, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 591–617 | Cite as

Social capital and migration: How do similar resources lead to divergent outcomes?

  • Filiz Garip


This article investigates how migrant social capital differentially influences individuals’ migration and cumulatively generates divergent outcomes for communities. To combine the fragmented findings in the literature, the article proposes a framework that decomposes migrant social capital into resources (information about or assistance with migration), sources (prior migrants), and recipients (potential migrants). Analysis of multilevel and longitudinal data from 22 rural villages in Thailand shows that the probability of internal migration increases with the available resources, yet the magnitude of increase depends on recipients’ characteristics and the strength of their ties to sources. Specifically, individuals become more likely to migrate if migrant social capital resources are greater and more accessible. The diversity of resources by occupation increases the likelihood of migration, while diversity by destination inhibits it. Resources from weakly tied sources, such as village members, have a higher effect on migration than resources from strongly tied sources in the household. Finally, the importance of resources for migration declines with recipients’ own migration experience. These findings challenge the mainstream account of migrant social capital as a uniform resource that generates similar migration outcomes for different groups of individuals or in different settings. In Nang Rong villages, depending on the configuration of resources, sources, and recipients, migrant social capital leads to differential migration outcomes for individuals and divergent cumulative migration patterns in communities.


Social Capital Potential Migrant Migration Decision Destination Diversity Migration Outcome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arizpe, L. 1975. Indigenas en la Ciudad de Mexico: El Caso de Las Marias [Indigenous in Mexico City: The case of“Las Marias”]. Mexico City: Secretaria de Educacion Publica.Google Scholar
  2. Bello, W., S. Cunningham, and L.K. Poh. 1998. A Siamese Tragedy: Development and Disintegration in Modern Thailand. London: Zed Books, Ltd.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. 1986. “The Forms of Capital.” Pp. 241 -58 in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, edited by J.G. Richardson. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  4. Burt, R. 1992. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chamratrithirong, A., K. Archavanitkul, K. Richter, P. Guest, T. Varachai, W. Boonchalaksi, N. Piriyathamwong, and P. Vong-ek. 1995. National Migration Survey of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand: Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University.Google Scholar
  6. Coleman, J. 1988. “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.” American Journal of Sociology 94(suppl.):S95-S120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Curran, S., F. Garip, and C. Chung. 2005. “Advancing Theory and Evidence About Migration and Cumulative Causation: Destination and Gender in Thailand.” CMD Working Paper No. 357. Center for Migration and Development, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. Curran, S., F. Garip, C. Chung, and K. Tangchonlatip. 2005. “Gendered Migrant Social Capital: Evidence From Thailand.” Social Forces 84:225–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Curran, S. and E. Rivero-Fuentes. 2003. “Engendering Migrant Networks: The Case of Mexican Migration.” Demography 40:289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis, B., G. Stecklov, and P. Winters. 2002. “Domestic and International Migration From Rural Mexico: Disaggregating the Effects of Network Structure and Composition.” Population Studies 56:291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deléchat, C. 2001. “International Migration Dynamics: The Role of Experience and Social Networks.” Labour 15:457–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Jong, G., K. Richter, and P. Isarabhakdi. 1996. “Gender, Values, and Intentions to Move in Rural Thailand.” International Migration Review 30:748–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunlevy, J.A. 1991. “On the Settlement Patterns of Recent Caribbean and Latin Immigrants to the United States.” Growth Change 22(1):54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fussell, E. and D. Massey. 2004. “The Limits to Cumulative Causation: International Migration From Mexican Urban Areas.” Demography 41:151–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Granovetter, M. 1973. “The Strength of Weak Ties.” American Journal of Sociology 78:1360–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hafner, J. 2000. “Thailand.” Pp. 434–68 in Southeast Asia Diversity and Development, edited by T. Leinbach and R. Ulack. