Migration, Remittances, and Household Strategies

Author(s): Jeffrey H. Cohen

Source: Annual Review of Anthropology , 2011, Vol. 40 (2011), pp. 103-114
Published by: Annual Reviews

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41287722

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41287722?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual
Review of Anthropology

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Migration, Remittances,
and Household Strategies*
Jeffrey H. Cohen
Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210;
email: [email protected]

Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2011.40:103-14

Keywords
First published online as a Review in Advance on
migration, transnationalism economic life, economic well-being,
June 29, 2011
social life
The Annual Revir^ of Anthropology is online at
anthro.annualreviews.org Abstract
This article's doi:
In this review, I examine the meaning, place, and role of remittances for
10. 1 146/annurev-anthro-081 309-14585 1
migrants (movers) and for their sending households and communities.
Copyright (e) 201 1 by Annual Reviews. I define remittances as more than economic and explore the cultural
All rights reserved
and social value of remittances as well as the ways in which transna-
0084-65 70/ 1 1 / 1 02 1 -0 1 03 S20.00
tional space is created as movers and nonmovers interact. Although
*This article is part of a special theme on remittances are often critical to the well-being and survival of migrant
Migration. For a list of other articles in this sending households, this review also defines the costs that movers face
theme, see http://www.annualreviews.
org/doi/full/1 0. 1 1 46/annurev-an40#h2 .
as they remit and the positive as well as negative impacts remittances
can hold for sending households.

103

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 INTRODUCTION Migrants who do remit are not driven by an
inchoate force to act; rather, they remit be-
The importance of remittances to the economic
cause they choose to do so (Mora & Taylor
well-being of immigrant workers, their house-
2006). Typically, movers who remit gain so-
holds, and their sending communities is unde-
cially through their actions, earning status vis-
niable (World Bank 2006). The OECD (2005)
a-vis their sending community, and exercise
estimates that $126 billion flowed from migrant
tempered altruism and enlightened selfishness
workers to their sending households, commu-
(see discussion in Lucas & Stark 1985). Thus,
nities, and countries in 2005, an amount well
although migrants
in excess of the total official aid directed to remit and support their
sending households and communities, they are
the developing world by donor nations. Al-
also compensated for their efforts: burnishing
though the formal, legal transfers noted by
their social status and amplifying identities as
these studies support nonmovers, their com-
they negotiate new destinations (Stodolska &
munities, and countries (Ratha et al. 2008), the
Santos 2006).
remittance estimates in these studies do not in-
clude informal, unofficial, and illegal transfers
(Christiansen 2008, Lozano Ascencio 1998,
MIGRATION AND
Mohan 2002, Shehu 2004) or engage in debates
REMITTANCES
concerning the goals of remittance practices for
Remittances
nations and the relationship of national devel-are defined as economic transfers
that follow
opment to local practices (Adams 2009, unidirectional paths from a mobile
Castles
2009, Iskander 2010, Kinoti 2006, van Doom
worker to her or his sending household, com-
2004). Furthermore, these reportsmunity, and country (Maimbo & Ratha 2005);
do not typ-
ically look beyond the economics however, remittances are about more than the
of migration
formal prac-
to the sociocultural impacts of remittance unidirectional flow of money (Carling
2008).
tices or the benefits and costs of these The economics of remittance practices
practices
for movers and nonmovers. is important to sending countries [influencing
the balance
Remittance practices are the outcomes ofof trade and supporting national
investments,
cultural traditions and social practices. They as is clear in Adams (1991), de
Haas (2005),
are rooted in the strengths and weaknesses that and Skeldon (2008)], but remit-
tancesending
drive individual migrants and their outcomes are rooted in migration and
households and communities (Brown founded in the connections movers share with
& Poirine
2005, Eversole 2008, Helweg 1983, Singer households and destination com-
their sending
munities
et al. 2008). I use anthropology to frame (Guarnizo 2003, Massey & Akresh
remit-
tance practices as one of the many 2006).
transnational
flows that link movers and nonmovers and Remittances are important for the role
sending and receiving communities through they play in sending households that lack local
complex social and cultural ties (Brettell 2003, opportunities (Mazzucato et al. 2008, Yang &
Paerregaard 2008, Trager 2005b, Vertovec Martinez 2006). They are also important to the
1999). movers who send resources. The flow between
Remittance research tends to focus on the movers and nonmovers, and destination and
large and expensive big-ticket items that mi- sending households (Gamburd 2008, Rose &
grants send to their communities of origin Shaw 2008), defines the transnational space
(Smith 2006); it often ignores the fact that some in which remittance practices occur (V ertovec
returns are not wanted and that sometimes 2009, p. 66). This space reproduces the social
movers make small, economically insignificant universe and cultural traditions of sending
contributions (Cliggett 2005, van Doom 2004), households and communities, the realities
whereas other movers send nothing at all and of the mover's life, the migration process,
choose to leave their networks (Qian 2003). and the reception by destination countries

