Marta Bivand Erdal

In research that seeks to answer questions where it is plausible that migration plays some role, it is recognised that there is a need to de-centre the migrant to gain a deeper understanding of the...

This chapter sheds light on transnational and translocal dynamics of (im)mobilities in conflict-affected settings, foregrounding temporal dimensions and advocating a non-linear approach to ‘forced migration’. Based on a 2022 survey among South Sudanese refugees in northern Uganda (n = 1008), mostly Dinka or Nuer, we show how displacement is shaped by past experiences, social ties, and ongoing mobility negotiations. First, we find that a third of respondents with partners were not co-located, highlighting spatial multiplicity. Second, over a quarter had returned to South Sudan, often repeatedly, navigating risks and routes. Third, analysing connections and migration aspirations pre-flight, we show that translocal networks and remittances existed—to varying extents—before displacement, reflecting long-standing cross-border ties. Finally, insights into refugees’ past migration considerations suggest that mobility was part of life in South Sudan for many. Through this analysis, we contribute to a temporal understanding of translocal lives in conflict, showing how current and future (im)mobilities must be interpreted also as a continuation of past connections.

This article foregrounds the migration–development nexus and analyses how the policy on migration and development in Pakistan does, or does not, address ongoing im/mobility realities. International migration is a significant economic and political issue. Meanwhile, international donors seek to influence the state’s development planning and policies on citizens’ im/mobilities. This article asks: How does the current migration policy in Pakistan engage with, and address, ongoing im/mobility realities within the migration–development nexus? Using a comprehensive mixed-methods research design, the analysis draws on qualitative and survey data, collected during fieldwork in three areas of Pakistan, and an extensive review of policies pertinent to the migration–development nexus. Findings reveal gaps and exclusions, showing a misalignment between macro-level policy agendas and lived experiences. Pakistan’s migration policy reveals not a lack of knowledge, but a hierarchy of attention, exposing prioritisations, omissions and silences in the existing policy. Addressing this disjuncture requires reimagining migration governance as a multidimensional, inclusive and context-sensitive process, centring internal mobility, climate adaptation and social equity within the migration–development nexus. The evidence calls for a fundamental rethinking of migration governance in Global South contexts, contributing to broader debates on migration, the state and the migration–development nexus.

Research on spatial and social mobility intersections often foregrounds the role of migration in struggles for improved socioeconomic positions. Inspired by im/mobility scholarship and growing interest in voluntary immobility, this article considers the role of staying in the interactions between migration and upward social mobility. Drawing on 106 family history interviews with middle-class urban residents in Hanoi, Manila, Karachi, and Mumbai, we develop “comfortable immobility” as an analytical window to ask: How do spatial and social immobility matter for understanding this relationship? We analyze comfortable immobility as an active phase in migration and social mobility processes across three interrelated dimensions. First, as a subjective, embodied experience, participants’ descriptions of being and becoming comfortably middle-class reflect a voluntary immobility characterized by geographical and socioeconomic stasis, emerging as a social mobility outcome. Second, comfortable immobility is relationally produced as family members’ intertwined histories of moving and staying, and their interdependent relations, shape upward social mobility trajectories. Third, we examine how comfortable immobility builds on family histories while becoming a social mobility strategy shaping family futures, enabling aspirations and possibilities for moving and staying. Our analysis illuminates how staying may matter both as an outcome and as a strategy in urban middle-class families’ social mobility trajectories, thus contributing to rebalancing attention toward moving and staying in studies of the social-spatial mobility nexus. The article suggests that “comfortable immobility” speaks to debates on social change from varying Global South vantage points, while engaging with immobility conceptualization in migration studies more generally.

This concluding chapter invites critical reflection on how migrant transnationalism can be studied going forward. We suggest that a transnational lens helps researchers grasp how lives stretch across borders, without assuming these experiences are unique to migrants or always significant. The chapter stresses the continuing importance of transnational lens in a world where borders continue to matter in both symbolic and material ways. We outline seven research avenues where such a perspective proves especially valuable. Reflecting on global imbalances in migration research, the chapter calls for more equitable and inclusive knowledge production. In a time when migration debates are often politically charged and exclusionary, a transnational perspective remains essential—not just for rigorous empirical research, but also for understanding how people live and act within an unequal and often unjust, yet deeply interconnected world.

This chapter investigates the interactions of migrant transnationalism and integration. It argues that understanding integration requires also being willing to adopt a transnational lens on relationships, identities, and resources shaped by movement and belonging in multiple contexts. It discusses empirical research over the past three decades, examining how transnational practices and integration interact, and considers the normative dimensions of what integration is or should be. The chapter critiques simplistic assumptions about transnationalism’s role, clarifying that it neither causes nor solves exclusion. Instead, it highlights the variability in how transnational engagement and integration may interact, and through this addresses common misconceptions, showing that transnationalism is neither inherently problematic nor a cure-all for integration challenges.

In this chapter, we introduce and explore approaches to migrant transnationalism, asking how cross-border connections were understood at the time the term first gained traction in the 1990s. The first section explores the ‘what’ of migrant transnationalism and traces the field’s foundations in interdisciplinary migration studies, emphasizing evolving approaches, and including tangible and intangible aspects of migrant transnationalism. The second section focuses on the geographies of migrant transnationalism–the ‘where’–places and spaces involved, discussing the two most used spatial concepts: transnational social spaces and transnational social fields. The third section examines the ‘who’–or the actors in transnational social fields—migrants, non-migrants, families, wartime migration, and religious actors. This section also includes considerations on time and the life course, such as whether transnational ties endure or fade over time?

This chapter explores migrant transnationalism in different areas of life, focusing on economic, socio-cultural and political transnationalism. It starts by looking at economic transnationalism, especially the importance of remittances—how and why they are sent, including digital and reverse remittances, and their effects on families and communities. Text boxes expand on the hawala system, transnational entrepreneurship, and the role of remittance costs in the Sustainable Development Goals. It then turns to sociocultural transnationalism, focusing on social relationships, traditions, and ideas shared across countries. It discusses the concept of social remittances, as well as transnational families and care. Finally, the chapter examines political transnationalism, including diaspora policies, voting from abroad, and dual citizenship. By connecting micro- and macro-level dynamics, it highlights how migrants’ transnational engagements shape and are shaped by broader structures across multiple domains.

This chapter examines methodological considerations in researching migrant transnationalism, focusing on how scholars can embed transnational awareness into research designs. Recognising that no single approach fits all questions, it reviews diverse quantitative and qualitative methods from across disciplines. The chapter emphasizes the value of multi-sited fieldwork, while also acknowledging the insights that can arise from single-location studies. It critically reflects on how transnational research often centres either migrants or their non-migrant counterparts, often in origin or residence countries. A contribution is a practical toolkit that discusses reflexivity, positionality, interdisciplinarity, and ethics as these relate to knowledge co-creation in transnational social fields, and across global asymmetries. The chapter aims to support researchers and students in conducting nuanced and rigorous, transnationally conscientious research, and highlights the enduring value of a transnational lens in migration studies.