Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality,
and to see the links to virtual rooms.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Judith Altrogge
(University of Osnabrueck)
Kwaku Arhin-Sam (Friedensau Adventist University)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Panel
- Stream:
- Flight and migration
- Location:
- Room 1231
- Sessions:
- Thursday 9 June, -
Time zone: Europe/Berlin
Short Abstract:
This panel addresses knowledge creation about return migration from Europe to Africa, focusing on how and why post-return processes are sidelined in many debates. We discuss dissonances between various interests and capacities in knowledge creation along theoretical and empirical contributions.
Long Abstract:
Rising immigration to Europe over the past decades has moved return migration to the political attention of European policy stakeholders, African immigration being no exception. Migrants returning voluntarily could contribute to development in Africa, while returned irregularized migrants strengthen European migration control. Although the so-called 'success' of returns unfolds after return, most European debates revolve around before and during return. Although demands for evidence-based policy making have recently increased empirical attention on post-return, the role of migrants' agency in knowledge production is questionable.
In this panel, we discuss knowledge creation on return migration in a reflexive manner, assuming dissonances between interests and capacities to create post-return knowledge. We seek to address this knowledge gap from theoretical and empirical directions. Theoretically, the gap represents a research subject in itself, considering reasons for the limited focus on post-return, and what the recent attention implies. The panel seeks to discuss which kind of knowledge about (post-)return is and which is not produced by whom and with which consequences. The debate will include postcolonial reflections that question European biases in (post-)return knowledge production.
Meanwhile, the knowledge gap also demands for more and diversified empirical studies that also uncover epistemological limitations of existing understandings. Here, imaginaries of return and the role of post-return therein both in Europe and in Africa are key. How is post-return incorporated in such imaginaries, both by policy and management actors, migrants and their networks alike? The panel seeks interdisciplinary contributions addressing the depicted limitations of return migration knowledge.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Thursday 9 June, 2022, -Divane Nzima (University of the Free State)
Paper short abstract:
The article contributes to return migration theorizing by introducing a new ‘diaspora trap’ framework which argues that permanent settlement is not always voluntary. Central to this involuntary permanent settlement is the social construction of migrants as successful in Zimbabwe
Paper long abstract:
This paper explores how South Africa-based Zimbabwean skilled migrants are dissuaded from returning home permanently. The study was conceptualized against the background that return migration has often been explained based on migrant failure or success in the host country. This failure-success dichotomy stems from the neo-classical economics theory of migration, the new economics of labor migration and the structuralist approach to return migration. Using a qualitative approach, this article challenges the failure-success theoretical position through an exploration of socio-economic factors in Zimbabwe and South Africa that deter permanent return migration. The article contributes to return migration theorizing by introducing a new ‘diaspora trap’ framework which argues that permanent settlement is not always voluntary. Central to this involuntary permanent settlement is the social construction of migrants as successful in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwean skilled migrants are thus entrapped in South Africa because of failure to live up to the ‘success social construct,’ and their inability to mitigate adversities in the host country.
Hamza Safouane (Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies (IMIS), Osnabrück University) Julia Stier (Berlin Social Science Center (WZB)) Andreas Pott (Osnabruck University)
Paper short abstract:
Based on interviews in Casamance in 2019, we approach migration drivers by considering, paradoxically, the role of imaginaries of return as a powerful motivation to migrate. We argue that the imaginary of a “triumphant” return is an integral, if not inaugural, part of migration aspirations.
Paper long abstract:
The study of migration drivers generally relies on two fundamental sets of explanations: first, the search for better life conditions and opportunities; second, the escape from situations of persecution or generalized violence. These two primary drivers encompass multilayered and interacting factors intervening in the decision-making phase and throughout the migratory journey. However, the research on migration drivers analyzes the movement toward a destination and seldom considers processes of return. In contrast, the literature on return generally focuses on migrants already in a destination country who need to return. In this article, we reflect on the role of return in the migration decision-making process. We argue that an imagined “triumphant” return is an integral, if not inaugural, part of migration aspirations and decisions. Migrants’ imaginaries of a triumphant return must be integrated to researching migration aspirations and stand in contrast to experiences of the “non-triumphant” returnees who were deported or were unable to reach their destination. Basing our analysis on 34 semi-structured interviews conducted in Casamance with prospective migrants, returnees, local government agencies and (I)NGOs, we approach migration drivers by considering, paradoxically, the role of imaginaries of return as a powerful motivation to migrate. First, we identify the various vectors of imaginaries of return encountered during our fieldwork that fuel aspirations to (re)migrate. Second, we show how research participants mobilize an imaginary of return that reflects a quest for economic and symbolic capital.
Claudia Ba (Technical University Darmstadt)
Paper short abstract:
This paper contributes empirical reflections on the visual production of policy makers in Europe and Africa, aiming at ending ‘irregular migration’ through ‘economic stirr-ups’. The visualised Kankurang Festival deals as a focal point for questioning paradox and multi-faceted spatiotemporal notions of this heritage.
Paper long abstract:
This paper focussed on an empirical case from Gambia, interrogating implicit knowledge-productions through visualisation. Secrecy and Invisibility being understood as co-constitutive of Knowledge-gaps. In 2018 the Kankurang Festival was revived in Janjanbureh, The Gambia, in cooperation with european development agencies. Financed by the EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (EUTF) and executed by the International Trade Center (ITC) and the Youth Development programme (YEP), the Festival aims at “ending irregular migration” (YEP, 2018) and producing “economic stirr-ups” for The Gambia. Since then, online visualisations depict the success-story of initating the Festival, supported by imagery of individual home-comers. Likewise, the associated gambian institutions partake in the imagery about the heritagisation as a success-story on social media. Since the Kankurang was also inscribed as Intangible Cultural Heritage (UNESCO) by Senegal and The Gambia in 2008, the measures of safeguarding the Initiatory Rite and the museal displays in Janjanbureh are now in feasible confrontation with the Festivals aims. Delicately, the Rite should not be seen by outsiders, namely women, and its safeguarding was a measure to reinstall the Rites’ secrecy. Hence, this paper raises questions about the ethical implications of two eurocentric agencies (1), the paradox created by them both individually and in comparison (2) by clarifying on how their visualisations’ spatiotemporal notions oppose eachother. In conclusion, the paper can add to a theorisation on knowledge-production and gaps through the entangled concepts of return-migration and heritagisation, their visual practices and limitations.