104 Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
(Eversole 2005, Lindley 2010, Lubkemann
plan to remit regularly but cannot (Ramirez
2005, Parrenas 2005, Schmalzbauer 2008, et al. 2007, Sanchez 2007, Tatla 2002). And
Stodolska & Santos 2006). remittance practices change over time and as
Movers face unique challenges that are de- migrants engage in new jobs, establish new
fined by their abilities, mobilities, destinations, relationships, and enter new stages of their lives
work, and countries of origin (Al-Sharmani (Al-Sharmani 2006, Bacallao & Smokowski
2006, DaVanzo 1981, De Jong 2000, Ryan 2007, Boehm 2008, Foner 1997, Heymann
et al. 2009). All movers have strengths and et al. 2009, Levitt & Lamba-Nieves 2011,
weaknesses such as age, gender, experience, Oropesa & Landale 1997, Schmalzbauer 2008).
and ability. Young women moving from rural First-time movers tend to cover their ex-
hometowns face a series of challenges that penses before they can begin to remit (Al-
are unique from challenges that confront Sharmani 2006, Guarnizo 1997, Kandel & Kao
young men (Curran et al. 2005, Fomby 2005, 2000), whereas younger movers and movers
Gamburd 2008, Kanaiaupuni 2000, Lutz 2010, with young children earmark a good deal of
McDowell 2004, Van Hear 2010). Whereas their remittances to support everyday expenses
the highly skilled migrant is welcomed by a back home (Stark 1992, Trager 1984). Set-
destination country (Cornelius et al. 2001), tled immigrant workers who hold reasonably
the unskilled migrant often finds he or she steady jobs often earn more money and earn
must negotiate a border, remain unassimilated, that money more consistently than do new, less
and accept low- wage work (Hartmann 1976, settled immigrants (Hernandez & Coutin 2006,
Manning 2002, Millard & Chapa 2004). Re- Portes 2007), which often translates to more
gional and internal movers also face a different consistent and larger remittances. Returns from
set of challenges than those that confront in- these movers cover more than the costs of daily
ternational migrants (Trager 2005b). Internal living and the purchase of consumer goods
movers tend to remit less, but they are not (Cohen & Rodriguez 2005, Newell 2005). Es-
negotiating borders. Nevertheless, an internal tablished households with older, settled movers
sojourn can be destabilizing for movers (think can use their remittances to make investments
of the Chinese immigrant who travels from that create new opportunities (Brown & Con-
the west to factories on the eastern coast). nell 1994, Conway 2007, Lopez & Seligson
Refugees and displaced persons represent 1991, Sorensen et al. 2002, Stahl & Arnold
additional categories and alternative challenges 1986, van Doom 2004); nevertheless, the ma-
that revolve around the impacts of social and jority of remittances are directed toward the
environmental disasters as they seek safety and challenges of daily life (Suro et al. 2002).
opportunities (Al-Sharmani 2006, Moorehead Remittances from migrants tend to grow
2005, Valentine et al. 2009, Van Hear 2006). over the short term and for about five years,
increasing as the income of the migrant rises
and as her or his work becomes more regular.
REMITTANCE PRACTICES
Remittances can decline or decay over time
Migrants move and remit for myriad
and asreasons:
the ties linking movers and nonmovers
are strained
Some travel and remit freely, whereas others(Gammage 2006, Lowell & de
have few choices and hope to find la Garza 2002). Remittances also decline as
opportu-
nities. Yet all move in relation to households,
the length of the migrants' stay in a desti-
and even those who decline to remit make nation country increases and as families are
established or reunited in their destination
decisions that impact households and the
countries (Amuedo-Dorantes et al. 2005,
communities left behind (Grasmuck & Pessar
1991). Whereas some sending households are
Orozco 2002b). Altruism on the part of the
never satisfied with the efforts of their mobile
mover, support of a community's traditions,
and family pressures can mediate some decline
members, there are some migrant workers who

www.annualreviews.org • Remittances and Household Strategies 105

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 in remittance rates, and researchers have,homes.
their in Some of these migrants are in-
fact, found that remittances often do ternal movers who earn relatively little as parts
not decay
of national workforces in countries with low
or decline but instead continue to flow from

movers to nonmovers over time even crossing

wages and restricted job markets (Borjas 2006,
generational barriers (Brown 1998). Gullette 2007, Skop et al. 2006). In a weak
labor market where low wages are paid, the
The variation in remittance practices over
time and in relation to a sojourner's situation
internal migrant may remit, but at a rate far
lower than compatriots who cross international
can make it difficult to define the impact that
lines and find higher wages in foreign coun-
remittances have on sending households, com-
tries (Campbell 2010, Liang & White 1996,
munities, and countries (Brettell 2007). Many
White 2009). Other migrants may cross na-
countries now celebrate their migrants and the
tional lines, yet find low wages as they move
money they return. In several countries (includ-
ing Brazil, El Salvador, and Turkey, for exam-
regionally, as is often the case with sub-Saharan
ple), remittances are one of the top sources African
of movers (Castles 2009, Mazzucato et al.
investment capital (Landolt 2001) supporting
2008, Triandafyllidou 2009). Gender also com-
national governments and local development plicates remittance rates (King et al. 2006). Mi-
and countering declines in direct foreign aid
grant women often find service jobs that pay
during economic crises (see Buch & Kuckulenz
less than what their male comigrants earn (par-
2010, Lianos & Cavounidis 2010). ticularly if they work as nannies or maids), and
they often juggle a job against maintaining a
Remittances also challenge the way individ-
uals think about themselves. Remittances pro-
home for other migrants, robbing them of time
vide nonmovers with the opportunity to de- for additional work (Al-Sharmani 2006, Brumer
2008, Curran et al. 2005, Gilbertson 1995,
mand higher wages, access new opportunities
(including education and better health care),
Livingston 2006, Pantoja 2005). Even as we fo-
and reject the status quo (Gamburd 2008, King
cus on the importance of remittances in the eco-
et al. 2006, Wong 2006). Where remittances
nomic life of sending communities, it is critical
to remember that mobility is not always a re-
are invested locally, informal economic growth
can open new opportunities for nonmovers
sponse to economic need; it can reflect other
(Brown & Connell 1994), and human capital
insecurities, including ethnic conflicts and nat-
ural disasters that fuel refugee movement and,
expands as nonmovers use the returns made by
in the process, encourage remittances as stay-
immigrant workers to rethink familial organiza-
tion, economic life, and political opportunities
behinds struggle to cope and rely on movers for
(Brown & Poirine 2005, Hirsch 2003). support (Lindley 2010, Sirkeci 2005).
We should not assume that all remittances

