Research Project
Diffusion and Contexts of Transnational Migrant Organizations in Europe
(TRAMO)
(Funded by Volkswagen-Stiftung/Germany)
Project Direction
Prof. Dr. Ludger Pries
General Project Team at Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Dr. Barbara Laubenthal (general adviser)
M.A. Zeynep Sezgin (responsible coordinator)
Dipl.Soz. Tülay Tuncer Zengingül (researcher)
Hülya Kaya, Christina Gögelein (research assistants)
Country Project Directors:
Prof. Dr. Stephen Castles, Centre of Migration Research, Oxford University
Prof. Dr. Gunther Dietz, Laboratorio de Estudios Interculturales, Universidad de Granada
Dr. Dirk Halm, Stiftung Zentrum für Türkeistudien, Universität Duisburg-Essen
Prof. Dr. Marek Okolski, Centre of Migration Research, Warsaw University
Prof.
Dr. Ludger
Department
of Pries
Social Sciences
Chair Sociology of Organisations and Participation
Studies
Building GB 04/42
44780 Bochum - Germany
Telephone +49-234-32-25429
FAX
+49-234-32-14446
E-Mail: [email protected]
General Website: www.rub.de/soaps
Project Website: <under construction>
1
Research Objectives and Rationale
The integration of migrants is an important task of the European societies. The results of the
PISA study demonstrate that children of migrants in many countries still do not have equal
educational opportunities; especially in Germany, children with a migration background are
strongly underrepresented in higher education. Unrest among youth with a migration background in the French banlieues, attacks on Muslim migrants in Spain and Britain also show
that the integration of migrants has by no means been fully realised in the European societies.
Closely linked to the question of the adequate ways and forms of integration is the issue of
migrants’ participation in the countries and societies of arrival. All over Europe, migrants
organize themselves in cultural, political, economic and social organizations. These migrant
organizations (MOs) play a central role in integrating migrants into the host societies. The
importance of MOs, however, is not limited to their role in integration. The civic participation
of migrants is also crucial for the democratic development of Europe and for the future enhancement of European civil societies. Accordingly, the importance of MOs has been recognized by national and European political institutions, and the promotion of migrants’ participation in civil societies has been formulated as a policy-aim (European Commission 2004;
Halm/Sauer 2005; Vogt 2005).
However, in the face of an increasingly globalized world, the issues of integration and migrants’ civic participation can not be adequately addressed by analytical concepts which focus
exclusively on the nation-state. In the last two decades, new political, social, cultural and economic migratory realities, which span across countries of origin and arrival, have emerged.
Furthermore, current research shows that the linkages of MOs with countries of origin have
been intensified during the last decade. This calls for a new scientific approach which focuses
on the role of countries of origin and of countries of arrival in promoting migrants’ integration
and participation. What is evidently required is a transnational analysis which can grasp current developments in international migration and which can identify the linkages of MOs with
their countries of origin (Vertovec 1999; Pries 2003 and 2005; Vogel 2005).
For this reason, the research project “Diffusion and Contexts of Transnational Migrants’ Organizations in Europe (TRAMO)” has developed an analytical framework addressing both
transnational organizations and the border-crossing contexts in which they exist. Particularly,
it seeks to (1) identify the characteristics of cross border migrant organizations (CBMOs), (2)
analyse the diffusion of transnational migrant organizations (TRAMOs), (3) study the context
factors which influence the emergence of TRAMOs, and (4) address the consequences of the
2
transnationalization of MOs (if this transnationalisation can be proven to be taking place),
regarding the participation and incorporation of migrants in European national societies.
State of Research on MOs
Both in Europe and in other immigration regions, there is comprehensive research ranging
from theoretical accounts of the causes, nature and extent of immigration, through analysis of
governments’ basic integration policies up to the problems that migrants face in arrival societies.1 Within this body of research, literature on the forms, stages and the degree of migrants’
incorporation in the societies of arrival have especially expanded.2 Some of these studies although in the various countries in differing intensity - have also dealt with the participation
of migrants and their organizations in European societies.
The scientific interest in MOs is higher in those European countries with a long migration
history than in those which more recently became important countries of origin or of arrival of
migration. However, in quite all European countries research on MOs is less developed than
for example research on individuals or ethnic groups. Also, especially in the new acceding
countries of the EU and in the Mediterranean countries, there has only been a limited number
of studies on MOs (Vogel 2005). In Spain, for example, although MOs have existed since the
end of 1970s, the participation of migrants has only become a research topic since the turn of
the millennium (González-Enríquez 2004). Previous studies show how MOs mainly act to
improve the legal and social situation of migrants, for instance incorporating them in the labour market and helping them to obtain a legal status in Spain. These studies, however, neither systematically investigate the landscape of MOs nor do they empirically analyse their
activities and structures.
