Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"The South Asian diaspora is a diverse group who settled in different parts of the world, often concentrated in developed countries. There is an emerging trend of re-engagement of the diaspora in the South Asian region. Entrepreneurs in Japan and Singapore as well as the Malaysian Indian diaspora are involved in South India making the region a lucrative space for capital, talent and ideas. This volume expands into diasporic communities such as the Nepali community in Singapore and their contribution to their home economy through remittances. Beyond economics, the contributors explore how transnational politics overlap with religious ideologies amongst Pakistanis in United Kingdom and the Sathya Sai Baba movement which contributes to diasporic identity building in host countries. They also explore media and culture: in the last decade Bollywood films have portrayed life in the diaspora, and have featured the diaspora and Non Resident Indians (NRI) as fully formed stock characters and protagonists. The process of diaspora re-engagement has tremendous development implications for South Asian countries, both individually and for their regional integration\"-- Provided by publisher.

The debate on migration and development has swung back and forth like a pendulum, from developmentalist optimism in the 1950s and 1960s, to neo-Marxist pessimism over the 1970s and 1980s, towards more optimistic views in the 1990s and 2000s. This paper argues how such discursive shifts in the migration and development debate should be primarily seen as part of more general paradigm shifts in social and development theory. However, the classical opposition between pessimistic and optimistic views is challenged by empirical evidence pointing to the heterogeneity of migration impacts. By integrating and amending insights from the new economics of labor migration, livelihood perspectives in development studies and transnational perspectives in migration studies — which share several though as yet unobserved conceptual parallels — this paper elaborates the contours of a conceptual framework that simultaneously integrates agency and structure perspectives and is therefore able to account for the heterogeneous nature of migration-development interactions. The resulting perspective reveals the naivety of recent views celebrating migration as self-help development \"from below\". These views are largely ideologically driven and shift the attention away from structural constraints and the vital role of states in shaping favorable conditions for positive development impacts of migration to occur.

There has been great interest in the relationship between immigration and the welfare state in recent years, and particularly since Alesina and Glaeser’s (2004) influential work. Following literatures on solidarity and fractionalization, race in the U.S. welfare state, and anti-immigrant sentiments, many contend that immigration undermines public support for social policy. This study analyzes three measures of immigration and six welfare attitudes using 1996 and 2006 International Social Survey Program (ISSP) data for 17 affluent democracies. Based on multi-level and two-way fixed-effects models, our results mostly fail to support the generic hypothesis that immigration undermines public support for social policy. The percent foreign born, net migration, and the 10-year change in the percent foreign born all fail to have robust significant negative effects on welfare attitudes. There is evidence that the percent foreign born significantly undermines the welfare attitude that government “should provide a job for everyone who wants one.” However, there is more robust evidence that net migration and change in percent foreign born have positive effects on welfare attitudes. We conclude that the compensation and chauvinism hypotheses provide greater potential for future research, and we critically consider other ways immigration could undermine the welfare state. Ultimately, this study demonstrates that factors other than immigration are far more important for public support of social policy. En los últimos años ha surgido un gran interés en la relación entre la inmigración y el estado de bienestar, especialmente a partir del influyente trabajo de Alesina y Glaeser (2004). Con base en la literatura sobre solidaridad y fraccionalización, raza en el estado de bienestar estadounidense y sentimientos en contra de los inmigrantes, muchos sostienen que la inmigración debilita el apoyo público a las políticas sociales. En este estudio se analizan tres medidas sobre inmigración y seis actitudes relativas al bienestar. Para ello utilizamos datos de 17 democracias prósperas del Programa Internacional de Encuestas Sociales (ISSP, según sus siglas en inglés) de 1996 y 2006. Sobre la base de modelos multinivel y de efectos fijos de doble vía, en su mayoría nuestros resultados no logran dar sustento a la hipótesis genérica que sostiene que la inmigración debilita el apoyo público a las políticas sociales. Ni el porcentaje de nacidos en el extranjero, ni la migración neta ni el cambio en diez años del porcentaje de nacidos en el extranjero demostraron tener efectos negativos significativos en las actitudes relativas al bienestar. Existe evidencia de que el porcentaje de nacidos en el extranjero debilita significativamente la actitud relativa al bienestar que indica que el gobierno \"debería proporcionar un empleo a todo aquel que lo desee\". Sin embargo, existe evidencia más robusta que sugiere que la migración neta y el cambio en el porcentaje de nacidos en el extranjero tienen efectos positivos en las actitudes relativas al bienestar. Concluimos que las hipótesis de la compensación y del chauvinismo proporcionan un potencial mayor para futuras investigaciones y discutimos críticamente otros modos en que la inmigración puede debilitar el estado de bienestar. Por último, en este estudio se demuestra que otros factores distintos de la inmigración son mucho más importantes para el apoyo público a las políticas sociales.

