Over at GLOBALCIT, we have a blog post on our recent research note on Covid-19 travel restrictions. We ask what we can learn from previous public health emergencies, and use this as the basis to discuss 5 research avenues that can advance our understanding of the effects of a public health emergency on the global mobility regime.
Piccoli, Lorenzo, Jelena Dzankic, Timothy Jacobs-Owen, and Didier Ruedin. 2022. ‘Restricting Human Movement during the COVID-19 Pandemic: New Research Avenues in the Study of Mobility, Migration, and Citizenship’. International Migration Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183221118907
Our article on how immigrants decide where to live once they have come to live in a country is now properly published.
Using a conjoint survey experiment with a representative sample of recently arrived immigrants, we established that both political and economic factors play a role in location decisions. In the literature on location choice, economic consideration (e.g., taxes) are often highlighted. Here we show that financial considerations are not everything: the parties in power, the integration policies, etc. also play a role.
The article is available online for everyone to read, but you can also watch a summary:
Bennour, Salomon, Anita Manatschal, and Didier Ruedin. 2022. ‘How Political Reception Contexts Shape Location Decisions of Immigrants’. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 48 (19): 4730–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2022.2098468. More.
I’m happy to announce that our research note on studying border closures and related restrictions to human mobility in the context of Covid-19 is now available at the International Migration Review.
We highlight how restrictions to human mobility were far from uniform across time and countries. The research note identifies 7 different databases that systematically collected information on these restrictions, which should help others identify the right database — they vary in what exactly they cover.
We also present possible research avenues in connection with these data on mobility restrictions: (1) drivers of Covid-19 mobility restrictions, (2) patterns of policy convergence and divergence, (3) the legality of mobility restrictions, (4) continuity and change in global migration policy, (5) citizenship and international mobility rights. In all these cases, data on restrictions during the pandemic can significantly advance research on the governance of mobility, migration, and citizenship.
Piccoli, Lorenzo, Jelena Dzankic, Didier Ruedin, and Timothy Jacobs-Owen. 2022. “Restricting Human Movement during the COVID-19 Pandemic: New Research Avenues in the Study of Mobility, Migration, and Citizenship.” International Migration Review. doi: 10.1177/01979183221118907.
Wanner, Philippe, Didier Ruedin, and Roberto Desponds Rodriguez. 2022. ‘How Working from Home Affected the Social Networks and Satisfaction of Migrant Populations during COVID-19’. Preprint. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2268984/v1.
Objective: We examine how the requirement to work from home during COVID-19 affected the social integration of immigrants. Methods: Using a representative panel of 7,400 immigrants to Switzerland, we run ordered logistic regression models to test how a change in job status and the obligation to work from home is reflected in a range of social integration and well-being indicators. Results: Switching to working from home during the semi-lockdown period is associated with increased difficulties in communicating with the local population, adapting to the Swiss way of life, and making friends. It is also associated with increased dissatisfaction with social relationships but does not lead to a more negative evaluation of the stay in Switzerland. Conclusion: We conclude that work is a place of socialization for migrant populations, and therefore, it is important to consider the negative impact of a forced shift to telework on the integration of these populations.
Joint work with Lorenzo Piccoli, out now at Democratization. Does transnationalism mean that immigrants who keep their right to vote in the country of origin focus their energies on the country of origin and therefore do not participate in the current country of residences? Or, by contrast, does this right to vote in the country of origin keep them interested in politics in general, and actually participate more in the country of destination? We wanted to find out.
Theoretical considerations led us to consider national-to-local and local-to-local influences separately: The right to vote in national elections in the country of origin may not have the same implications as the right to vote in local elections in the country of origin.
Empirically, we used data on electoral participation in Geneva, one of the places where foreign citizens can vote at the local level. We find evidence for local-to-local influences, that is a benefit if immigrants keep their right to vote in the country of origin.
Piccoli, Lorenzo, and Didier Ruedin. 2022. ‘Local-to-local electoral connections for migrants: The association between voting rights in the place of origin and the propensity to vote in the place of residence’. Democratization. DOI: 10.1080/13510347.2022.2108802
Ruedin, Didier. 2018. ‘Participation in Local Elections: “Why Don’t Immigrants Vote More?’’. Parliamentary Affairs 71 (2): 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsx024. — examination of participation more generally, with thanks to Rosita Fibbi!