Similarly, migration research in Poland only started after 1989, taking into account new migration flows and migratory patterns. A large part of this research focuses on (1) current migration flows to Eastern Europe, (2) the transformation of Poland into a transit and migration
country (Iglicka 2000; Okolski 2004), (3) the socio-economic situation of migrants (Hamilton
Ian/Iglicka 2000), and (4) the general conditions for the integration of migrants in Polish society (Okolski/Grzymala-Kazlowska 2003). Regarding migrants’ participation, some studies
have dealt with the historically present ethnic minorities, who have increasingly been estab1
See e.g. Castles/Davidson (2000); Castles et al. (2006); Okolski (2004); Thränhardt (2000).
See e.g. Heckmann/Schnapper 2003; OECD 2005; British Council Brussels 2005: World Bank 2005; International Organisation for Migration (IOM) 2005; Bade 2004; Pries 2003; Gogolin/Pries 2004; European Commission 2001; Esser 2001; Esser 2006; Castles/Davidson 2000; Goebel/Pries 2003; Geddes 2000.
2
3
lishing new organizations since 1989 (Grzymala-Kazlowska 2002). The establishment of organizations by new groups of immigrant workers has not been scientifically addressed in Poland yet.
There is a broad landscape of migrants’ and ethnic organizations in the UK and Germany countries with a long migration history. Accordingly, there is extensive research on MOs in
these countries. In the UK, many recent studies focus on the political participation of migrants
at the local level and on their integration into political institutions and trade unions. As opposed to the state of research in the new acceding countries of the European Union and in the
Mediterranean countries, there is a significant number of studies on MOs in the UK (see e.g.
Düvell 2005; McLeod et al. 2001; Davis/Cooke 2002; Husband 2002; Zetter/Pearl 2000).
Similarly, in Germany, extensive research on participation of migrants and MOs in particular
exists. Research on MOs started in Germany at the beginning of the 1980s (Elwert 1984). A
large number of studies dealt with the self-organization of various national groups; the impact
of MOs on integration success of different migrant groups (Fijalkowki / Gillmeister 1997;
Thränhardt 1989; Thränhardt / Hunger 2000) was analysed as well as the historical development of MOs in Germany (Hunger 2002). Based on the – contested – concept of ‘ethnic colony’, various forms of self-organizations of ethnic minorities and their function for migrants
have been illuminated in detail (Heckmann 1998). There is also a number of systematicempirical analyses on participation of migrants (Diehl et al. 1998; Diehl 2002) and on the
members, structures, resources and responsibilities of MOs (Thränhardt 1999). Some of these
studies particularly address the civic participation of Turkish migrants in German society
(Halm/Sauer 2005). Yet, despite this wide range of research projects on migration in Germany, including some contributions specific to the migrant organizations, there still remains
an important research gap in Germany. As stated by Jungk, 2000, since the 1980s most migration studies in Germany have been self-restricted and underestimated migrants’ associations.
When migrant organizations actually were in the focus, the main approach was on their role in
the integration process (Huth/ Hoppe 2002). Thus research has asked whether MOs contribute
to migrants’ integration or if they increase their cultural and structural segregation.
This focus on integration processes in the society of arrival has not been limited to the German case; it has been a common feature of much of the European research on MOs. As a consequence, studies have offered only a limited view on migrant organizations. Especially the
influences of migrant organizations in countries of origin, the potential importance of transnational structures and the transnational characteristics of MOs have been neglected.
4
State of Research on cross border migrant organizations (CBMOs)
Some recent studies have started to address the border-crossing activities of MOs; they have
claimed that MOs should be (increasingly) understood as a transnational phenomenon (Vertovec 1999; Itzigsohn et al. 1999). For the German case, without explicitly addressing the
issue of border-crossing activities of MOs, some recent studies show the existence of transnational ties of organizations. A study on the civic participation of migrants revealed that the
activities of 12 percent of Turkish organizations in Germany are directed equally to Germany
and Turkey (Halm/ Sauer 2005). A study on the self-organization of migrants in North Rhein
Westphalia (Thränhardt 1999) has also pointed out the existence of cross-border activities of
migrants: 13 percent of the analysed MOs stated that their main area of activity is the “humanitarian aid in the country of origin” (Thränhardt 1999). Caglar (2006: 18) supported these
findings and argued that “migrant organizations strive to become political actors in both countries of arrival and origin”.
