Migration is a pervasive social, political, and economic experience. Despite its ubiquity, the complexities of migration present challenges for scholars. Ongoing debates revolve around defining central categories that describe and understand human movement. Concepts such as migrant, asylum-seeker, and refugee are fraught with tensions and overlapping characteristics. Disaggregating these categories is complex due to the messy and varied nature of individuals’ lived experiences. This complexity prompts scholars to critically examine how these categories are constructed and applied. Considering this, I argue that reconceptualizing migration categories as interconnected positions within a temporally and geographically contingent multidimensional migration space-time allows scholars to better examine the complexities of movement. Moreover, the intricate nature of migration necessitates the construction and reconstruction of adaptable concepts to better understand highly contextual experiences. Therefore, researchers must design research projects that can capture the nuances, tensions, and contradictions inherent in migration experiences, even when these nuances do not align with narrow, instrumentalized definitions used in legal regimes and public policy. While more flexible concepts offer valuable opportunities for deeper insights, there are also significant risks to consider.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jared Keyel (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: