Building on the transnational approach to migration, this introduction outlines some elements of the programme of an emergent methodological transnationalism. This effort aims to de-naturalize the concept of the national within migration studies. First, the analysis identifies methodological challenges of migration studies, such as contextualization, the ethnic lens and the essentializing view on ethnicity. Second, it indicates the relevant conceptual elements which deal with these methodological challenges, such as the critique of methodological nationalism, cosmopolitanism and the relational concept of space. Third, it addresses the relevant methods, such as multi-sited ethnography, the mobile methods approach, as well as researchers' positionality and strategies of deethnicization, all of which correspond to the new epistemology of migration studies. Finally, it highlights the common characteristics of the contributions to this special issue, which go beyond the normative view of cross-border migration.

Transnational social spaces are multidimensional in terms of the socio-spatial categoriesthat is, local, global, and nationaland different actors and institutions involved. Recent developments in transnational methodology argue for a thorough reflection on the challenges of methodological nationalism, essentialism, and researchers' positionality. Therefore, in designing and conducting transnational research, reflections on methodological challenges become a crucial step. Yet, as these challenges often remain to be discussed on a methodological level, their implementation still needs to be set out clearly to be useful for empirical research in transnational social spaces such as on social protection. For that reason, we discuss transnational research designs as well as different methods of data collection and analysis. We argue for a multisited and mixed-method research design, which includes the emigration and the immigration countries, as well as the involvement of research teams located across borders. Thereby, a combination of perspectives between emigration and immigration countries in transnational social spaces can be achieved.

Through migration, expectations and obligations of social protection can change and migrants can be faced with the situation where they are not able to fulfil these new expectations, for example, because of a lack of (financial) resources. The sending of parcels to Kazakhstan will be used in this paper as an example of one form of symbolic protectionby which we mean protection where the symbolic value is very high whilst the material value is low -within the German-Kazakh social space, which allows migrants to maintain transnational ties and be the provider of protection to their relatives left behind. Drawing on interviews collected in a multi-sited matched sample approach, we demonstrate that when family members in both countries compare life chances, a 'transnational space of comparison' emerges. Transnational comparisons in the German-Kazakh social space shape expectations of reciprocity in informal protection that often diverge from those within the national space. For example, migrants in Germany can be defined by their family members as in need of protection within a national network but at the same time as providers of protection within transnational networks. We argue that transnational comparisons can lead to inequalities within multi-locally organised families, such as the exclusion of migrants in Germany from transnational informal protection. Our study contributes to the literature on social protection by drawing attention to a form of protection in transnational spaces that has low material but high symbolic value, indicating the symbolic dimension of social protection.

What processes transform (im)mobile individuals into ‘migrants’ and geographic movements across political‐territorial borders into ‘migration’? Addressing this question, the article develops the doing migration approach that combines socio constructivist, praxeological and the sociology of knowledge and performativity perspectives. ‘Doing migration’ starts with the processes of social attribution that separate between ‘migrants’ and ‘nonmigrants’ and that are embedded into institutional, organisational and interactional routines which generate unique social order(s) of migration. Illustrating these conceptual ideas, the article provides insights into the elements of the contemporary European order of ‘migration’. The institutional routines contribute to the emergence of the European migration regime that includes narratives of economisation, securitisation and humanitarisation. The organisational routines of European migration order realise bordering, surveillance and othering contributing to the disciplining effects on those defined as ‘migrants’. Furthermore, the routines of daily face‐to‐face interactions generate various microforms of ‘migration’ by stigmatisation, while also giving the potential to resist the social attribution as ‘migrant’.

No abstract