Transnational migrant communities and corresponding CBMOs have also emerged in Spain
(Dietz 2004). Ecuadorian and Uruguayan organizations which emerged at the end of the
1990s in Spain have established branches of their organizations in their home countries and
have directed their claims both to the Spanish and to the Ecuadorian/Uruguayan government
(Laubenthal 2007; Moraes 2004; Dietz/Agrela 2005). Portes et al. (2005) have identified similar transnational tendencies of MOs active in the USA as country of arrival. The aim of their
study was to analyse the activities of transnational MOs and to identify the differences between the organizations founded by different nationalities. To this aim, Portes et al. (2005)
have conducted a comparative study of transnational Colombian, Dominican and Mexican
MOs in the United States. In this study, they defined transnational organizations as those
whose goals and activities were not limited to countries in which their members resided
(Portes et al. 2005). They studied organizations that were active both in the countries of origin
and arrival. The organizations were classified by a typology differentiating civic, hometown
committees, social agency, religious and political activities (the latter mainly political parties).
Portes et al. (2005) showed that a significant amount of MOs in the USA display transnational
characteristics, and that the political contexts of both the countries of arrival and origin have
an influence on these organizations.
Other studies also advocated the transnational analysis and elaborated typologies in order to
highlight the transnational claims and practices of MOs (Koopmans/Statham 2003; Oester5
gaard-Nielsen 2003). Koopmans/Statham (2003), for example, studied the transnational character of migrants’ political claims in several European countries. In their comparative study,
they investigated the extent and the ways the various European citizenship and integration
models influence the transnational claims-making of migrants. Accordingly, they identified
four types of claims-making: (1) transplanted homeland politics, (2) homeland-directed transnationalism, (3) country of residence-directed transnationalism and (4) purely national claims;
only two of these types of claims-making (2 and 3) can be described as transnational. Ostergaard-Nielsen (Ostergaard-Nielsen 2001; Ostergaard-Nielsen 2003; Ostergaard-Nielsen 2006)
created also a typology of transnational political practices. She defined various forms of political activity as transnational: (a) transnational immigration politics as politics in the country
of arrival when the country of origin is involved in helping to improve the legal or socioeconomic status of its citizens or former citizens, and (b) homeland politics from migrants or
refugees, directed to their home country (its internal or external politics) including the two
subtypes of Diaspora politics (homeland politics of those who can not participate) and translocal politics (by immigrants to improve the local community, from which they come). The
conceptualization of Portes et al. and the typologies of Ostergaard-Nielsen and Koopmans/Statham contain the same criteria for the identification of transnational phenomena.
First, the direction of claims and/or political, social or economic activities are understood as
transnational if they cross national borders and are directed to home country. Secondly, they
coin transnationalization a process if a cross-border geographical distribution of organizations’ resources exists.
Transnationalism and Organization Research as research perspectives
In addition to these studies focusing on CBMOs, another body of literature deal with crossborder phenomena: the transnationalism approach and organization research. Organization
studies have suggested some important approaches and concepts for studying different types
of cross border organizations, and mainly transnational organizations. Following scholars like
Bartlett/ Ghoshal (1989) Pries (2000) differentiated between the ideal types of focal, global,
multinational and transnational organizations and proposed a more specific concept of transnational organizations as those which are characterized by a border-crossing, strongly decentralised distribution of their resources, knowledge, culture and interests and at the same time
have a strong coordination in the form of a network. The proposition by Pries (2005 and
2008) thus offers a specific concept of transnationalization and transnational organisations,
6
distinguishing seven ideal types of internationalisation and four types of international organisations.
An interesting empirical study regarding the existence of (specifically defined) transnational
organizations is the contribution by Dijkzeul (2008). In the study of international humanitarian NGOs, Dijkzeul presented the case of the NGO Malteser International’s work in the Democratic Republic of Congo, asking if this organization has similarities to the transnational
ideal type. His understanding of an ideal type of transnational humanitarian NGO management was mainly based on the Bartlett/Ghoshal (1989) proposal. In a similar way, other
scholars tested for the specific definition of transnational organisations and found empirical
evidence in the field of international educational organisations (Adick 2008) and of international women’s movement organisations (Lenz 2008).
These examples show that efforts aiming at conceptualising a framework for transnational
studies of migration and MOs have generally been increasing in recent years. Khagram and
Levitt (2008), for instance, have identified five intellectual foundations of transnationalism,
namely the empirical, methodological, theoretical, philosophical and public transnationalism.
Schiller and Cağlar (2008) made another input for developing conceptual definitions and proposals of transnational studies. In particular, they analysed if ethnic groups are adequate units
of reference for transnational studies, and concluded that individual migrants, networks, organisations and social fields (the latter as ‘networks of networks’) constitute more adequate
units of analysis.
