Dual citizenship or dual identity? Does ‘transnationalism’ supplant ‘nationalism’ among returning Trinidadians?

Abstract

In this article we focus on the dual identities of relatively young Trinidadians who have decided to return to the island of their birth, or of their parents, while still in their thirties and forties. Highly‐educated professional transnational migrants mostly make up our sample of 36; 26 possess dual citizenship. We focus on our informants’ narratives about their transnational experiences, self‐appraisals of their dual identities and how they value dual citizenship. More generally, we ask, does transnationalism supplant nationalism among our returning informants? Unsurprisingly, the diverse responses we document do not support the commonly held explanatory relationship between return adaptations, ‘national belonging’ and the expected dominance of ‘transnational belonging’. Family relations intervene significantly, both to encourage transnationalism and to strengthen nationalism. Feelings of national belonging often accompany transnationalism. Notably, we view dual citizenship strategically and pragmatically as advantageous to the continuation of transnational practices.

Citizenship on paper or at heart? a closer look into the dual citizenship debate in Europe

“…Bloemraad 2006;Conover, Crewe and Searing 1991;Lister et al 2003) so far conducted on citizens' espousal of the theoretical conceptualisations is the perspective of dual citizens. Recently, a handful of qualitative studies have addressed this lack by examining the interlinkage between citizenship and nationality in the case of dual citizens in Finland (Ronkainen 2011), national belonging and transnational allegiances of returning Trinidadians (Conway, Potter and Bernard 2008) or of returning Lebanese citizens (Skulte-Ouaiss 2013). Regardless of the variation in their geographical scope, these studies identify diverse attitudes to citizenship ties ranging from mono to binationals or else from regional to global citizens.…”

“…Aleinikoff and Klusmeyer 2001;Faist and Kivisto 2007;Gustafson 2002;Hansen and Weil 2002;Sejersen 2008). Paralleling the scarcity of micro level research in citizenship literature, scholars, with few exceptions (Conway, Potter and Bernard 2008;Ronkainen 2011;Skulte-Ouaiss 2013) that I will delve into in the next section, have seldom dealt with individuals' practices of dual citizenship (Kivisto and Faist 2007, 12). This lack becomes particularly significant in an era when the quality of citizenship as a source of identity is more contested than ever.…”

Reasons for Returning and Not Returning to Rural U.S. Communities

“…Within agendas set by critical migration theory and the desire for migrants to speak for themselves, the topic of return migration often takes center stage. Included are ambitious, mixedmethod projects that place migration in the details of everyday life (Bailey et al 2002;Ní Laoire 2007;Conway, Potter, and St Bernard 2008;Phillips and Potter 2009). Additionally, these and several other studies focus on untying complex theoretical and conceptual knots, addressing such questions as "What constitutes a return move?"…”

“…Interviews took place in small towns at ten-to thirty-year high school reunions, the only venues where stayers, return migrants, and nonreturn migrants are found together, allowing simultaneous recording of reasons for returning and reasons for not returning. The dominant conceptualization of migration used here-migration as a family-related and deeply community-embedded process-draws most heavily on social network theory, especially as formulated in new interview-based research on return migration in transnational settings (e.g., Conway, Potter, and St Bernard 2008;Ralph 2009;Reynolds 2009). The project's overall design and much of its analytical strategy, however, builds on life course perspectives that dominate current empirical research on U.S. domestic migration (Chen and Rosenthal 2008;Whisler et al 2008;Cromartie and Nelson 2009;Plane and Jurjevich 2009).…”

Negotiating identities and emotional belonging: Shan in northern Thailand

“…This approach allows for engagement with the ways migrants negotiate both changes in citizenship status but also the expected practices and feelings of citizenship (see Ho, 2009;Waite and Cook, 2011). Increasing levels of transnational belonging (as emotional citizenship) produces alternative spatialities and temporalities of belonging to those associated with Westphalian understandings of citizenship as territorially-bound (Black, 2006;Brees, 2010;Conway et al, 2008;Gemignani, 2011). For migrants in positons of permanent temporariness, or those who are excluded from both their 'home'…”