work to improve the situation for sending

BEYOND ECONOMIC
households. Remittances can displace local in-
TRANSFERS
comes and increase local inequalities, drive con-
sumptive spending, and inflate prices, among Remittances are one part of a system of strong
other things (Vertovec 2009). Nonmovers who transnational connections that link people over
rely on remittances are sometimes caught in adistances and around diverse cultural practices
web of dependency and consumerism that can (Georges 1990, Grigolini 2005, Moran -Taylor
develop into what some researchers term a mi-2008a, Newell 2005, Styan 2007). Remittances
grant "syndrome" as local opportunities fail toreflect and build the social status of the sender
materialize (Binford 2003, Reichert 1981). as funds flow to support not just family, but
Remittances, particularly large remittances,also community, local government, develop-
create opportunities and support local develop- ment, and traditional practices as well as cel-
ment schemes and investments; yet many mi-ebrations (Ali 2007, Cohen 2004, Paerregaard
grants cannot afford to return large sums to 2008, Suzuki 2006).

io6 Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The connections created through remit- refocuses efforts so that movers and their

tance practices are sometimes surprising and children do not lose sight of connections with
beg the question of why immigrant work- their hometowns, even as the generations build
ers continue to return funds to their house- over time (Kana'iaupuni et al. 2005, Parrenas
holds, particularly when these individuals may2005, Ryan et al. 2009). Researchers have doc-
umented cases of second-generation children
be second- or third-generation children of mi-
grants with few ties to their homeland (Oropesaof migrants who are connected through family,
& Landale 1997, Orozco 2002 a). The realityfriends, and traditions to hometowns they may
never visit (Foner 2002, Kasinitz et al. 2004,
is that even though remittances track from an
Levitt 2002, Portes 1998). These connections
immigrant sender to her or his home and com-
munity, they are about more than economics.are often formalized around hometown as-
The children of movers often continue the cy-sociations (HTAs). The reach and influence
cle of remittances (though often sending lessof HTAs should not be underestimated and
include support for development initiatives
money or periodically sending goods) and sup-
port a homeland (a homeland that will oftenthat establish school and universities (Mohan
grow more mythical with time) as a way to2002), health clinics (Hagan 1994, Lowell & de
declare their own value and worth vis-a-vis la Garza 2002), and sports facilities in sending
communities (see Portes 2003).
their destination country's cultural traditions
(Paerregaard 2008). Remittances are appreci- The flows between migrants and their send-
ated and celebrated even as they create obli-
ing households and communities are not equal.
There are few ways that sending households
gations among individuals who may not know
can match the value of the remittances that
one another, and the remittances that flow from
migrants return. Yet, at a social and cultural
migrants and their children to sending house-
holds are often returned as sending households
level, the gifts, goods, and information that are
and communities work to maintain connections forwarded to movers by sending households are
over time (Boehm 2008, Dreby 2006, Gamburd critical to the survival of the migrant and her or
2008, Heymann et al. 2009). his children. For undocumented migrants who
Returned goods, gifts, services, and the like, face criminal prosecution if they are caught,
regardless of their real value, are a kind of re- the goods and phone calls from family and the
payment for the effort made by the remitting support that comes from a sending household
migrant, and they have both direct and indi- and community are crucial to psychological
rect effects (Colton 1993, Lubkemann 2005, well-being (Chavez 1994). Even small gifts can
Rose & Shaw 2008). The returned gift mo- serve to invigorate links between movers and
tivates and reminds the immigrant worker of nonmovers, and the information and connec-
the family and friends left behind who de- tions that nonmovers share with movers can
pend on her or him for support. Other times, help them as they search for jobs, friends, and
the returned resources are part of an elabo- support (Aleman-Castilla 2007, Connell 2008,
rate reciprocal system that uses nostalgia toHashim 2007, Ley & Kobayashi 2005, Moran-
build linkages between the children of immi- Taylor 2008b, Sanchez 2007, Schmalzbauer
grants and their former sending hometowns 2008). These connections can even serve to
(Georges 1990, Stodolska & Santos 2006). help a migrant manage her or his remittance
The remittances and the goods and servicesschedule as family in origin communities share
returned to the mover create strong, long- news of their needs, statuses, and challenges
lasting transnational bonds that connect movers faced. Finally, remittances can be repaid when
and nonmovers (and see Smith & Guarnizo migrants face economic challenges themselves
1998). as when family members in origin communities
The circular flow of remittances, goods, send money to support children living across
services, and information reassures and national borders who encounter new hardship