Generally the perception of MOs as transnational actors brings about new theoretical questions concerning the contexts in which MOs emerge and are being influenced. The transnational perspective calls for a reconsideration of the existing frameworks and the approaches
on the participation of migrants. A core argument is that theoretical concepts on the political,
cultural, social and economic participation of migrants must systematically integrate both, the
countries of origin and the countries of arrival as analytical levels. In other words, theoretical
concepts must analyse migrants’ participation taking into account transnational social realities
and spaces. Besides investigating the specific (transnational) characteristics of CBMOs, new
research must deepen our understanding of the context factors and preconditions for their
emergence and stability. In order to analyse the context factors and to address CBMOs successfully, four approaches are considered to be especially important:
1. the concept of (transnational) political opportunity structure (Soysal 1994; Nell 2004;
Ogulman 2003),
7
2. migration systems or regimes (as bi- or multi-national historically grown and sedimented rules and practices of handling migration) (Zolberg / Smith 1996; Hillmann
2000; Papademetriou 2006),
3. translocal identity and/or culture (Mandaville 2001; Featherstone 1995), and
4. transnational social spaces (pluri-local dense and durable interaction relations and
networks of everyday life and institutions) (Basch et al. 1994; Pries 1997; Faist 2000;
Pries 2007).
Main Research Questions, Hypothesis and Analytical Framework
The research project “Diffusion and Contexts of Transnational Migrants’ Organizations in
Europe” seeks to: (1) identify the characteristics of transnational MOs and distinguish them
from other types of CBMOs, (2) analyse the diffusion of transnational MOs starting in four
countries of arrival (Spain, Germany, Poland, and England), (3) study the specific conditions
under which such transnational MOs emerge and consolidate themselves. One of the conceptual problems of previous studies on transnational organizations has been to differentiate
transnational organizations from cross-border organizations in general. In order to avoid a
very broad and unclear understanding of transnationalism and transnational organisations, the
research project is based on a more specific definition of transnational organizations and
transnational MOs, based on organization research as outlined above. Thus the following typology of six ideal types of CBMOs can be developed (Table 1). After having been discussed
and ‘fine tuned’ by the international project team, this typology should be the guideline for
the national empirical studies.
First Complex of Questions: Diffusion of types of CBMOs, especially TRAMOs
Within the first complex of questions (existence and diffusion of different types of CBMOs)
the project aims at finding out:
-
how prevalent CBMOs are as subset of the total of MOs,
-
what their organizational characteristics with respect to distribution and coordination,
-
how prevalent transnational migrant organizations (TRAMOs) are as subset within
CBMOs.
In order to address these questions, about 30 CBMOs in each of the four countries of arrival
(Germany, Great Britain, Poland, and Spain) will be identified. These organizations will be
studied in accordance with the typology of organizations (Table 1). Here, TRAMOs are of
8
particular interest. The questions to be addressed are: How can the selected CBMOs be assigned to the six ideal types? Is there empirical evidence for the existence of TRAMOs? If so,
did these organizations develop from other types of CBMOs or are they ‘born transnationals’?
Here, the research starts from two assumptions: First, it is assumed that some CBMOs have
become more transnational in the last decade; secondly, that other TRAMOs are newly established organizations that have been transnational from the beginning:
Hypothesis-1.1: CBMOs have undergone a change in the last two decades and to a growing
extent display transnational characteristics.
Hypothesis -1.2: New CBMOs have emerged that from the beginning of their establishment
match with the ideal type of TRAMOs.
Second Complex of Questions: Context factors for CBMOs, especially TRAMOs
The second Complex of questions deals with the context factors determining the specific type
of CBMOs, especially of TRAMOs. These preconditions and factors will be analysed by
means of case studies, i.e. four transnational organizations which will be selected from the
total group of about 30 organizations in each country. The research starts from the assumption
that migrants’ organizations differ in terms of the degree and form of their transnationality:
(1) according to the specific context of countries of origin and of arrival,
(2) under the respective organizational fields in which they operate, and
(3) in respect to idiosyncratic conditions (the history and development of the organization,
important personalities, conflicts, decisions, events, etc.).
Especially, the following three hypotheses are analysed in the second complex of questions:
H-2.1: The degree and form of transnationalization of MOs are determined by the contexts of
the countries of origin and of arrival.
H-2.2: The degree and form of the transnationalization of MOs are determined by the organizational field in which the organizations are working.
H.2.3: The degree and form of the transnationalization of MOs are determined by specific
idiosyncratic factors of each organisation.
