No abstract

In this paper, I explore how British migrants in Singapore utilise the term 'expatriate' to denote themselves as being a different kind of migrant. The way in which a migrant is distinguished from an expatriate is the question of returnthe migrant is expected to stay, while an expatriate is expected to return to their home country. Yet the term 'expatriate' often becomes one that is axiomatically applied to Western migrants living abroad. This paper argues that we should not see the term 'expatriate' as axiomatic in describing this type of mobility, as we need to pay attention to the political context in which the term is enmeshed. The paper therefore argues that we need to understand how expatriation is not only understood as an identity in relation to the place of stay abroad, but also in comparison to migration as a whole. To do this, the paper looks first at how British migrants in Singapore draw upon racialised understandings of immigration debates to portray expatriates as being 'good' migrants. Second, it considers how the term expatriate is deployed in social sciences literature itself.

Culture shock is when the experience of difference is seen to emotionally overwhelm a migrant. In this paper, I look at how the Global Mobility Industry, an industry that acts as an outsourcer for international human resource management processes, seeks to treat culture shock in the corporate expatriate. Through arguing that different cultures become medicalised as a risk to the expatriate, the paper makes two key points. First, there is a need to understand the way in which migration industries play a role in producing how migrants experience migration, with the paper illustrating a way through which we can conceptually engage with how the Global Mobility Industry manages encounter. Second, through this I argue that there are spaces out with the 'contact zone' through which encounter is learnt, highlighting a need and providing a theoretical basis for how research on migrant identities can explore different sites through which migrant subjectivities are produced as part of their journey's abroad.

This paper argues that we need to pay more theoretical attention to the ways in which migration industries come into being, how they produce a need for themselves within the management of migration processes. Using the example of the Global Mobility Industry (GMI), an industry that supports expatriate migration, the paper suggests that we can theorise migration industries as being part of the knowledge economy. It shows how the GMI is produced around the practices of knowing the successful expatriate which work to 'calculate' what expatriate migration should look like. In doing so, the paper shows the way in which the calculative practice of compartmentalisation, in producing knowledge about expatriate migration, produces a need for the GMI. This illustrates the importance of widening our understanding of the economy when researching the migration industries.

This paper argues that we need to pay more attention to the spaces in which the (knowledge) economy operates and industry sectors are brought into being. Following research that examines the performative nature of the economy, the paper sees the trade show as not merely a reflection of an industry sector, but as a space that produces it into being. Looking at the Global Mobility Industry, an industry directed towards the management of expatriates, the paper uses narratives to uncover performance as a way to understand the practice of knowledge, specifically benchmarking about talent management, at the Expat Show.