www.. annualreviews.org • Remittances and Household Strategies 107

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 because of global economic crises (see the position (Binford 2003) and can challenge
special issue of Migration Letters on remit- movers who cannot meet their own or others'
tances and economic crises in Ratha & Sirkeci expectations (Duke & Gomez Carpinteiro
2010). 2009). Because remittances do not flow equally,
there is also a risk of increased inequality lo-
cally as households with movers differentiate
CONCLUSIONS
themselves from nonmovers (Adams & Page
Remittances are more than economic. 2005, Burawoy
They1976, Jones 1998, McKenzie
are critical to the social and cultural2006, Semyonov & Gorodzeisky 2008). Re-
well-being
of movers and nonmovers of small rural mittances are not thrown away on consumer
communities and nations (Ratha et al. 2008),
goods and luxury items (Taylor 1999). Rather,
and remittances must be understood for their remittances are critical in unanticipated ways
benefits as well as their costs. Remittances are to local economies as the members of sending
of fundamental importance to many migrant- households improve their households; spend
sending households as they cope with poor local on education, health care, and rituals; engage
economies, limited job markets, and low wages in local politics; and invest in small business.
(Suro et al. 2002). The pull of opportunity Even as migration rates shift and movers
in destination countries (whether the United appear from new and heretofore understud-
States, Western Europe, or elsewhere) tends ied sending regions, remittances will likely
to relieve some of the pressures on sending continue to be important as will the need for
nations to improve labor practices and wages ethnographic and anthropological research
and to develop local economies (Cohen 2001, that can follow new ways of connecting mi-
Stodolska & Santos 2006). Yet success can grants and nonmigrants and of understanding
drive an increase in overall migration rates that the flow of goods, services, information, and
leaves nonmovers in an increasingly dependent money.

SUMMARY POINTS

1. Remittance practices are related to migration outcomes, strengths, and weaknesse

the mover and origin, as well as destination communities.

2. Remittances are rooted in migration decision making.

3. There are benefits and costs to remittance practices for movers and nonmovers.

4. The flow of remittances creates and maintains transnational space for mover
nonmovers.

5. Nonmovers often return resources (food, information, etc.) when

tances from movers.

6. Remittances are overwhelmingly tied to the well-being of sending households; however,

thev can also drive development.

FUTURE ISSUES

1. Several issues are critical, yet understudied, in the anthropology of migration includ
the dvnamics of and difference between internal and international movement and the

continued value of transnational models in the discussion of migration and remittance

outcomes.

108 Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 2. '' e need more research on shifts in remittance practices bevond the second generation
and in terms ot gender and religion as well as the role of 1 1 1 As.

3. The recent economic crises highlight the importance of remittances, vet we need more
ethnographic work on how movers anil nonmovers adapt to economic change anil how
remittance practices change in response to economic crises.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The author is not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings
be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.

LITERATURE CITED

Adams RH Jr. 1991. The economic uses and impact of international remittances in rural Egypt. Ec
Cult . Change 39:695-722
Adams RH Jr. 2009. The determinants of international remittances in developing countries. Wo
37:93-103

Adams RH Jr, Page J. 2005. Do international migration and remittances reduce poverty in developing coun-
tries? World Dev. 33:1645-69

Aleman-Castilla B. 2007. The Returns to Temporary Migration to the United States: Evidence from the MEXICAN
URBAN Employment Survey. London: Cent. Econ. Perform.
Ali S. 2007. "Go west young man": the culture of migration among Muslims in Hyderabad, India. J. Ethn.
Migr. Stud. 33:37-58
Al-Sharmani M. 2006. Living transnationally: Somali diasporic women in Cairo. Int. Migr. 44:55-77
Amuedo-Dorantes C, Bansak C, Pozo S. 2005. On the remitting patterns of immigrants: evidence from
Mexican survey data. Econ. Rev. Fed. Reserve Bank Atlanta First Q.:37-58
Bacallao ML, Smokowski PR. 2007. The costs of getting ahead: Mexican family system changes after immi-
gration. Fam. Relat. 56:52-66
Binford L. 2003. Migrant remittances and (underdevelopment in Mexico. Crit. Anthropol. 23:305-36
Boehm DA. 2008. "For my children": constructing family and navigating the state in the U.S. -Mexico transna-
tion .Anthropol. Q 81:777-802
Borjas GJ. 2006. Native internal migration and the labor market impact of immigration. J. Hum. Resour.
41:221-58

Brettell C. 2003 . Anthropology and Migration: Essays on Transnationalism , Ethnicity , and Identity. Walnut Creek,
CA: AltaMira