Ad H-2.1 Context of Countries/ Country Profiles
It can be assumed that national contexts influence the activities and the character of MOs. A
migration policy which puts greater emphasis on inclusion, such as in the UK, might encourage the emergence of global or focal country of arrival centred organizations, while a de facto
9
non-integration policy, as for a long time in Germany, or a very recent immigration situation
as in Poland may rather lead to the emergence of multinational or transnational MOs. Regarding the countries of origin, an active policy for encouraging labour migration and the attempt
of channelling remittances in regional development projects might influence the character of
existing or emerging MOs differently than a policy, which denies emigration or treats it as a
taboo. Also a multi-cultural integration approach, as in Britain, might influence CBMOs differently than for example a rather mono-cultural oriented policy as in Poland and as partly in
Germany. A very strong colonial history, resulting structures of migration flows and relatively
liberal policy of integration, as in Spain, facilitate probably the emergence of multinational or
transnational oriented MOs besides strong organizations, which are oriented towards country
of arrival.
Under the term migration systems, several country specific factors will be defined and studied
in the first phase of the project. Some of these factors that determine country contexts are:
basic immigration guidelines, the legal contexts in respect to civil rights and obligations of
individuals and organizations, the public and governmental treatment of religion, and the
regulation (liberal or rather corporatist) of interests and conflicts of MOs.
Generally, in accordance with the hypothesis H-2.1 at least four levels of context which
probably influence the nature of CBMOs differently, have to be distinguished: (1) the specific
context of the countries of arrival, (2) the specific context of the countries of origin, (3) the
specific conditions of the bi - or multi-national migration systems and migration regimes, to
which the researched MOs belong (e.g. in the case of Britain the Commonwealth context, in
the case of Spain the specific rules for migration in the former colonies of Latin America, in
the case of Poland the recent involvement in the European Union and the historical links with
Middle-East European countries, in the case of Germany the conditions emerging from the
guest worker policy), and (4) for the respective relevant context of the European Union.
H-2.2 Organizational Fields
Neo-institutional research assumes that institutional influences within organizational field
affect the structures and practices of organizations. “Wider societal forces operate to structure
organizational fields, which develop their own distinctive institutional logics and governance
systems, and these systems, in turn, influence the structure and activities of individual organizations” (Scott 2001: 148). The following organizational fields belong particularly to the re-
10
search of CBMOs and will allow to systematically and theoretically operationalize the internal and external contexts of organizations:
-
national institutions and bodies which are relevant for the activities of the analized
MOs,
-
other social movement groups and organizations working in the field of migration and
connecting with the researched MOs,
-
international and supranational organizations, such as European public and non-profit
organizations, and
-
members and stakeholders of the MOs with their specific expectations of how their
organization should work.
H-2.3 Individual Organizing Factors
This third hypothesis is directed against a potential ‘context determinism’ underlying an exclusive focus on H.2.1 and H-2.2. H-2.3 underlines that the features of MOs are not only or
exclusively an expression of its contingent situation but that actors and their strategies also
matter. In organizational research, there is wide consensus that a ‘situational’ or ‘contingency
theoretical’ approach significantly underestimates the importance of strategic actor groups,
leading personalities and strategic decisions. Therefore, the variation of these factors related
to individual organisation and their influences on the specific type of CBMOs should be controlled by the paired comparison of two organizations operating in the same country of arrival
and in the same organizational field.
Operationalisation
The outlined analytical framework will be applied in the four project countries, each following the same research design. In a first step, the 30 most important CBMOs in each country
will be identified. These organizations will then be described according to the typology of six
ideal types of cross border organizations. These research aims will be carried out with a mix
of methods, such as document analysis, internet research and telephone interviews.
In a second step, four organizations will be selected for each country that can be considered to
be a TRAMO (according to the table of ideal types outlined above). These organizations will
then be analysed within the framework of an in-depth case study. The case study will focus
both on the organizational characteristics and the influence of context factors.
11
References
Adick, Christel (2008): Surveying the Transnationalism Approach and Looking for Transnational Organisations. Transnational Organisations in Education. In: Pries, Ludger
(ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link of Organisations, Routledge, London/New York (forthcoming)
Bade, Klaus (2004): Legal and illegal migration into Europe. Experiences and challenges, in:
European Review, 12 (3), p. 339-376.
Bartlett, Christopher A./Ghoshal, Sumantra (1989): Managing across borders: the transnational solution, London.
Basch, Linda/Glick Schiller, Nina/Szanton Blanc, Cristina, 1994: Nations Unbound. Transnational Projetcs, Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach
British Council Brussels (2005): European Civic Citizenship and Inclusion Index, Brussels.
