Dahinden, Janine

2019, Crettaz, Eric, Dahinden, Janine

Transnational studies have been in vogue for the past two decades. Nevertheless, there remain important knowledge gaps concerning migrants’ transnational formations. First, most of the literature relies on qualitative case studies. The few existing quantitative studies have shown that transnationality is far from being a “lifestyle” and that factors other than individual preferences are at play. Second, most studies in this field focus on one nationally defined group, which renders impossible the elaboration of an overall model of transnationality that goes beyond description. Third, few studies have tried to link the question of transnationality simultaneously to migration and mobility. To address these gaps, we propose here an analysis of migrant transnationality based on the Migration-Mobility Survey. We define transnationality along three dimensions. We make a distinction between transnational (pre-and-post-migration) mobilities, network transnationality and transnational belonging. We use regression models and multiple correspondence analysis to identify the prevalence of transnationality and the main determinants of transnational patterns. The analysis confirms the hypothesis that transnationality can be linear – an “automatic effect” of migration – resource-dependent, but also reactive upon discrimination. Migrant transnationality can simultaneously be a sign of possessing high resources – most importantly, in terms of legal capital, education and economic resources – or of discrimination. Furthermore, our analysis brings to light five ideal-typical configurations of what we call the Migration-Mobility-Transnationality Nexus. Our analysis contributes to this book by investigating the Migration-Mobility-Nexus with respect to transnationality, going beyond the normative ideas of migration and mobility by integrating them analytically into one model.

2017-6-5, Dahinden, Janine

In this commentary, I discuss the importance of Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt’s article, focusing on three specific points. First, I argue that this 1999 article represented a turning point in transnational migration studies, in that it made it possible to address important weaknesses in this field of study. Second, I reflect on the article’s lack of reference to the nation-state and its power to shape transnational fields. Third, I argue that the cumulative knowledge gained over the last two decades – triggered in part by the claims of this 1999 article – have been steadily integrated into this field of investigation, rendering possible important theoretical alterations. These insights have made possible a shift towards a new stance, a transnational perspective whose specific epistemology makes it possible to develop explanatory frameworks for current transformation processes and to revise social theory more generally.

2016-1-13, Dahinden, Janine

2016, Toader, Alina, Dahinden, Janine, Schaer, Martine

2019, Fischer, Carolin, Dahinden, Janine

2016-7-1, Dümmler, Kerstin, Dahinden, Janine

2016, Dahinden, Janine

2017-11-14, Schaer, Martine, Dahinden, Janine

2016-5-20, Dahinden, Janine

2016, Schaer, Martine, Dahinden, Janine, Toader, Alina