Der sogenannte "spatial turn" ist bereits in vielen Bereichen der Sozialwissenschaften vollzogen worden. In der Migrationssoziologie hingegen sind raumspezifische Überlegungen bislang nur selten anzutreffen. Am Beginn dieses Buches steht daher die Auseinandersetzung mit der Frage, wie dieser Umstand historisch zu verstehen sein könnte. Im Anschluss daran wird ein konzeptueller methodologischer Vorschlag gemacht, wie raumspezifische Überlegungen die Migrationssoziologie bereichern können. Dies wird anhand empirischer Beispiele am Ende des Buches näher erläutert.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
With migration being a reality within and between nation‐states worldwide, transnational social protection has become a concern on various levels. This thematic issue focuses on nation‐state conceptions and policies, migrants' experiences with regards to accessing social protection, as well as the social inequalities resulting from the nexus of transnational social protection and migration.
It has been argued that nation‐states confront migrant protection with a highly diverse array of measures ranging from excluding strategies (often labelled as "welfare chauvinism") to more inclusionary, post‐national approaches. While exclusionary strategies are often guided by nativist principles such as citizenship, post‐national approaches of social protection are usually based on residence. Building on an international comparative project with a focus on free movement within the European Union, and involving four pairs of EU member states, this article argues that the extremes of these two ways of understanding nation‐state approaches to migrant social protection are not mutually exclusive, as has been discussed so far, but, instead, are intertwined with one another. While there is a common (and globally unique) framework on the EU level for the coordination of mobile citizens' social protection, EU member states determine their strategies using residence as a main tool to govern intra‐EU migration. We differentiate between three main intertwining strategies applied by nation‐states in this respect: generally, selectively, and purposefully gated access to social protection. All three potentially lead to the social exclusion of migrants, particularly those who cannot prove their residence status in line with institutional regulations due to their undocumented living situations or their transnational lifestyles.
Based on the results of a qualitative study, this article deals with the biographies of Austrians who emigrated to the US after 1965. While, in terms of quantity, the most significant waves of immigration into Western Europe have been studied extensively during the past few years, external migration has been given comparatively little consideration. A closer look at the sociological contributions that deal with this phenomenon also shows that the existing research is only helpful to a certain extent: emigration from Western European countries is mainly discussed on the basis of very few groups of people and is ultimately categorized as being `diversified' and `individualized'. In this article, it is suggested that emigration from Western Europe should be understood as one possible course of action shaped by the conditions of a second modernity. Therefore, it is oriented more closely towards the goal of self-realization — quite in contrast to such well-known forms of migration as labour-related migration or forced migration into the European Union.