Caglar, Ayse (2006): Hometown associations, the rescaling of state spatiality and migrant
grassroots transnationalism, in: Global Networks, 6 (1), p. 1-22.
Castles, S./Schierup, C./Hansen P. (2006): Migration, Citizenship and the European Welfare
State: A European Dilemma, Oxford University Press.
Castles, Stephen/Davidson, Alastair (2000): Citizenship and Migration. Globalization and the
Politics of Belonging, Basingstoke.
Davis, Sonia/Cooke, Veronica (2002): Why do Black Women Organise? A comparative
analysis of black women's voluntary sector organisations in Britain and their relationship to the state, London.
Diehl, Claudia (2002): Die Partizipation von Migranten in Deutschland. Rückzug oder Mobilisierung? Opladen.
Diehl, Claudia, et al. (1998): Die soziale und politische Partizipation von Zuwanderern in der
Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Bonn.
Dietz, Gunther (2004): Frontier Hybridization or Culture Clash? Trans-national migrant
communities and sub-national identity politics in Andalusia, Spain, Journal of Ethnic
and Migration Studies, Brighton.
Dietz, Gunther/Agrela, Belén (2005): Emergencia de regímenes multinivel y diversificación
público-privada de la política de inmigración en España, in: Migración y Desarrollo, 2
(4), p. 20-41.
Dijkzeul, Dennis (forthcoming in 2008): " Transnational Humanitarian NGOs? A Progress
Report", in: Pries, Ludger (ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link of Organisations, Routledge, London/New York, p. 119-145.
DiMaggio, Paul J./Powell, Walter W. (1983): The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, in: American Sociological
Review, 48 p. 147-160.
Düvell, Franck (2005): Active Civic Participation of Immigrants in the United Kingdom.
Elwert, G. (1984): “Die Angst vor dem Ghetto. Binnenintegration als erster Schritt zur Integration“ in Integration: Anpassung an den Deutschen? Hrsg. von A. Bayaz. Weinheim.
Beltz Verlag, p. 51-74
12
Esser, Hartmut (2001): Integration und ethnische Schichtung, Mannheim.
Esser, Hartmut (2006): Migration, Sprache und Integration. AKI-Forschungsbilanz 4, Berlin.
European Commission (2001): EU Socio-Economic-Research. Effectiveness of national integration strategies towards second generation migrant youth in a comparative European
perspective. Final report of project ERB-SOE2-CT97-3055 (coord. F. Heckmann),
Brussels.
European Commission (2004): First Annual Report on Migration and Integration. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, The European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions, Brussels, 16.7.2004,
COM (2004) 508 final.
Faist, Thomas, 2000: The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Social Spaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Fawcett, James T. (1989): Networks, Linkages and Migration Systems, in: International Migration Review, 23 (3), p. 671-681.
Featherstone, Mike (1995): Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity,
Sage, London.
Fijalkowki, J./Gillmeister, H. (1997): Ausländervereine. Ein Forschungsbericht. Über die
Funktion für die Integration heterogener Zuwanderer in eine Aufnahmegesellschaft Am Beispiel Berlin, Berlin.
Geddes, Andrew (2000): Lobbying for migrant inclusion in the European Union. New opportunities for transnational advocacy? in: Journal of European Public Policy, 7 (4), p.
632-649.
Glick, Nina/ Caglar, Ayse (2008): Beyond Methodological Ethnicity and Towards City Scale,
in: Pries, Ludger (ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link of Organisations,
Routledge, London/New York (forthcoming)
Goebel, Dorothea/Pries, Ludger (2003): Transnationale Migration und die Inkorporation von
Migranten. Einige konzeptionell theoretische Überlegeungen zu einem erweiterten
Verständnis gegenwärtiger Inkorporationsprozesse von Migranten., in: Swiaczny,
Frank /Haug, Sonja (Hrsg.): Migration - Integration - Minderheiten. Neuere interdisziplinäre Forschungsergebnisse. Materialien zur Bevölkerungswissenschaft, Heft 107,
Wiesbaden, p. 35-48.
Gogolin, Ingrid/Pries, Ludger (2004): Stichwort: Transmigration und Bildung, in: Zeitschrift
für Erziehungswissenschaft, 2004 (1), p. 5-19.
González-Enríquez, Carmen (2004): Active Civic Participation of Immigrants in Spain. Country Report prepared for the European research project POLITIS, Oldenburg.
Grzymala-Kazlowska, Aleksandra (2002): The Formation of Ethnic Representations: The
Vietnamese in Poland, Sussex.
Halm, Dirk/Sauer, Martina (2005): Freiwilliges Engagement von Türkinnen und Türken in
Deutschland (Online-Publikation des Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren,
Frauen und Jugend.), Essen.
