Geography
Anthropological Approaches to Migration and Transnationalism
Quick fact
Anthropologists coined the term 'transnationalism' to describe how many migrants maintain active economic, political, and social ties to their homeland while simultaneously integrating into their new country—creating a 'transnational social field' that stretches across borders.
Why this is interesting
We often think of migration as a one-way journey—leaving one country and starting a new life in another. But for millions of people, the reality is far more complex: they live with one foot in two worlds. How do anthropologists capture this in-between experience?
Read the full explanation
Understanding Anthropological Approaches to Migration and Transnationalism
To understand how anthropologists approach migration, imagine following a person's daily life, not just their travel documents. Traditional migration studies often focused on the 'push' and 'pull' factors that cause people to move. But anthropologists ask a deeper question: What does it mean to live a life that spans two or more societies? They use ethnography—a method of immersive observation and interviewing—to understand the everyday experiences of migrants. Instead of seeing migrants as people who leave one culture and adopt another, anthropologists see them as creating new cultural forms. For example, a Filipino nurse in London might video-call her family in Manila every day, send money to build a house, and participate in local church activities. Her identity is not simply 'Filipino' or 'British'; it is a hybrid, shaped by constant movement between these worlds. This is what anthropologists call 'transnationalism.' It is not just about moving across a border once, but about maintaining ongoing connections that create a single social field that spans multiple nation-states.
A deeper explanation
The core mechanism that anthropologists study is the creation and maintenance of 'transnational social fields.' These are networks of relationships, practices, and institutions that link migrants to their homelands and to other migrants worldwide. This perspective challenges the idea that nations are natural containers for society. Instead, it shows that social life can be stretched across borders. Anthropologists like Nina Glick Schiller, Linda Basch, and Cristina Szanton Blanc argued in the early 1990s that migrants are not 'uprooted' but rather 'transmigrants' who develop identities and social relations that are embedded in more than one society. They maintain these fields through various mechanisms: remittances (money sent home), visits, phone calls, social media, and participation in home-country politics. These practices are not just leftovers from the past; they are a dynamic way of being in the world. For example, a Mexican migrant in California might celebrate both US holidays and fiestas from their hometown, and they might support a local political candidate while also funding a community project back in Mexico. Understanding this mechanism matters because it forces us to rethink what 'integration' means. Instead of a one-way assimilation, integration can be multiple and partial. It also has real-world consequences: migrants are political actors in two states, economic contributors to both economies, and cultural brokers who challenge the idea that cultures are bounded. Anthropological research here is vital because it gives voice to the lived experiences that policy and statistics often overlook.