This article analyzes how Central American immigrants in tenuous legal statuses experience current immigration laws. Based on ethnographic observations and over 200 interviews conducted between 1998 and 2010 with immigrants in Los Angeles and Phoenix and individuals in sending communities, this study reveals how the convergence and implementation of immigration and criminal law constitute forms of violence. Drawing on theories of structural and symbolic violence, the authors use the analytic category \"legal violence\" to capture the normalized but cumulatively injurious effects of the law. The analysis focuses on three central and interrelated areas of immigrants' lives -- work, family, and school -- to expose how the criminalization of immigrants at the federal, state, and local levels is not only exclusionary but also generates violent effects for individual immigrants and their families, affecting everyday lives and long-term incorporation processes. Adapted from the source document.

Using a quasi-experimental research design, this study examines the effect of terrorist events on the perception of immigrants across 65 regions in nine European countries. It first elaborates a theoretical argument that explains the effect of events and points to economic conditions, the size of the immigrant population, and personal contact as mediating factors. This argument is evaluated using the fact that the terror attack in Bali on October 12, 2002, occurred during the fieldwork period of the European Social Survey. The findings from this natural experiment reveal considerable cross-national and regional variation in the effect of the event and its temporal duration. The analysis on the regional level supports the argument about contextual variations in the response to the event and a second analysis based on the 2004 Madrid bombing confirms the study's conclusions. Implications of the findings for societal responses to terror attacks, the literature on attitudes toward immigrants, and survey research are discussed. Adapted from the source document.

A Bourdieusian concept of cultural capital is used to investigate the transformations and contestations of migrants' cultural capital. Research often treated migrants' cultural capital as reified and ethnically bounded, assuming they bring a set of cultural resources from the country of origin to the country of migration that either fit or do not fit Critiquing such 'rucksack approaches', I argue that migration results in new ways of producing and re-producing (mobilizing, enacting, validating) cultural capital that builds on, rather than simply mirrors, power relations of either the country of origin or the country of migration. Migrants create mechanisms of validation for their cultural capital, negotiating both ethnic majority and migrant institutions and networks. Migration-specific cultural capital (re-)produces intra-migrant differentiations of gender, ethnicity and class, in the process creating modes of validation alternative to national capital. The argument builds on case studies of skilled Turkish and Kurdish migrant women in Britain and Germany.

This article critically reviews the intersectional locus of public opinion scholarship and immigration studies that make use of data from multinational survey projects. Specifically, it emphasizes current cross-national research seeking to understand the causes, manifestations, and implications of attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in economically advanced countries of the world. Despite rapid expansion, the field suffers from several methodological challenges and theoretical constraints. A succinct exposure of trends and patterns is followed by presentations of influential theoretical perspectives and established individual- and contextual-level determinants. The review suggests that strengthening the conceptual apparatus and enlarging the analytical focus are priorities. It concludes with some observations on how to circumvent these problems and to bridge current research with future explorations of the embedded nature of such public attitudes.

The purpose of our article is to examine how current East European migration to the UK has been racialized in immigration policy and tabloid journalism. The state's immigration policy, we argue, exhibits features of institutionalized racism that implicitly invokes shared whiteness as a basis of racialized inclusion. The tabloids, in contrast, tend toward cultural racism in their coverage of these migrations by explicitly invoking cultural difference as a basis of racialized exclusion. Our analysis focuses on two cohorts of migrants: Hungarians, representing the larger 2004 entrants, and Romanians, representing the smaller 2007 entrants. The processes of racialization we examine in this article reveal degrees of whiteness that give 'race' continued currency as an idiom for making sense of these migrations and the migrants that people them.

Immigrant citizenship rights in the nation-state reference both theories of cross-national convergence and the resilience of national political processes. This article investigates European countries' attribution of rights to immigrants: Have these rights become more inclusive and more similar across countries? Are they affected by EU membership, the role of the judiciary, the party in power, the size of the immigrant electorate, or pressure exerted by anti-immigrant parties? Original data on 10 European countries, 1980-2008, reveal no evidence for cross-national convergence. Rights tended to become more inclusive until 2002, but stagnated afterward. Electoral changes drive these trends: growth of the immigrant electorate led to expansion, but countermobilization by right-wing parties slowed or reversed liberalizations. These electoral mechanisms are in turn shaped by long-standing policy traditions, leading to strong path dependence and the reproduction of preexisting cross-national differences.

High cost barriers and immigration policy restrictions prevent many low-capital migrants from realizing their destination preferences. However, interviews with 95 Filipino domestic workers in the Philippines, Hong Kong, and Singapore reveal how these low-capital migrants can intentionally follow a stepwise international migration trajectory, working their way up a hierarchy of destination countries and accumulating sufficient migrant capital in the process so as to eventually gain legal entry into their preferred destinations, often in the West. Such a trajectory differs from more frequently studied migration patterns in its number of stages, duration, intentionality hierarchical progression, and dynamic nature. Adapted from the source document.