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Jansen, K. 1997. External Finance in Thailands Development: An Interpretation of Thailands Growth Boom. New York: St. Martins Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kanaiaupuni, S. 2000. “Reframing the Migration Question: An Analysis of Men, Women, and Gender in Mexico.” Social Forces 78:1311–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lin, N. 2000. “Inequality in Social Capital.” Contemporary Sociology 29:785–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. — 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lin, N., W.N. Vaughn, and J.C. Ensel. 1981. “Social Resources and Strength of Ties.” American Sociological Review 46:393–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lomnitz, L.A. 1977. Networks and Marginality: Life in a Mexican Shantytown. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Massey, D. 1990. “Social Structure, Household Strategies, and the Cumulative Causation of Migration.” Population Index 56:3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Massey, D., J. Ariango, G. Hugo, A. Kouaouci, A. Pellegrino, and J. Taylor. 1993. “Theories of International Migration: A Review and Appraisal.” Population and Development Review 19:431–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Massey, D. and K.E. Espinosa. 1997. “What’s Driving Mexico-U.S. Migration? A Theoretical, Empirical, and Policy Analysis.” American Journal of Sociology 102:939–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Massey, D. and F. García-España. 1987. “The Social Process of International Migration.” Science 237:733–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Massey, D., L. Goldring, and J. Durand. 1994. “Continuities in Transnational Migration: An Analysis of Nineteen Mexican Communities.” American Journal of Sociology 99:1492–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Massey, D. and R. Zenteno. 1999. “The Dynamics of Mass Migration.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96:5328–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mills, M.B. 1997. Thai Women in the Global Labor Force: Consuming Desires, Contested Selves. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.Google Scholar
  30. Neter, J., W. Wasserman, and M. Kunter. 1990. Applied Linear Statistical Models, 3rd ed. Boston: Irwin.Google Scholar
  31. Palloni, A., D. Massey, M. Ceballos, K. Espinosa, and M. Spittel. 2001. “Social Capital and International Migration: A Test Using Information on Family Networks.” American Journal of Sociology 106:1262–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Portes, A. 1998. “Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 24:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  34. Rasbash, J., F. Steele, W. Browne, and B. Prosser. 2005. A User’s Guide to MlwiN, version 2.0. London: Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
  35. Rindfuss, R., T. Kaneda, A. Chattopadhyay, and C. Sethaput. 2007. “Panel Studies and Migration.” Social Science Research 36:374–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shannon, C. 1948. “A Mathematical Theory of Communication.” Bell System Technical Journal 27:379–422, 623–56.Google Scholar
  37. Short, S. 2006. “Focus Group Interviews.” Pp. 103–16 in A Handbook for Social Science Field Research: Essays and Bibliographic Sources on Research Design, Methodology, and Fieldwork, edited by E. Perecman and S. Curran. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  38. Stark, O. and E. Taylor. 1989. “Relative Deprivation and International Migration.” Demography 26:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Suksiriserekul, S. 2000. “Responses of Thai Households and the Thai Government in Coping With the Social Impacts of the Economic Crisis.” Pp. 221–28 in Globalization and the Asian Economic Crisis: Indigenous Responses, Coping Strategies, and Governance Reform in Southeast Asia, edited by G. Hainsworth. Vancouver, Canada: Centre for Southeast Asia Research, Institute for Asian Research.Google Scholar
  40. Tambunlertchai, S. 1990. A Profile of Provincial Industries. Bangkok, Thailand: Thailand Development Research Institute.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, J.E. 1986. “Differential Migration, Networks, Information and Risk.” Pp. 147–71 in Research in Human Capital and Development, Vol. 4, edited by O. Stark. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  42. Warr, P. and B. Nidhiprabha. 1996. Thailands Macroeconomic Miracle: Stable Adjustment and Sustained Growth. Washington, DC: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Winters, P., A. de Janvry, and E. Sadoulet. 2001. “Family and Community Networks in Mexico-U.S. Migration.” Journal of Human Resources 36:159–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Population Association of America 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filiz Garip
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyHarvard UniversityCambridge

Personalised recommendations