a transna- tional conception of self’. Through narratives and the sharing of experiences ± particularly regarding Israel ± returnees have had a powerful impact even on those who never left the Ukraine.

Finally, Katrin Hansing addresses the transnational ¯ ow of meanings, images and practices and their effects on locally conditioned identity (cf. Hannerz 1996). Her focus, Rastafarianism, is a cultural complex of aesthetics, values, beliefs and practices that has been globalised predominantly through music and consumer capitalism. In Cuba, the site of Hansing’ s research, Rastafari has (despite government restrictions affecting global cultural ¯ ows) been adopted increas- ingly by black Cubans. In recent years Rastafari has stimulated an alternative view of cubanidad (Cubanness) while remaining pro-African, anti-racist and pan-human. Expressed and adopted locally in multiform ways, transnational Rastafarianism importantly offers black Cubans a source of personal resistance to growing racism within a context of ever-worsening economic conditions.

People who embody transnationalism, CË agÏ lar points out in this issue, `weave their collective identities out of multiple af® liations and positionings and link their cross-cutting belongingness with complex attachments and multiple alle- giances to issues, peoples, places, and traditions beyond the boundaries of their resident nation-states’. These kinds of connections ± exempli® ed in all of the articles contributing to this special issue of JEMS ± demonstrate how the juxtaposition of the concepts transnationalism and identity raises numerous theoretical issues which, in turn, help social scientists deepen their understand- ing of each concept itself.

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my gratitude to Russell King and Jenny Money at JEMS, Robin Cohen, Alisdair Rogers and anonymous referees for assistance in preparing this issue, and especially Emma Newcombe for her work on preparation of the ® nal manuscript.

References

Appadurai, A. (1995) `The production of locality’ , in Fardon, R. (ed.) Counterworks: Managing the Diversity of Knowledge. London: Routledge, 204± 25.

Transnationalism and identity 581

Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N. and Szanton Blanc, C. (1994) Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Langhorne, PA: Gordon & Breach.

BauboÈ ck, R. (1994) Transnational Citizenship: Membership and Rights in International Migration. Alder- shot: Edward Elgar.

BauboÈ ck, R. (2002) `Political community beyond the sovereign state: supranational federalism and transnational minorities’ , in Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (eds) Conceiving Cosmopolitanism: Theory,

Context and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, in press. Baumann, G. (1996) Contesting Culture: Discourses of Identity in Multi-Ethnic London. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press. Beck, U. (2000) `Cosmopolitan manifesto: the cosmopolitan society and its enemies’ . Paper presented

at Theory, Culture and Society Conference, Helsinki. Castells, M. (1996) The Information Age ± Vol. 1: The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.

Castles, S. (2000a) Ethnicity and Globalization: From Migrant Worker to Transnational Citizen. London: Sage.

Castles, S. (2000b) `Transnational communities: challenge to social order or new mode of immigrant incorporation?’ Paper presented at 5

th International Metropolis Conference, Vancouver (http://

www.international.metropolis.net). Castles, S. and Davidson, A. (2000) Citizenship and Migration: Globalization and the Politics of Belonging.

Basingstoke: Palgrave. Cheah, P. and Robbins, B. (eds) (1998) Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling Beyond the Nation.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Conway, D. and Cohen, J.H. (1998) `Consequences of migration and remittances for Mexican

transnational communities’ , Economic Geography, 74(1): 26± 44. Crisp, J. (1999) `Policy challenges of the new diasporas: migrant networks and their impact on asylum

¯ ows and regimes’. Oxford: ESRC Transnational Communities Programme Working Paper, WPTC-99± 05 (www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk).

Faist, T. (1999) `Transnationalizatio n in international migration: implications for the study of citizenship and culture’ . Oxford: ESRC Transnational Communities Programme Working Paper,

WPTC-99± 14 (www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk). Faist, T. (2000) The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Social Spaces.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fitzgerald, D. (2000) Negotiating Extra-Territorial Citizenship: Mexican Migration and the Transnational

Politics of Community. La Jolla, CA: Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, Monograph Series No. 2.

Foner, N. (1997) `What’s new about transnationalism? New York immigrants today and at the turn of the century’ , Diaspora, 6(3): 355± 75.

Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (eds) (1992a) Toward a Transnational Perspective on Migration. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C. (1992b) `Transnationalism: a new analytical framework for understanding migration’ , in Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L. and Blanc-Szanton, C.

