This article examines Venezuelan migrants’ remittance practices in Madeira and Trinidad & Tobago (T&T) to highlight how similar-sounding remittance methods diverge sharply across contexts. In Madeira, it identifies a novel remittance system termed ‘reciprocal remittances’ whereby friends enable transfers through parallel domestic transactions in both countries. Unlike systems like hawala, these exchanges are bidirectional, non-profit, and enabled by reciprocity as an integral feature of the mechanics of the transfer itself. Conversely, in T&T, migrants rely on ‘friends’ who operate as profit-seeking informal agents. Here, Venezuelan migrants must pay high fees while remaining unaware of the multiple intermediaries involved. They face limited alternatives due to their undocumented status as well as T&T’s restrictive banking regulation. By comparing the contexts of Madeira and T&T, the article reveals how migrants’ legal status and local fintech environments shape the availability of different remittance practices. While reciprocal remittances exemplify an alternative economy rooted in reciprocity, their dependence on documentation and access to diverse infrastructures is thus an important limitations. The article concludes by challenging the assumption that formalisation improves remittance efficiency, calling instead for greater recognition of migrant-devised remittance practices.
Daniel Robins (Mon,) studied this question.