Hamilton Ian, F.E. /Iglicka, Krystyna (2000): From Homogeneity to Multiculturalism. Minorities old and New in Poland, London.
13
Heckmann, Friedrich (1998): Ethnische Kolonien. Schonraum für die Integration oder Verstärker der Ausgrenzung? in: (Hrsg.): Ghettos oder ethnische Kolonien. Entwicklungschanchen von Stadtteilen mit hohem Zuwandereranteil. Gesprächskreis Arbeit und
Soziales, N. 85, Bonn, p. 29-41.
Heckmann, Friedrich/Schnapper, Dominique (2003): The Integration of Immigrants in European Societies. National Differences and Trends of Convergence, Stuttgart.
Hillmann, Felicitas. (2000): Von Internationalen Wanderungen zu transnationalen Migrationsnetzwerken? Der neue europäische Wanderungsraum, in: Kölner Zeitschrift für
Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Sonderheft 40, p. 363-85.
Hofstede, Geert (1997): Cultures and Organizations. Software of the Mind, New York.
Hunger, Uwe (2002): Von der Betreuung zur Eigenverantwortung. Neuere Entwicklungstendenzen bei Migrantenvereinen in Deutschland, Münster.
Husband, Charles (2002): The place of Muslims in British secularism, in: AlSayyad,
Nezar/Castel, Manuel (Hrsg.): Muslim Europe or Euro-Islam, Lanham, S. 113-130
Huth, Susanne/Hoppe, Jörg-Reiner (2002): Recherche zum freiwilligen Engagement von
Migrantinnen und Migranten, im Auftrag des Bundesministeriums für Familie, Senioren, Frauen und Jugend, Frankfurt.
Iglicka, Krystyna (2000): Mechanisms of migration from Poland before and during the transition period, in: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 26 (1), S. 61-75.
International Organisation for Migration (IOM) (2005): World Migration, Geneva.
Itzigsohn, José, et al. (1999): Mapping Dominican transnationalism: narrow and broad transnational practices, in: Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22 (2), p. 316-339.
Jungk, S. (2001): Soziale Selbsthilfe und politische Interessenvertretung in Organisationen
von Migrantinnen und Migranten. Politische Rahmenbedingungen, Forschungslage,
Weiterbildungsbedarf, in: soFid Migration und ethnische Minderheiten 1, p. 7-15.
Khagram, Sanjeev/Levitt, Peggy (forthcoming in 2008): Constructing Transnational Studies,
in: Pries, Ludger (ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link of Organisations,
Routledge, London/New York, p. 30-59.
Koopmans, Ruud/Statham, Paul (2003): How national citizenship shapes transnationalism: A
comparative analysis of migrant claims-making in Germany, Great Britain and the
Netherlands, in: Joppke, Christian/Morawska, Ewa (Hrsg.): Toward Assimilation and
Citizenship. Integrating Immigrants in Liberal Nation States, New York, p. 195-238.
Laubenthal, Barbara (2007Der Kampf um Legalisierung. Soziale Bewegungen illegaler
Migranten in Frankreich, Spanien und der Schweiz. Frankfurt/Main: campus.
Lenz, Ilse (2008): Transnational social movement networks and transnational public spaces:
Glocalizing Gender Justice. In: Pries, Ludger (ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The
Meso-link of Organisations, Routledge, London/New York (forthcoming)
Mandaville, Peter (2001): Transnational Muslim Politics, Reimaginaning the Umma, Routledge, London and New York.
Moraes, Natalia (2004): Entre el transnacionalismo y la relocalización: un estudio del
movimiento asociativo de lo inmigrantes uruguayanos en España, 4° Congreso sobre
la inmigración en España. Ciudadanía y participación, Girona.
14
Nell, Liza M. (2004): Conceptualising the Emergence of Immigrants' Transnational Communities, in: Migration Letters, 1 (1), p. 50-56.
OECD (2005): Die Arbeitsmarktintegration von Zuwanderern in Deutschland, Paris.
Ogulman, N. (2003): Documenting and Explaining the Persistence of Homeland Politics
among Germany's Turks, in: International Migration Review, 37 (1), S. 163-193.
Okolski, Marek (2004): Migration Patterns in Central and Eastern Europe on the eve of the
European Union Enlargement: An Overview, in: Gorny, A./Ruspini, P. (eds.) Migration in the New Europe: East-West Revisited, Palgrave/Macmillan Press, Houndmills.