(eds) Toward a Transnational Perspective on Migration. New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1± 24.

Hannerz, U. (1996) Transnational Connections: Culture, People, Places. London: Routledge. Itzigsohn, J. (2000) `Immigration and the boundaries of citizenship: the institutions of immigrants’

political transnationalism’ , International Migration Review, 34(4): 1126± 54. Itzigsohn, J., Dore Cabral, C., Herna ndez Medina, E. and Va zquez, O. (1999) `Mapping Dominican

transnationalism: narrow and broad transnational practices’ , Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2): 316± 39. Jenkins, R. (1996) Social Identity. London: Routledge.

Kearney, M. (1995) `The local and the global: the anthropology of globalization and transnationalism’ , Annual Review of Anthropology, 24: 547± 65.

Labelle, M. and Midy, F. (1999) `Re-reading citizenship and the transnational practices of immi- grants’ , Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 25(2): 213± 32.

Laguerre, M.S. (1998) Diasporic Citizenship: Haitian Americans in Transnational America. London: Macmillan.

Levitt, P. (2001) The Transnational Villagers. Berkeley: University of California Press. Massey, D., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A. and Taylor, J.E. (1998) Worlds in Motion:

Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Morawska, E. (1999) `The new-old transmigrants, their transnational lives, and ethnicization : a

comparison of 19 th

/20 th

and 20 th

/21 st

C situations’ . Florence: European University Institute Working Papers EUF No. 99/2.

582 S. Vertovec

Ong, A. (1999) Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality. Durham, NC: Duke Univer- sity Press.

é stergaard-Nielsen, E. (2001) `Turkish and Kurdish transnational political mobilisatio n in Germany and the Netherlands’, Global Networks, 1(3): 261± 81.

Portes, A. (1997) Ìmmigration theory for a new century: some problems and opportunities’ , International Migration Review, 31(4): 799± 825.

Portes, A., Guarnizo, L.E. and Landolt, P. (eds) (1999a) Transnational Communities. Special issue, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2).

Portes, A., Guarnizo, L.E. and Landolt, P. (eds) (1999b) `The study of transnationalism : pitfalls and promises of an emergent research ® eld’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2): 217± 37.

Pries, L. (ed.) (1999) Migration and Transnational Social Spaces. Aldershot: Ashgate. Rouse, R. (1991) `Mexican migration and the social space of postmodernism’ , Diaspora, 1(1): 8± 23.

Rouse, R. (1995) `Questions of identity: personhood and collectivit y in transnational migration to the United States’ , Critique of Anthropology, 15(4): 351± 80.

Sassen, S. (1998) `The de facto transnationalizin g of immigration policy’ , in Joppke, C. (ed.) Challenge to the Nation-State: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 49± 85. Smith, M.P. and Guarnizo, L.E. (eds) (1998) Transnationalism from Below. New Brunswick, NJ:

Transaction Publishers. Soysal, Y.N. (1994) The Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in Europe. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press. Vertovec, S. (1999a) `Conceiving and researching transnationalism’ , Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2):

447± 62. Vertovec, S. (1999b) Ìntroduction’, in Vertovec, S. (ed.) Migration and Social Cohesion. Aldershot:

Edward Elgar, xi± xxxvii. Vertovec, S. (1999c) `Minority associations, networks and public policies: re-assessing relationships’ ,

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 25(1): 21± 42. Vertovec, S. (2000) `Rethinking remittances’ . Paper presented at 5

th International Metropolis Confer-

ence, Vancouver (http://www.international.metropolis.net) . Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (1999) `Introduction’, in Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (eds) Migration,

Diasporas and Transnationalism. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, xiii± xxviii. Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (eds) (2002) Conceiving Cosmopolitanism: Theory, Context and Practice.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, in press. Waller Meyers, D. (1998) `Migrant remittances to Latin America: reviewing the literature’ . Inter-

American Dialogue/Toma s Rivera Policy Institute, Working Paper 1 (www.iadialog.org / meyers.html).

Yuval-Davis , N. (1997) Gender and Nation. London: Sage.

Author details

Steven Vertovec is Research Reader in Social Anthropology at Oxford University and Director of the Economic and Social Research Council’s Research Programme on Transnational Communities

(www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk). He may be contacted at:

Oxford University Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology

51 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 6PE

UK

E-mail: [email protected] k

Copyright of Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies is the property of Routledge and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.