Brettell C. 2007. Adjustment of status, remittances, and return: some observations on the 2 1st century migra-
tion processes. City Soc. 19:47-59
Brown RP. 1998. Do migrants' remittances decline over time? Evidence from Tongans and Western Samoans
in Australia. Contemp. Pac. 10:107-51
Brown RPC, Connell J. 1994. The global flea market: migration, remittances and the informal economy in
Tonga. Dev. Change 24:61 1-47
Brown RPC, Poirine B. 2005 . A model of migrants' remittances with human capital investment and intrafamilial
transfers. Int. Migr. Rev. 39:407-38
Brumer A. 2008. Gender relations in family-farm agriculture and rural-urban migration in Brazil. Lat. Am.
Perspect. 35:11-28
Buch CM, Kuckulenz A. 2010. Worker remittances and capital flows to developing countries. Int. Migr.
48:89-117

Burawoy M. 1976. The functions and reproduction of migrant labor: comparative material from Southern
Africa and the United States. Am. J. Sociol. 81:1050-87

www.annualreviews.org • Remittances and Household Strategies iop

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Campbell EK. 2010. The role of remittances in Botswana: Does internal migration really reward sending
families? Popul. Space Place 16:151-64
Carling J. 2008. The determinants of migrant remittances. Oxford Rev. Econ. Policy 24:581-98
Castles S. 2009. Development and migration - migration and development: What comes first? Global per-
spective and African experiences. TheoriaiJ. Soc. Pol. Theory 56:1-31
Chavez LR. 1994. The power of the imagined community: the settlement of undocumented Mexicans and
Central Americans in the United States. Am. Anthropol. 96:52-73
Christiansen CC. 2008. Hometown associations and solidarities in Kurdish transnational villages: the
migration-development nexus in a European context. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 20:88-103
Cliggett L. 2005. Remitting the gift: Zambian mobility and anthropological insights for migration studies.
Popul. Space Place 11:35-48
Cohen JH. 2001. Transnational migration in rural Oaxaca, Mexico: dependency, development and the house-
hold. Am. Anthropol. 103:954-67
Cohen JH. 2004. The Culture of Migration in Southern Mexico. Austin: Univ. Tex. Press
Cohen JH, Rodriguez L. 2005. Remittance outcomes in rural Oaxaca, Mexico: challenges, options and op-
portunities for migrant households. Popul. Space Place 1 1:49-63
Colton N. 1993. Homeward bound: Yemeni return migration. Int. Migr. Rev. 27:873-86
Connell J. 2008. Niue: embracing a culture of migration. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 34:1021-40
Conway D. 2007. The importance of remittances for the Caribbean's future transcends their macroeconomic
influences. Glob. Dev. Stud. 4:41-76

Cornelius WA, Espenshade TJ, Salehyan I, eds. 2001 . The International Migration of the Highly Skilled: Demand,
Supply , and Development Consequences in Sending and Receiving Countries. La Jolla: Cent. Comp. Immigr.
Stud./Univ. Calif., San Diego
Curran SR, Garip F, Chung CY, Tangchonlatip K. 2005. Gendered migrant social capital: evidence from
Thailand. Soc. Forces 84:225-55

DaVanzo J. 1981. Microeconomic approaches to studying migration decision making. In Migration Decision
Making: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Microlevel Studies in Developed and Developing Countries , ed. GF
Dejong, RW Gardner. New York: Pergamon
De Haas H. 2005. International migration, remittances and development: myths and facts. Third World Q.
26:1269-84

Dejong GF. 2000. Expectations, gender, and norms in migration decision-making. Popul. Stud. 54:307-19
de la Garza RO, Lowell BL, eds. 2002. Sending Money Home: Hispanic Remittances and Community Development.
Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield
Dreby J. 2006. Honor and virtue - Mexican parenting in the transnational context. Gender Soc. 20:32-59
Duke M, Gomez Carpinteiro FJ. 2009. The effects of problem drinking and sexual risk among Mexican
migrant workers on their community of origin. Hum. Organ. 68:328-39
Eversole R. 2005. "Direct to the poor" revisited: migrant remittances and development assistance. See Trager
2005a, pp. 289-322
Eversole R. 2008. Development in motion: what to think about migration? Dev. Pract. 18:94-99
Fomby P. 2005. Mexican Migrants and their Parental Households in Mexico. New York: LFB
Foner N. 1997. The immigrant family: cultural legacies and cultural change. Int. Migr. Rev. 3 1:961-74
Foner N. 2002. Second-generation transnationalism, then and now. In The Changing Face of Home: The
Transnational Lives of Second Generation , ed. P Levitt, MC Waters, pp. 242-54. New York: Russell Sage
Gamburd MR. 2008. Milk teeth and jet planes: kin relations in families of Sri Lanka's transnational domestic
servants. City Soc. 20:5-31
Gammage S. 2006. Exporting people and recruiting remittances: a development strategy for El Salvador? Lat.
Am. Perspect. 3 3 : 7 5- 1 00
Georges E. 1990. The Making of a Transnational Community: Migration , Development , and Cultural Change in
the Dominican Republic. New York: Columbia Univ. Press
Gilbertson GA. 1995. Women's labor and enclave employment: the case of Dominican and Colombian
women in New York City. Int. Migr. Rev. 29:657-70
Grasmuck S, Pessar PR. 1991. Between Two Islands: Dominican International Migration. Berkeley: Univ. Calif.
Press

