The Migration–Development Nexus and Organizational Time

Abstract

While some migration research looks at how time influences individual migration trajectories, little attention has been paid to the ways in which temporal considerations influence migration and development. We propose the idea of "organizational time" and argue that bringing time into sharper focus calls into question how the categories of migration and return affect organizational change; reveals how the career stage at which migrants leave affects their ability to influence organizational change when they return, and shows how the role of senders and receivers of social remittances shifts over time. We draw on research on the impact of return migration and social remittances on institutional capacity building and policymaking in the health sectors in Gujarat, India to make these arguments.

Return Migration and Psychosocial Wellbeing

“…This is analogous to how researchers describe an idealization of the home country on the part of migrants abroad (Cornish et al 1999;Markowitz and Stefansson 2004;Warner 1994). Our respondents described how their attitudes changed under the influence of their migration experiences, and their view on 'how things are done in Belgium' became a 'moral touchstone', a 'frame of reference', contrasting with the difficulties and injustices they were confronted with in their country of origin (Levitt and Rajaram 2013;Pedersen 2003). Lilit described this as something positive, making her a better person; though for Davit, it led to frustration when confronted with the disjuncture between both places and the clash between his changed mentality and the post-return reality (Pedersen 2003).…”

“…Finally, the multiple changes in the lived experiences of the returnees suggest the necessity of incorporating a temporal dimension into the study of return experiences (Levitt and Rajaram 2013). These four case studies were not exceptional in the wider study sample of 65 returnees, and their stories relate to the stories and perspectives of many others.…”

“…Even so, during the first interview after return, his view on his migration experience was countered by a strong feeling of belonging to his country of origin. These evolutions illustrate how the meaning of places can change over time (Levitt and Rajaram 2013) and under the influence of migration experiences and changes in post-return living situations. The stories also illustrated that locality matters, given the fact that the place to which people return influences their options (cf.…”

The International Migration Review at 50: Reflecting on Half a Century of International Migration Research and Looking Ahead

“…The transnational turn in migration studies has coincided with a reinvigorated interest in the links between migration and development, or what has become known as the migration–development nexus (Sørensen, Van Hear, and Pedersen, ; Levitt and Rajaram, ). At the time when the IMR was established, the dominant views on the development effects of out‐migration were optimistic.…”

The boundaries of transnationalism: the case of assisted voluntary return migrants

“…There is thus a gap between the physical space these returnees inhabit and the social, emotional and affective spaces they strive to negotiate (Pries 2007), as well as a possible mismatch between their desire and their ability to participate in the transnational field. Overall, our respondents had very little ability to reach out to other places (Gielis 2009), which strongly limits what Levitt and Rajaram (2013) describe as the porosity of return or the selfperpetuation of transnational ties after return. Our respondents' access to transnational ties was, at first, mediated by their migration experience, mainly as asylum seekers.…”