Advertisement

Comparative Migration Studies

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 335–360 | Cite as

Understanding Different Post-Return Experiences

The Role of Preparedness, Return Motives and Family Expectations for Returned Migrants in Morocco
  • Masja van Meeteren
  • Godfried Engbersen
  • Erik Snel
  • Marije FaberEmail author
Open Access
Article

Abstract

Studies aimed at understanding different post-return experiences point at various factors that are involved. In this article, we show the importance of striving for a contextualized understanding of post-return experiences as different factors appear to be important in different cases. Our study sets out to seek the value of the theory of preparedness proposed by Cassarino and simultaneously contribute to further contextualization of this theory through a qualitative study conducted in Morocco. Drawing on 44 qualitative interviews with a diverse set of returned migrants we scrutinize how mechanisms related to intersections between factors commonly found to be important in the literature take shape to make different factors important in different cases. For example, we show how the ability to keep transnational contacts with the destination country after return adds to positive post-return experiences, but only for migrants with specific return motives. In doing so, this article contributes to theory specification and contextualization.

Keywords

return migration Morocco transnationalism return motivations preparedness transnational obligations post-return experiences immigration family expectations the Netherlands 

References

  1. Al-Ali, N., Black, R. & Koser, K. (2001) The limits of transnationalism: Bosnian and Eritrean refugees in Europe as emerging transnational communities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24(4): 578–600. DOI: 10.1080/01419870120049798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bastia, T. (2011) Should I stay or should I go? Return migration in times of crises. Journal of International Development, 23(4): 583–595. DOI: 10.1002/jid.1794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bath, W. & Roberts, B.R. (2012) ‘Forbidden return’: return migration in the age of restriction. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 10(2): 162–183. DOI: 10.1080/15562948.2012.674325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloch, A. (2008) Zimbabweans in Britain: transnational activities and capabilities. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 34(2): 287–305. DOI: 10.1080/13691830701823822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carling, J. (2004) Emigration, return and development in Cape Verde: the impact of closing borders. Population, Space and Place, 10(2): 113–132. DOI: 10.1002/psp.322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cassarino, J.P. (2004) Theorising return migration: the conceptual approach to return migrants revisited. International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 6(2): 253–279.Google Scholar
  7. Cassarino, J.P. (2008) Conditions of modern return migrants — Editorial introduction. International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 10(2): 95–105.Google Scholar
  8. Cerase, F.P. (1974) Expectations and reality: a case study of return migration from the Unites States to southern Italy. International Migration Review, 8(2): 245–262. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3002783 (geen DOI, wel “stable link”)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Constant, A. & Massey, D. (2002) Return migration by German guestworkers: Neoclassical versus new economic theories. International Migration, 40(4): 5–38. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2435.00204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Bree, J., Davids, T. & De Haas, H. (2010) Post-return experiences and transnational belonging of returned migrants: a Dutch-Moroccan case study. Global Networks, 10(4): 489–509. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0374.2010.00299.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gmelch, G. (1980) Return migration. Annual review of Anthropology, 9: 135–159. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.an.09.100180.001031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fokkema, T. (2011) ‘Return’ migration intentions among second-generation Turks in Europe: the effect of integration and transnationalism in a cross-national perspective. Journal of Mediterranean Studies, 20(2): 365–388.Google Scholar
  13. Hunter, A. (2010) Theory and practice of return migration at retirement: the case of migrant worker hostel residents in France. Population Space and Place, 17(2): 179–192. DOI: 10.1002/psp.610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Itzigsohn, J. & S.G. Saucedo (2002) Immigrant incorporation and sociocultural transnationalism. International Migration Review, 766–798. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4149563 (Article first published online: 23 FEB 2006 DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-7379.2002.tb00104.x.)
  15. Jansen, S. (2011). Refuchess: locating Bosniac repatriates after the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Population, Space and Place, 17(2): 140–152. DOI: 10.1002/psp.607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jeffery, L. & Murison, J. (2011) Guest editorial: the temporal, social, spatial and legal dimensions of return and onward migration. Population, Space and Place, 17(2): 131–139. DOI: 10.1002/psp.606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Komter, A. (1996) Reciprocity as a principle of exclusion: Gift giving in the Netherlands. Sociology, 30(2): 299–316. DOI: 10.1177/0038038596030002006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ley, D. & Kobayashi, A. (2005) Back to Hong Kong: return migration or transnational sojourn? Global Networks, 5(2): 111–127. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0374.2005.00110.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Massey, D. S., Alarcón, R., Durand, J., & González, H. (1987) Return to Aztlan. The social process of international migration from western Mexico. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  20. Portes, A. (2001) Introduction: the debates and significance of immigrant transnationalism. Global Networks, 1(3): 181–93. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0374.00012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reynolds, T. (2010) Transnational family relationships, social networks and return migration among British-Caribbean young people. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33(5): 797–815. DOI: 10.1080/01419870903307931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sinatti, G. (2011) Mobile transmigrants or unsettled returnees? Myth of return and permanent resettlement among Senegalese migrants. Population, Space and Place, 17(2): 153–166. DOI: 10.1002/psp.608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Snel, E., G. Engbersen & A. Leerkes (2006) Transnational involvement and social Integration. Global Networks, 6(3): 285–308. DOI:  10.1111/j.1471-0374.2006.00145.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Van Houte, M. & Davids, T. (2008) Development and return migration: from policy panacea to migrant perspective sustainability. Third World Quarterly, 29(7): 1411–1429. DOI:  10.1080/01436590802386658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Van Meeteren, M. (2012) Transnational activities and aspirations of irregular migrants in Belgium and the Netherlands. Global Networks, 12(3): 314–332. DOI:  10.1111/j.1471-0374.2012.00354.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2014

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masja van Meeteren
    • 1
  • Godfried Engbersen
    • 2
  • Erik Snel
    • 3
  • Marije Faber
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of CriminologyLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Erasmus University of RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of SociologyErasmus University Rotterdam (EUR)RotterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Rad-boud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations