Separate but not equal: Toward a nomological net for migrants and migrant entrepreneurship

The impact of the international crisis on the entrepreneurial intentions of refugees

“…Given the historic wave of human migration across the world in the past decade, including a wave of refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea, Ethiopia and Yemen, studies are increasingly addressing refugee entrepreneurship independently (Alloush et al , 2017; Beehner, 2015; Bizri, 2017; Wauters and Lambrecht, 2008; Welsh et al , 2020). Bizri (2017, p. 9) argues that entrepreneur refugees are a distinct category from migrants, in that their entrepreneurial ventures are characterised by five unique features related to their deployment of social capital: “a ‘one-way-ahead’ attitude, a pseudo-family business perception, collective bootstrapping, a distinct network structure and opportunity-seizing proliferation.” Christiansen et al (2019, p. 1) characterise refugee entrepreneurs as distinct from migrants by their “terms of voluntariness of departure and intended timeframe in the new location.”…”

Migrants, migration policies, and international business research: Current trends and new directions

“…That is up 80 million from 2000 and almost 170 million from 1970 (IOM, 2018). As Christensen, Newman, Herrick, and Godfrey (2019) explain, many leave home seeking better economic opportunities. Some leave home involuntarily because of threatened conflict, violence, and/or persecution.…”

“…The special issue article by Christensen et al (2019) is also primarily theoretical. They develop a nomological net for migrants.…”

“…The articles in this special issue contributed insights on how these flows may vary due to, say, home-country diaspora engagement institution type immigration system points (Chand & Tung, 2019) or PPP design (Poliakova et al, 2019) enticing these flows, or broader social attitudes toward the migrant executives directing these flows (Kautto, 2019). They contributed insights on how these flows may vary due to host-country factors like migrant knowledge (Kunczer et al, 2019) or the conditions of migrant arrival (Christensen et al, 2019), maybe even the MNE stewardship (Reade et al, 2019), or the strength of professional purpose (Emmanuel et al, 2019). By studying these home-and host-country factors, we gain insight on current MMP issues and their implications for IB executives and investors looking to benefit from migrant movements, migrant money, and migrant knowledge.…”

“…The articles we curated for the special issue address these and other new or renewed MMP issues confronting IB executives and investors. They analyze IB research and practice implications of: a dramatic rise in the value of migrant remittances to and the number of migrant ministries in many developing countries ; an escalating battle for skilled migrants only a few developing countries are producing but many developed-country MNEs need (Chand & Tung, 2019;Emmanuel, Elo, & Piekkari, 2019); a change in the mix of migrants ''pulled'' to host countries by economic opportunity versus migrants ''pushed'' from home countries by conflict, violence, and persecution (Christensen, Newman, Herrick & Godfrey, 2019); a debate about how migrants influence the direction of FDI from their host countries (Kunczer, Lindner & Puck, 2019); a shift in home-country citizen attitudes that now treat migrants living abroad as role models rather than renegades (Kautto, 2019); a trend among MNEs operating in ''fragile states'' to hire and train refugees as hedges against political risks and demonstrations of corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Reade, Oetzel, & McKenna, 2019); and a growth in public-private partnerships between government-run investment development agencies offering financial incentives to attract inward FDI and non-governmental migrant community organizations able to identify firms abroad more likely to respond to those incentives (Poliakova, Riddle, & Cummings, 2019).…”