ii o Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Grigolini S. 2005. When houses provide more than shelter: analyzing the uses of remittances within their
social context. See Trager 2005a, pp. 193-224
Guarnizo LE. 1997. "Going home": class, gender, and household transformation among Dominican return
migrants. In Caribbean Circuits: New Directions in the Study of Caribbean Migration , ed. PR Pessar, pp. 1 3-60.
New York: Cent. Migr. Stud. N. Y.
Guarnizo LE. 2003. The economics of transnational living. Int. Migr. Rev. 37:666-99
Gullette GS. 2007. Migration and tourism development in Huatulco, Oaxaca. Curr. Anthropol. 48:603-1 1
Hagan JM. 1994. Deciding to be Legal: A Maya Community in Houston. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
Hartmann H. 1976. Women and the workplace: the implications of occupational segregation. Signs 1:137-69
Hashim I. 2007. Independent child migration and education in Ghana. Dev. Change 38:91 1-3 1
HelwegAW. 1983. Emigrant remittances: their nature and impact on a Punjabi village. New Commun. 10:67-84
Hernandez E, Coutin SB. 2006. Remitting subjects: migrants, money and states. Econ. Soc. 35:185-208
Heymann J, Flores-Macias F, Hayes JA, Kennedy M, Lahaie C, Earle A. 2009. The impact of migration on
the well-being of transnational families: new data from sending communities in Mexico. Commun. Work
Fam. 12:91-103

Hirsch JS. 2003. A Courtship after Marriage: Sexuality and Love in Mexican Transnational Families. Berkeley:
Univ. Calif. Press

Iskander N. 2010. Creative State: Forty Years of Migration and Development Policy in Morocco and Mexico. Ithaca,
NY: ILR/Cornell Univ. Press

Jones RC. 1998. Remittances and inequality: a question of migration stage and geographic scale. Econ. Geogr.
74:8-25

Kana'iaupuni SM, Donato KM, Thompson-Colon T, StainbackM. 2005. Counting on kin: social networks,
social support, and child health status. Soc. Forces 83:1 137-64
Kanaiaupuni SM. 2000. Reframing the migration question: an analysis of men, women, and gender in Mexico.
Soc. Forces 78:1311 -48

Kandel W, Kao G. 2000. Shifting orientations: how US labor migration affects children's aspirations in
Mexican migrant communities. Soc. Sci. Q. 81:16-32
Kasinitz P, Mollenkopf JH, Waters MC. 2004. Worlds of the second generation. In Becoming New Yorkers:
Ethnographies of the New Second Generation , ed. P Kasinitz, JH Mollenkopf, MC Waters, pp. 1-19. New
York: Russell Sage Found.
King R, Dalipaj M, Mai N. 2006. Gendering migration and remittances: evidence from London and Northern
Albania. Popul. Space Place 12:409-34
Kinoti K. 2006. Women, remittances and development. In Resource Net Friday File, Issue 29 7. Toronto, ON:
Assoc. Women's Rights in Dev.
Landolt P. 2001. Salvadoran economic transnationalism: embedded strategies for household maintenance,
immigrant incorporation, and entrepreneurial expansion. Glob. Netw. J. Transnatl. Aff. 1:217-42
Levitt P. 2002. The ties that change: relations to the ancestral home over the life cycle. In The Changing Face of
Home: The Transnational Lives of the Second Generation , ed. P Levitt, MC Waters, pp. 123-44. New York:
Russell Sage Found.
Levitt P, Lamba-Nieves D. 2011. Social remittances revisited. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 37:1-22
Ley D, Kobayashi A. 2005. Back to Hong Kong: return migration or transnational sojourn? Glob. Netw.
5:111-27

Liang Z, White MJ. 1996. Internal migration in China, 1950-1988. Demography 33:375-84
Lianos TP, Cavounidis J. 2010. Immigrant remittances, stability of employment and relative deprivation. Int.
Migr. 48:1 18-41
Lindley, A. 2010. The Early Morning Phone Call: Somali Refugees ' Remittances. New York: Berghahn Books
Livingston G. 2006. Gender, job searching, and employment outcomes among Mexican immigrants. Popul.
Res. Policy Rev. 25:43-66
Lopez JR, Seligson MA. 1991. Small business development in El Salvador: the impact of remittances. In
Migration , Remittances , and Small Business Development: Mexico and Caribbean Basin Countries , ed. S Diaz-
Briquets, S Weintraub, pp. 175-206. Boulder, CO: Westview
Lowell BL, de la Garza RO. 2002. The development role of remittances in U.S. Latino Communities and
Latin America. See de la Garza & Lowell 2002, pp. 3-27

www.annualreviews.org • Remittances and Household Strategies hi

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Lozano Ascencio F. 1998. Las remesas de los migrantes Mexicanos en Estados Unidos: estimaciones para
1995. In Migration between Mexico and the United States , pp. 1 189-2 14. Austin, TX: Mex. Minist. Foreign
Aff./U.S. Comm. Immigr. Reform
Lubkemann S. 2005. The moral economy of nonreturn among socially diverted labor migrants from Portugal
and Mozambique. In Society for Economic Anthropology Monographs , Vol. 22, ed. L Trager, pp. 257-88.
Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira
Lucas REB, Stark O. 1985. Motivations to remit: evidence from Botswana. J. Pol. Econ. 93:901-18
Lutz H. 2010. Gender in the migratory process. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 36:1647-63
Maimbo SM, Ratha D. 2005. Remittances: an overview. In Remittances: Develop Impact and Future Prospects,
ed. SM Maimbo, D Ratha, pp. 1-16. Washington, DC: World Bank
Manning C. 2002. Structural change, economic crisis and international labour migration in East Asia. World
Econ. 25:359-85