Okólski, Marek (2004): Migration trends in Central and Eastern Europe on the eve of the
European Union enlargement: an overview, in: Gorny, P. Ruspini (eds.): Migration in
the New Europe: East-West Revisited, Houndmills/Basingstokes, S. 23-48.
Okólski, Marek/Grzymala-Kazlowska, A. (2003): Influx and Integration of Migrants in Poland in the early XXI century. 50. Warsaw: ISS UW
Orozco, Manuel (2004): Mexican Hometown Associations and Development Opportunities,
in: Journal of International Affairs, 57 (2), p. 31-49.
Ostergaard-Nielsen, Eva K. (2001): The Politics of Migrants' Transnational Political Practices, Transnational Migration: Comparative Perspectives, Princeton University.
Ostergaard-Nielsen, Eva K. (2003): Transnational Politics. Turks and Kurds in Germany,
Ostergaard-Nielsen, Eva K. (2006): Diasporas and Conflict Resolution - Part of the Problem
or Part of the Solution. Paper presented at seminar on Diaspora and Conflict, Peace
Builders or Peace Wreckers? (8 December 2005)
Papademetriou, Demetrios G. (Hrsg.) (2006): Europe and its Immigrants in the 21st Century.
A New Deal or a Continuing Dialogue of the Deaf? Washington.
Perlmutter, H. V. (1969): The Tortuous Evolution of the Multinational Corporation., in: Columbia Journal of World Business, 4 (1), p. 9-18.
Porter, M. E. (1986): Competition in Global Industries, Boston.
Portes, Alejandro, et al. (2005): Immigrant Transnational Organizations and Development: A
Comparative Study. The Center for Migration and Development Working Paper Series, Princeton University.
Pries, Ludger (2000): Globalisierung und Wandel internationaler Unternehmen. Konzeptionelle Überlegungen am Beispiel der deutschen Automobilkonzerne., in: Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 52 (4), p. 670-695.
Pries, Ludger (2002): Transnationalisierung der sozialen Welt, in: Berliner Journal für Soziologie, 11 (2), p. 263-272.
Pries, Ludger (2003): Labour migration, social incorporation and transmigration in the Old
and New Europe - the case of Germany in a comparative perspective, in: Transfer. European Review of Labour and Research, 9 (3), p. 432-451.
Pries, Ludger (2005): Configurations of geographic and societal spaces: a sociological proposal between 'methodological nationalism' and the 'spaces of flows', in: Global Networks, 5 (2), p. 167-190.
Pries, Ludger (ed.) (forthcoming in 2008): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link of
Organisations, Routledge, London/New York.
15
Pries, Ludger (forthcoming in 2008): " European Works Councils as Transnational Interest
Organisations?", in: Pries, Ludger (ed.): Rethinking Transnationalism: The Meso-link
of Organisations, Routledge, London/New York, p. 213-239.
Pries, Ludger (forthcoming in Nov. 2007): Die Transnationalisierung der sozialen Welt,
Suhrkamp.
Pries, Ludger (Hg.), 1997: Transnationale Migration. Sonderband 12 der Zeitschrift SOZIALE WELT. Baden-Baden: Nomos
Scott, Richard W.S. (2003): Organizations.Rational, Natural and Open Systems, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Soysal, Yasemin (1994): Limits of Citizenship: Migrants and Postnational Membership in
Europe, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Thränhardt, Dietrich (1989): Patterns of Organization among Different Ethnic Minorities, in:
New German Critique, 46 (1989) p. 10-26.
Thränhardt, Dietrich (1999): Selbstorganisationen von Migrantinnen und Migranten in NRW,
Düsseldorf: Ministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Stadtentwicklung, Kultur und Sport
des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen.
Thränhardt, Dietrich/Hunger, Uwe (2000): Einwanderer-Netzwerke und ihre Integrationsqualität in Deutschland und Israel, Münster/ Hamburg.
Vertovec, Steven (1999): Conceiving and researching transnationalism, in: Ethnic and Racial
Studies, 22 (2), p. 448-462.
Vogel, Dita (2005): Building Europe With New Citizens? Civic Participation of Immigrants
in Europe, Brussels.
Welge, M. K./Holtbrügge, D. (2003): International Management, Landsberg.
World Bank (Hrsg.) (2005): Global Economic Prospects 2006: Economic Implications of
Zetter, Roger/Pearl, Martin (2000): The Minority within the Minority: Refugee Communitybased Organisations in the UK and the Impact of Restrictionism on Asylum-Seekers,
in: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 26 (4), p. 675-698.
Zolberg, Aristide R./Smith, Robert C. (1996): Migration systems in comparative perspective:
An analysis of the Inter-American Migration System with comparative reference to the
Mediteranean-European System, New York.
16