Mobilizing Ethnic Resources in the Transnational Enclave

Abstract

In recent years, scholars have noted that migrants exhibit distinct patterns of adaptation characterized by frequent movement to their countries of origin. Increasing numbers of migrants have settled in "new" types of enclave communities that have helped them sustain their transnational lifestyles. This article uses original survey data, interviews, and ethnographic research on the Korean transnational enclave in Beijing, comparing how South Korean and Korean Chinese migrants collectively mobilize resources within the ethnic church. Findings suggest that the ways in which ethnic organizations such as the church, influence the cultivation is more important than the availability of transnational resources as solidarity acts as the key mechanism by which migrants are able to actually mobilize and benefit from these resources.

Venues and segregation: A revised Schelling model

“…Further research that overcomes these limitations would contribute not only to the verisimilitude of the simulation, but also move toward a more robust heuristic model of urban segregation. Finally, while most of our examples and literature have been from the North American context, we believe that this phenomenon is more general, such as in the activity spaces in Belfast [74], Korean churches in Beijing, [75] or the "restaurants, cafes, markets, museums, [and] festivals where Germans and Turks exchange and meld their cultural values and practices" in Kreuzberg [76]. An important future direction is to more fully engage with a more international set of literatures and examples.…”

Enclavic tourism spaces: territorialization and bordering in tourism destination development and planning

“…Rather than erasing or creating the mutual connectivity of borders, enclavic spaces are usually seen as expressions of exclusive borderwork, where mobilities and encounters are somehow curtailed and differences and inequalities between "insiders and outsiders" are reinforced. This exclusive borderwork immobilizing flows of people, goods, and services at a local or regional scale can be based on social, cultural, political, and economic exclusions, among others (see Turner, 2007;Yoon, 2013).…”