Immobility as loyalty: ‘Voluntariness’ and narratives of a duty to stay in the context of (non)migration decision making

Re‐imagining belonging to Brazil: Active immobility in times of crisis

“…Of those who stated they did not intend to leave I found two themes that I believe deserve to be explored further. The first theme concerns those who expressed staying in terms of duty or loyalty (Robins, 2022). The second, which this paper addresses, concerns those who cited a sense of belonging to Brazil as a reason to stay.…”

“…For Coulter et al (2015), staying is very much an ‘active process’. This can be true even in cases where immobility is not necessarily voluntary (Reeves, 2011) or where the line between voluntary and involuntary may be blurred (Robins, 2022). Active immobility is thus closely associated with ‘staying’ since ‘staying suggests an active maintenance of continuity’ (Reeves, 2011, p. 558).…”

Staying put in an era of climate change: The geographies, legalities, and public health implications of immobility

“…Consequently, scholars have become increasingly concerned with understanding immobility on its own terms: as a phenomenon with distinct forms, drivers and impacts, just as has been done with mobility (Mallick et al, 2021;Robins, 2022aRobins, , 2022bSchewel, 2019;Schewel & Fransen, 2022). These reasons for immobility have been framed as forms of both resistance (Halfacree, 2018) and acquiescence (Schewel, 2020), as "livelihood resilience" (Mallick, 2019), or as expressions of a sense of duty (Robins, 2022a), of belonging (Robins, 2022b), and of place attachment (Adams, 2016;Mallick et al, 2021). Place attachment can have economic, psychosocial and cultural dimensions and is often the dominant motivation for staying in the face of environmental pressure to move (Farbotko & McMichael, 2019;Mallick et al, 2021;Perch-Nielsen et al, 2008;Zickgraf et al, 2016).…”

“…Scholars have begun to focus on immobility within the wider context of migration studies as a reaction to a perceived “mobility bias” (Robins, 2022a, 2022b; Schewel, 2019; Schewel & Fransen, 2022; Zickgraf, 2018) that can underpin the “alarmist” narrative of mass migration as an inevitable outcome of environmental change (Wiegel et al, 2019). This bias often influences the perspectives and priorities of policy makers, aid agencies and other institutional actors who have an interest in migration's causes and effects.…”

“…But, given that only a minority opt for this strategy, it is critical to reflect on how staying put can be an adaptative strategy beyond being simply “left behind” (Zickgraf, 2018). Consequently, scholars have become increasingly concerned with understanding immobility on its own terms: as a phenomenon with distinct forms, drivers and impacts, just as has been done with mobility (Mallick et al, 2021; Robins, 2022a, 2022b; Schewel, 2019; Schewel & Fransen, 2022). These reasons for immobility have been framed as forms of both resistance (Halfacree, 2018) and acquiescence (Schewel, 2020), as “livelihood resilience” (Mallick, 2019), or as expressions of a sense of duty (Robins, 2022a), of belonging (Robins, 2022b), and of place attachment (Adams, 2016; Mallick et al, 2021).…”