Remittances and morality: family obligations, development, and the ethical demands of migration

Abstract

Remittances have moral dimensions that, albeit implicitly addressed in migration literature, have not yet been the focus of explicit attention and analysis by social scientists. Building on recent developments in the anthropology of ethics and morality, this article proposes theoretical and analytical pathways to address this important but often neglected aspect of remittances. It does so mainly via a critical analysis of existing scholarship on remittances, and ethnographic data drawn from research among Cuban migrants in Cuba and Spain. The reflexive scrutiny of scholars' moral assumptions about remittances opens the way for the study of the moral dilemmas and ethical demands articulated by remittance senders and recipients. Family roles and obligations, and the uses of the money sent by migrants, are identified as key areas of moral difficulty. Their analysis shows how remittances inform moral reassessments of family relations, individual responsibility, economic practice, and development. The notion of 'moral remittances' is proposed as a heuristic comparative tool that serves to illuminate the moral aspects of remittances. This notion is put into perspective to complement and reconsider more metaphorical takes on remittances, notably the concept of 'social remittances', of which it helps reveal some epistemological limitations while opening future research avenues.

“I am 30 and I have nothing”: the context of reception and the lived experiences of foreign migrants working as car guards in Johannesburg's West Rand

“…The importance of income for the SWB for foreign migrants working as car guards is possibly grounded in the commitment these men have to provide for families back home. The fact that they migrated implies the physical separation of family members (Simoni & Voirol, 2021). The separation can generate moral breakdowns.…”

“…The separation can generate moral breakdowns. They constantly have to face questions about how to 'properly' fulfil one's role and obligations towards relatives left behind (Simoni & Voirol, 2021). Income earned in South Africa determines the value of remittances sent home and the possibility of revisiting their families.…”

Global justice and the remittances challenge: On political ontology and agency

“…Ethnographic studies sharpen our understanding of remittances revealing other positive and some counterintuitive effects. These include norm promulgation regarding the collective good, new goals and organizational techniques by receiving communities, increasing levels of exercise, shifts in marriage practices, improved health education, shifts in educational aspirations, changes in gender and sexual norms, increases in individual autonomy, strengthened women's support networks, increased political participation, increased support for democratic governance, and more (Levitt, 1998; Levitt & Lamba‐Nieves, 2011; see also Cohen, 2011; Simoni & Voirol, 2020). One contribution of the ethnographic literature has been to call into question widespread assumptions in the large‐sample and economic literatures that only simple altruism or self‐interest motivates remitters.…”

“…One contribution of the ethnographic literature has been to call into question widespread assumptions in the large‐sample and economic literatures that only simple altruism or self‐interest motivates remitters. Those assumptions are belied by the variety of motives and concerns that have been described as “moralities of transnationalism” underwriting the migrants journey (Carling, 2014; see also Lindley, 2009; Simoni & Voirol, 2020). Other studies show how the entire network that facilitates the migrant's journey—often a perilous one—is underwritten by communal associations, solidaristic practices, and other modes of trust and reciprocity (Achilli, 2018; Maher, 2018; Mengiste, 2018; Zhang, Sanchez, & Achilli, 2018).…”

Rethinking remittance: The socioeconomic dynamics of giving for migrants and nonmigrants

“…Nevertheless, while the dollars transferred by movers is rather mind‐boggling and the act of migration is presented as a straightforward decision with a huge positive payoff, assuming that migration is an easy decision or that remitting is convenient and cannot complicate and inconvenience movers and nonmovers misses just how socially complex these processes can be, particularly over time (Betts et al 2014; Martin and Sirkeci 2017; Sirkeci, Cohen, and Ratha 2012). In other words, privileging the economic convenience that remittances provide as well as the positive benefits that are associated with migration can miss the contests that confront movers and nonmovers as they debate the outcomes of mobility, dispute changes in social orders, and revise cultural practices (Levitt and Lamba‐Nieves 2013; Simoni and Voirol 2020).…”