Second Generation and Migrant Capital in the Transnational Space: The Case of Young Kurds in France

Abstract

Transnational ties, networks, and mobilities can constitute a social resource for diaspora communities. Resources available as a result of the migration process or transnational ties can potentially become capitalised by diaspora members. Yet, diaspora members cannot automatically capitalise on all transnational networks and ties, and only resources that are mobilisable within particular transnational networks constitute “migrant capital” (Anthias, 2007; Ryan, 2011). Migrants’ children have grown up in “transnational social space,” in a social setting that is embedded with multiple sets of interconnected networks of social relationships, memberships, identities, and mobilities of cross-border character (Levitt, 2009). Little is known on whether such transnational networks function as a mobilisable social resource, i.e., migrant capital, for the second generation. This study focuses on the transnational ties, practices, and mobilities of second-generation Kurds in France and examines whether those constitute a mobilisable resource for them. It specifically asks if second-generation members intent to or have capitalised on such resources in the transnational social space. The study sheds light on the workings of transnational resources in the lives of the second generation and asks about the extent to which they can be considered migrant capital. The analysis draws from a qualitative dataset such as interviews and observations collected with second-generation Kurds in France.

The Kobane Generation: Kurdish Diaspora Mobilising in France

“…We can approach their transnational engagements and actions as well as mobilities as diasporic in the sense that they -at least to some extent -are connected to them having been raised in the transnational Kurdish diaspora space. Drawing from the same material as for this study, I have discussed the resources that are available to secondgeneration Kurds as a result of their parents' migration process and transnational ties elsewhere (Toivanen 2019). That article focused on the role of mobilisable resources and concluded that they were capitalised upon by second-generation members for two, albeit interrelated, aims: to advance one's educational and professional advantages and to contribute to the development of Kurdistan.…”

“…For instance, Santelli and colleagues' study on secondgeneration Algerians in France (1999) show that investment opportunities can motivate the sustaining of transnational ties to the homeland without such activities necessarily being rooted to lingering attachments and loyalties towards the homeland. I have also discussed the professional and educational reasons underlying second-generation Kurds' temporary 'return' motivations elsewhere (Toivanen 2019).…”

“…What is more, not only did some plan to return to Kurdistan by employing the existing diaspora networks they had but in some cases those led to the creation of new networks. In that sense, their transnational mobility did not only lean on the pre-existing (diaspora) networks or institutional structures but instead led to a creation of a new one that was not diasporic per se (Toivanen 2019). Discerning what is diasporic in second-generation mobilisation processes and transnational participation towards the ancestral 'homeland' opens unavoidably the question of what is not.…”

Migrant Capital as a Resource for Migrant Communities

“…The authors approach migrant capital as a resource that becomes available to migrants during their migration process (Atasü-Topcuoğlu, 2019;Glorius, 2019;Hiitola, 2019) and as one that is created by migrants because of their migration (Koikkalainen, 2019;Wahlbeck & Fortelius, 2019). Migrant capital is also shown to be available to migrants' family members via their transnational ties (Dís Skaptadóttir, 2019;Saksela-Bergholm, 2019;Toivanen, 2019). Overall, migrant capital can constitute a source of community cohesion, economic advancement, informal social protection or for professional and educational gains for members of migrant communities.…”

“…The analysis in the articles considers both strategies and opportunities utilised by migrants and members of transnational communities in diverse economic, social and political context. As the articles show, transnational networks can be used by migrants and their family members to achieve occupational, economic and educational advantages (Atasü-Topcuoğlu, 2019;Dís Skaptadóttir, 2019;Glorius, 2019;Koikkalainen, 2019;Toivanen, 2019;Wahlbeck & Fortelius, 2019). They can also be useful in their attempts to reunite with family members (Hiitola, 2019) or to have access to informal social protection and care arrangements (Saksela-Bergholm, 2019) in both the sending and receiving societies.…”