Massey DS, Akresh IR. 2006. Immigrant intentions and mobility in a global economy: the attitudes and
behavior of recently arrived US immigrants. Soc. Sci. Q. 87:954-71
Mazzucato V, van den Boom B, Nsowah-Nuamah NNN. 2008. Remittances in Ghana: origin, destination
and issues of measurement. Int. Migr. 46:103-22
McDowell L. 2004. Cultural memory, gender and age: young Latvian women's narrative memories of war-time
Europe, 1944-1947. J. Hist. Geogr. 30:701-28
McKenzie DJ. 2006. Beyond remittances: the effects of migration on Mexican households. See Ozden & Schiff
2006, pp. 123-47
Millard AV, Chapa J. 2004. Apple Pie & Enchiladas. Austin: Univ. Tex. Press. 276 pp.
Mohan G. 2002. Diaspora and development. In Development and Displacement , ed. J Robinson, pp. 77-139.
Oxford: Milton Keynes/Open Univ./ Oxford Univ. Press
Moorehead C. 2005. Human Cargo: A Journey Among Refugees. New York: Holt
Mora J, Taylor JE. 2006. Determinants of migration, destination and sector choice: disentangling individual,
household, and community effects. See Ozden & Schiff 2006, pp. 21-52
Moran-Taylor MJ. 2008a. Guatemala's Ladino and Maya Migra landscapes: the tangible and intangible out-
comes of migration. Hum. Organ. 67:1 1 1-24
Moran-Taylor MJ. 2008b. When mothers and fathers migrate north: caretakers, children, and child rearing
in Guatemala, hat. Am. Perspect. 35:79-95
Newell S. 2005. Migratory modernity and the cosmology of consumption in Cote d'lvoire. See Trager 2005a,
pp. 163-90
OECD. 2005. Migration , Remittances and Development. Paris: OECD
Oropesa RS, Landale NS. 1997. Immigrant legacies: ethnicity, generation, and children's familial and economic
lives. Soc. Sci. Q. 78:399-416
Orozco M. 2002 a. Globalization and migration: the impact of family remittances in Latin America. Latin Am.
Polit. Soc. 44:41-66

Orozco M. 2002b. Latino hometown associations as agents of development in Latin America. See de la Garza
& Lowell 2002, pp. 85-99
Ozden Q, Schiff MW, eds. 2006. International Migration, Remittances, and the Brain Drain. Washington, DC:
World Bank/Palgrave Macmillan
Paerregaard K. 2008. Peruvians Dispersed: A Global Ethnography of Migration. Lanham, MD: Rowman and
Littlefield

Pantoja AD. 2005. Transnational ties and immigrant political incorporation: the case of Dominicans in
Washington heights, New York. Int. Migr. 43:123-46
Parrenas R. 2005. Long distance intimacy: class, gender and intergenerational relations between mothers and
children in Filipino transnational families. Glob. Netw. 5:317-36
Portes A. 1998. Divergent destinies: immigration, the second generation, and the rise of transnational com-
munities. In Paths to Inclusion: The Integration of Migrants in the United States and Germany, ed. P Schuck,
RMunz, pp. 33-57. New York: Berghahn
Portes A. 2003. Conclusion: theoretical convergencies and empirical evidence in the study of immigrant
transnationalism. Int. Migr. Rev. 37:874-92

in Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Portes A. 2007. Migration, development, and segmented assimilation: a conceptual review of the evidence.
Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 610:73-97

Qian C. 2003. Migrant remittances and family ties: a case study in China. Int. J. Popul. Geogr. 9:471-83
Ramirez M, Skrbis Z, Emmison M. 2007. Transnational family reunions as lived experience: narrating a
Salvadoran autoethnography. Identities 14:411-31
Ratha D, Sirkeci I, eds. 2010. Special Issue: Financial Crisis and Remittances. Migr. Lett. Vol. 7(2)
Ratha D, Xu Z, World Bank, Dev. Prospects Group. 2008. Migration and Remittances Factbook 2008.
Washington, DC: World Bank
Reichert J. 1981. The migrant syndrome: seasonal US wage labor and rural development in central Mexico.
Hum. Organ. 40:56-66
Rose S, Shaw R. 2008. The gamble: circular Mexican migration and the return on remittances. Mex. Stud./Estud.
Mex. 24:79-111

Ryan L, Sales R, Tilki M, Siara B. 2009. Family strategies and transnational migration: recent Polish migrants
in London. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 35:61-77
Sanchez P. 2007. Cultural authenticity and transnational Latina youth: constructing a meta-narrative across
borders. Ling. Educ. 18:258-82
Schmalzbauer L. 2008. Family divided: the class formation of Honduran transnational families. Glob. Netw.
8:329-46

SemyonovM, Gorodzeisky A. 2008. Labor migration, remittances and economic well-being of households in
the Philippines. Popul. Res. Policy Rev. 27:619-37
Shehu AY. 2004. The Asian alternative remittance systems and money laundering. J. Money Laund. Control
7:175-85

