Suchergebnisse

This three-paper dissertation is about the relationship between remittances and political institutions in developing countries and how institutions shape emigration flows. I build on the political economy, democratization, and international migration literatures to theorize the political consequences from remittances. Drawing on underutilized surveys and extant cross-national databases, I show that remittance inflows alter citizen preferences on redistribution as well as government spending patterns on health and educational outcomes. In addition, I find that institutional quality in migrant-sending countries shapes emigration lows in times of economic crisis. My findings add to established theories of government redistribution, which are largely based on wealthier, industrialized countries, and the nascent field on the political economy of remittances. The first paper analyzes how remittance recipients view the role of the state and how citizen attitudes change due to fluctuations in remittance income. I use survey data from the most remittance-dependent countries in Latin America to see how preferences for redistribution changed during the course of the Global Financial Crisis of 2008-2009. With the United States as the main source of remittances, the recession had ripple effects in Latin America. I find remittance receivers are more likely to favor redistribution policies following the economic crisis than before 2009.The second paper analyzes the political effects of remittances at the country level. I use country-level data to show that the relationship between remittances and government spending is conditional on regime type. Autocratic regimes show greater changes in spending on educational and public health from rising remittances. On the other hand, democracies show mild relationships between remittances and spending. I find that institutions will influence the ways government spending responds to rising remittances.The final paper argues that political institutions shape emigration flows conditional on economic performance. Using data from the American Community Surveys to measure Latin American migration into the United States, I find that countries with higher quality institutions will experience a brain drain when economic growth is low. I use the example of Venezuela in 2002-2003 when the country saw its intelligentsia emigrate. While economic performance is a strong factor explaining emigration flows, political institutions have the capacity to mitigate or exacerbate them. Together, these three essays show that remittances and migration flows have profound implications for domestic policy, state expenditures, and the consequences of institutional quality and economic crisis.

Transit migration through Honduras has grown at a time of increasing US border externalization, which raises barriers to mobility through Central America. This research note presents a descriptive analysis of how Hondurans view transit migrants traveling across the country. Honduras is a major migrant-sending country, one that has become an important transit country for migrants of different backgrounds. This article will present results from an original survey of Hondurans asking respondents of their opinions of transit migrants from Haiti, Nicaragua, Cuba, and other regions. We find that negative attitudes toward transit migrants tend to be concentrated in the exit regions near the border with Guatemala. We argue that border externalization generates bottlenecks to mobility that can prolong exposure to transit migrants. We propose recommendations for future research to better understand how border externalization may lead countries to become new transit zones and how attitudes toward transit migrants vary regionally.

Abstract
In this article, we explore how historical patterns of identity construction shape today's attitudes towards immigrants in Mexico. Immigrants in Mexico constitute a very small percentage of the country's population. Yet some immigrants, in particular those of Asian origin, face a strong anti-immigrant sentiment as measured in terms of opinions and opposition to their social and political incorporation. We trace contemporary anti-Chinese sentiment back to historical processes of Mexican colonisation, which resulted in a particular politics of Chinese incorporation at the turn of the 19th century. This incorporation was violently contested during and after the revolution, leading to a construction of a national identity based on openly excluding the Chinese community. Using experimental evidence, we show that anti-Asian prejudice today is well explained by looking at ethnic traits and civic norms that are endorsed by natives as being constitutive of Mexican national identity.