Digital Divides among Asylum‐Related Migrants: Comparing Internet Use and Smartphone Ownership

Abstract

This paper studies asylum-related migrants' Internet use and smartphone ownership. In total, 2,454 asylum-related migrants originating from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East (37 countries) answered the surveys in the European Union migration hotspots (Lesvos in Greece and Lampedusa in Italy) and in transit/host countries (Iran, Jordan, and Turkey). Internet use was studied at three phases: before the actual journey in the country of origin, during the journey before entering the hotspot or transit/host location, and at the hotspot or transit/host location where smartphone ownership was also studied. During their journeys (from the country of origin to hotspot or transit/host location), the differences in Internet use regarding education and urban/rural backgrounds diminished and vanished in regards to gender. In the transit/host or hotspot location, many respondents started to use the Internet even if they had not used it before in their country of origin.

Asylum-Related Migrants’ Social-Media Use, Mobility Decisions, and Resilience

“…Zijlstra & Van Liempt, 2017). Merisalo and Jauhiainen (2019) showed how digital divides diminished during asylum-related migration: Many asylum-related migrants started to use the Internet on their journeys even if they had not used it in their countries of origin. Moreover, during those journeys, the differences in Internet use in terms of socioeconomic background and age decreased (but remained) and in terms of gender disappeared.…”

“…The indisputable importance of the Internet and social media for migrants and migration networks (e.g., Dekker et al, 2018;Dekker & Engbersen, 2014;Merisalo & Jauhiainen, 2019) leads us to presume that social media (its multiple platforms for multiple purposes) is highly utilized by asylum-related migrants. This leads to our first group of hypotheses (H) on the extent of social-media use among asylum-related migrants:…”

“…In this article, we study asylum-related migrants' social-media use and its connection to their mobility decisions and resilience, in particular, in relation to their socioeconomic and demographic background, social capital, and views of the future. Merisalo & Jauhiainen (2019) define "asylumrelated migrants" as migrants who left their country of origin (a) to seek asylum and whose asylum process is ongoing (i.e., asylum seekers; see Goodwin-Gill, 2014); (b) with the aim of seeking asylum (i.e., "soon-to-be asylum seekers"); (c) to seek asylum but whose requests for asylum were rejected and who did not return to their country of origin (i.e., irregular migrants; see D€ uvell, 2012); and (d) were not accepted for asylum according to the Refugee Convention (UN General Assembly, 1951) or did not receive similar protection status but were admitted by national authorities (i.e., refugees). This definition corresponds to the heterogeneity of asylum-related migrants who were at our study locations either for a short time or for an extended period.…”

Conclusions

“…In general, the first and second digital divides (i.e. access to the internet and the ability and resources to use the internet and social media) had narrowed among the undocumented migrants since their departures from their countries of origin (see also Merisalo and Jauhiainen 2020); however, in some of their countries of origin, these media were not yet ubiquitous, meaning that their family and friends did not have easy-or necessarily any-access to the internet. These tools could not cover all aspects of social networking; hence, a few undocumented migrants used ordinary telephone calls to their countries of origin.…”

A city as a virtual community — Several perspectives

“…Structural, cultural and political factors are important as well. Marginalized groups are composed of various social minorities (Yoon, et al, 2020), emigrants (Hajer, 2017;Merisalo and Jauhiainen, 2019) older individuals (Friemel, 2016) and women (Graells-Garrido, et al, 2015;Shaw and Gant, 2002). There will be some efforts in order to make a virtual urban environment reach all members of a community; these efforts will not be easy or inexpensive.…”