Singer A, Hardwick SW, Brettell C. 2008. Twenty -First-Century Gateways: Immigrant Incorporation in Suburban
America. Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press
Sirkeci I. 2005. War in Iraq: environment of insecurity and international migration. Int. Migr. 43:197-2 14
Skeldon R. 2008. International migration as a tool in development policy: a passing phase? Popul. Dev. Rev.
34:1-18

Skop E, Peters PA, Amaral EF, Potter JE, Fusco W. 2006. Chain migration and residential segregation of
internal migrants in the metropolitan area of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Urban Geogr. 27:397^1-2 1
Smith MP, Guarnizo LE, eds. 1998. Transnationalism from Below. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Smith RC. 2006. Mexican New York: Transnational Lives of New Immigrants. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
Sorensen NN, Van Hear N, Engberg-Pedersen P. 2002 . The Migration-Development Nexus: Evidence and Policy
Options. Geneva, Switz.: Int. Organ. Migr.
Stahl CW, Arnold F. 1986. Overseas workers' remittances in Asian development. Int. Migr. Rev. 20:899-925
Stark O. 1992. Migration in Developing Countries: Risk, Remittances , and the Family. Tel Aviv: David Horowitz
Inst. Res. Dev. Ctries., Tel Aviv Univ.
Stodolska M, Santos CA. 2006. 'You must think of familia': the everyday lives of Mexican migrants in desti-
nation communities. Soc. Cult. Geogr. 7:627-47
Styan D. 2007. The security of Africans beyond borders: migration, remittances and London's transnational
entrepreneurs. Int. Aff. 83:1 171-91
Suro R, Bendixen S, Lowell BL, Benavides DC. 2002. Billions in motion Latino immigrants, remittances
and banking, a report produced in cooperation between the Pew Hispanic Center and the Multilateral
Investment Fund. Washington, DC: Pew Hisp. Cent./Multilater. Invest. Fund
Suzuki T. 2006. Becoming "Japanese" in Bolivia: Okinawan- Bolivian trans(national) formations in Colonia
Okinawa. Identities: Glob. Stud. Cult. Power 13:455-581

Tatla DS. 2002. A passage to England: oral tradition and popular culture among early Punjabi settlers in
Britain. Oral Hist. 30:61-72

Taylor JE. 1999. The new economics of labor migration and the role of remittances in the migration process.
Int. Migr. 37:63-88
Trager L. 1984. Migration and remittances: urban income and rural households in the Philippines. J. Dev.
Areas 18:317-40

Trager L, ed. 2005a. Migration and Economy: Global and Local Dynamics. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira

wwiv.annualrevieivs.org • Remittances and Household Strategies 113

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Trager L. 2005b. Women migrants and hometown linkages in Nigeria: status, economic roles and contribu-
tions to community development. See Trager 2005a, pp. 225-56
Triandafyllidou A. 2009. Sub-Saharan African immigrant activists in Europe: transcultural capital and tran-
scultural community building. Ethn. Racial Stud. 32:93-1 16
Valentine G, Sporton D, Nielsen KB. 2009. Identities and belonging: a study of Somali refugee and asylum
seekers living in the UK and Denmark. Environ. Plann. D , Soc. Space 27:234-50
Van Doom J. 2004. Migration , Remittances and Small Enterprise Development. Geneva: ILO
Van Hear N. 2006. 'I went as far as my money would take me': conflict, forced migration and class. In Forced
Migration and Global Processes: A View from Forced Migration Studies , ed. F Crepeau, D Nakache, M Collyer,
NH Goetz, A Hansen, et al., pp. 125-58. Lanham, MD: Lexington
Van Hear N. 2010. Theories of migration and social change. J. Ethn. Migr. Stud. 36:1531-36
Vertovec S. 1999. Conceiving and researching transnationalism. Ethn. Racial Stud. 22:447-62
Vertovec S. 2009. Transnationalism. London/New York: Routledge
White A. 2009. Internal migration, identity and livelihood strategies in contemporary Russia. J. Ethn. Migr.
Stud. 35:555-73

WongM. 2006. The gendered politics of remittances in Ghanaian transnational families. Econ. Geogr. 82:355-
81

World Bank. 2006. Global Economic Prospects 2006: Economic Implications of Remittances and Migration.
Washington, DC: World Bank
Yang D, Martinez CA. 2006. Remittances and poverty in migrants' home areas: evidence from the Philippines.
See Ozden & Schiff 2006, pp. 81-122

RELATED RESOURCES

Cornelius WA, Fitzgerald D, Fisher PL, eds. 2007. Mayan Journeys : The New Migratio
Yucatan to the United States. San Diego: Cent. Comp. Immigr. Stud./Univ. Calif. San D
Foner N. 2000. From Ellis Island to J. F.K.: New York's Two Great Waves of Immigration. New
Russell Sage
Kearney M. 1996. Reconceptualizing the Peasantry: Anthropology in Global Perspective. Boulder, CO:
Westview

Levitt P. 2001. The Transnational Villagers. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

1 14 Cohen

This content downloaded from

41.82.212.193 on Mon, 12 Jul 2021 10:07:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms