Temp Nations? A Research Agenda on Migration, Temporariness, and Membership

Abstract

This article outlines a research agenda to study how, why, and with what consequences systems of migration policy that rely on time-delimited statuses have been tools of nation-state making. Taking a long view and comparing key contemporary cases, I argue that temporary migration regimes have been appealing because they purport to reconcile the disparate interests and preferences of political actors in sending and receiving countries, native and foreign workers, and employers. Such regimes have been a means for the affirmative selection of migrants as workers—an approach that preserves the option of rejecting them as permanent members. The proposed research would uncover the full range of temporal means by which states have shaped populations through migration policy. Substantively, it explores how changes in the ratio of temporary to permanent statuses affect the meaning of political belonging. This would include an examination of how the policing of temporariness requires routine bureaucratic monitoring as well as extreme measures like deportation with consequences for migrants as well as for the communities in which they live.

Precarity for the global talent: The impact of visa policies on high‐skilled immigrants’ work in the United States

“…In a historical context of growing diversification of migration channels and legal statuses for highly killed immigration, it is necessary to disaggregate legal immigration in an analysis that pays attention to the complexification of visa policies between temporary and permanent, the different legal tracks that this entails and the rights attached to each legal track (Gonzales & Sigona, 2017;Cook-Martín, 2019). Visa policies for highly skilled immigrants are not only formal or administrative instruments the United States uses to determine who enters the country and under what conditions, but they also function as technologies of control and regulation of labour at a macro and micro level.…”

Syrian refugee labour and food insecurity in Middle Eastern agriculture during the early COVID‐19 pandemic

“…This means that the various government authorities interact with them differently (Coutin 2000). Temporary status, coupled with the threat of deportation, reduces the bargaining power of migrant workers vis-à-vis employers, thereby increasing their vulnerability to exploitative labour, debt relationships, and dependence on labour contractors (Cook-Martin 2019;Shamir 2017). It also gives rise to experiences of discrimination and exclusion, a fragmented sense of belonging, and transnational families (Menjívar 2006).…”

Differentiation from above and below: Evolving immigration policy and the integration dilemma in Singapore

“…They cannot bring family members, cannot easily change employers, and have no pathways to permanent settlement. These regulations are particularly strict in migrant-receiving countries in Asia as compared with Western liberal democracies (Castles et al, 2014; Cook-Martin, 2019; Stasiulis, 2008; Tong and Jiang, 2020).…”

“…For example, most Asian countries regard labor migration as a temporary necessity and regulate it to ensure that the recruitment of foreign labor, particularly low-skilled labor, will not lead to permanent settlement (Castles et al, 2014: 156). Differentiating migrants based on skill levels, ethnicity, and other parameters are also common among Western countries (Cook-Martin, 2019). A study of the United States of America (USA) and five major European countries found that the social rights of migrants varied by entry category and that migrants did not have the same social rights as native citizens (Sainsbury, 2012).…”