Reshaping Migrant Labour Market Geographies: Local Regularisations and the Informal Economy

Abstract

Regularisation remains a strategic site for studying the political economy of migrant socio-economic incorporation. Research suggests that immigrant regularisation policies improve labour market opportunities for undocumented migrant workers in host societiesparticularly those engaged in the informal economy. However, research on regularisation remains focused on nationallevel policy efforts, despite increased political activity by sub-national levels of government on immigration issues across migrant-receiving societies. This article identifies and examines local migrant labour market regularisationsa new political geography of labour market regulationand explores the potential of these policies to influence labour market mobility and opportunity for irregular migrants in the US. Using data on 5,528 policy ordinances across 3,067 city, counties, and states, implementation trends across four local migrant labour market regularisation policy domains were analysed for the time period 2001-2014. Case studies of local-level government activism within each policy domain are also presented. Findings indicate that the implementation of local migrant labour market regularisations in the US has become increasingly unfavourable towards migrant workers and that within these new political geographies, local governments are emerging as central actors in shaping migrant labour market opportunities. The article concludes by reflecting on the implications these new political geographies present for the economic incorporation of irregular migrants and their role in constructing a new scalar reality of migrant labour market regulation.

Informality and the context of reception in South Africa's new immigrant destinations

“…It is generally understood that there are multiple drivers of population movements to regions that previously have seen little in‐migration, and that the promise of economic opportunity ranks among the most important. Research has also found that the context of reception in NIDs can figure prominently in the adverse incorporation of migrants, especially in areas where employment opportunities are constrained by discrimination or by tight labour markets, where local policy actors are hostile to the interests of recent immigrants, where xenophobia among residents is pervasive, or where the institutional infrastructure necessary for successful immigrant incorporation is underdeveloped (see Glick Schiller & Çağlar, ; Marrow, ; Phillips & Robinson, ; Samers, ; Visser, ). To date, however, the research literature examining patterns of South–South migration only gestures towards these issues, despite evidence that migration between low‐ and middle‐income countries accounts for a substantial share of total global migration (International Organization for Migration, ).…”

Care Like Kin: Community Based Youth Serving Organizations and the Social Reproduction of Disconnected Youth in Rural America

“…However, for many disconnected youth their families are unable to absorb these costs and these young people must turn to social networks and community organizations to obtain resources that ensure their livelihood. The capacity of disconnected youth to access resources, markets, and their reliance on certain types of networks and institutions simultaneously influence their capacity to ensure social reproduction (Visser, ; Visser, , , , ).…”

“…However, many of these activities are hidden in the sense that they are not found or included in annual reports or grant applications CBYSOs submit to their funders. CBYSOs throughout the San Joaquin Valley indicate that over 65% of their funding is received from foundations, while just less than 26% comes from government sources, and under 9% from private donations (Visser, , , , ). Heavy reliance on foundation funding is emblematic of the nature of the larger funding scheme of nonprofits in the US, and is part of the reason why much of the work in CBYSOs to support disconnected youth remains hidden.…”

“…However, CBYSO staff members also exercise a high level of agency in service provision. This includes the integration of what Campbell () identifies as “workarounds” wherein staff effectively invade directives imposed upon them by more powerful external actors to serve populations that lie outside of service guidelines and provisions by staying late, working weekends, or leveraging institutional and personal networks to assist disconnected youth (Visser, , , , ). For disconnected youth, this includes helping them find shelter, getting a lead on a job, accessing public benefits, securing food, and workforce development.…”

“…Neoliberal processes of economic restructuring have resulted in the shift away from stable, family sustaining production jobs in the occupational structure of rural labor markets to low wage service occupations (Mattingly & Smith, ; Smith & Tickamyer, ). Growth in immigration ‐ both new‐destination settlement of international migrants and the migration of low‐income racial/ethnic minorities from urban areas ‐ has given rise to contentious social relations often accompanied by local policy changes that restrict access to social services for populations deemed “undeserving” or “ineligible” (Foulkes & Newbold, ; Keene, Padilla, & Geronimus, ; Kandel, Henderson, Koball, & Capps, ; Visser, ). At the same time, deepening “pockets of poverty” have emerged as rural communities continue to serve as sites for the development of “rural ghettos” and environmental “dumping grounds” (Lichter & Brown, ).…”