留學生社會研究dissertation,Clark University Consequences of Migration and Remittances for Mexican Transnational Communities

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Clark University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Geography.
http://www.jstor.org
Consequences of Migration and Remittances for Mexican
Transnational Communities*
Dennis Conway
Department of Geography, Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN 47405
Jeffrey H. Cohen
Department of Anthropology, Texas A & M University,
College Station, TX 77843
Abstract: To better understand the positive contributions return migrants andmigrant remittances make in Latin American society, this paper offers a reevaluationof existing conceptual frameworks. Previous research dwelt upon the unproductivenature of expenditures and the difficulties facing return migrants as theyreintegrate themselves in home communities, among other problems caused bymigration. Drawing upon recent feminist scholarship and the growing body of literaturefocused on the positive aspects of "migradollars"(U .S. dollars returned bymigrants) upon home communities, we propose that remittance investmentsshould be analyzed for their progressive and satisficing effects. We focus on thepotential range of household strategies for remittance investment, the ways migrantcirculation patterns relate to family and household decision making, and the impactof remittances and migration upon community structure. Finally, using ethnographicdata from rural Mexico, we illustrate our argumentand demonstrate the dynamic nature of contemporary migration and migrant remittances.

Key words: migration, remittances,America.
In Mexico, as elsewhere in Latin
America and the Caribbean, global restructuringis ushering in new political economic
relationships. The subsequentrestructuring of regional economic landscapescreates different local, national, andinternational contexts, stimulating themovement of people and capital inprocesses Glick-Schiller, Basch, and Blanc-Szanton (1992, 1995) have depicted as"transnational." As restructuring pressuresintensify, Mexican families and householdsappear to be increasing their dependenceon international migration to the UnitedStates as a survival strategy (Durand et al.1996; Massey, Goldring, and Durand#p#分頁標題#e#
* We wish to thank John Connell, Richard
Jones, and two anonymous reviewers for theiradvice, although the responsibility for its use is
ours alone.household development, Mexico, Latin1994). With more international migration
and temporary circulation expected, remittances
are likely to become critical
resources for the sustenance of homes andfamilies in rural and urban Mexico, Latin
America, and the Caribbean (Conway1994; Roberts 1994).
Our aims in this paper are to broadenexplanation of remittance expenditures andto evaluate the positive contributions ofremittances, return migrants, or circulatingsojourners. Specifically focusing on the situationin "home" communities, we illustratethe multifaceted consequences ofremittances and migration, emphasizingpositive nonmonetary and social impacts.We see remittance investments as having a
set of progressive effects that outweigh thenegative aspects when people's relations
and interactions are examined at themicroscale. We do not explicitly treat contextualforces, although macro-level factors
26
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
do structure the individual and householdbehaviors we model (as Gardner (1981)and Wood (1981) persuasively argue). Ourfocus is on the microscale, where householdnegotiations, contestations, compromises,and decisions over investments aremade. Previous commentary has dwelledon the negative aspects of return migrationand remittances (Brana-Shute and Brana-Shute 1982; Reichart 1981, 1982;Rubenstein 1992; Weist 1979), but there isgrowing evidence that the positive aspectsof "migradollar"'i mpacts in Mexico havebeen underestimated, or misrepresented(Durand, Parrado, and Massey 1996;Lozano-Ascencio 1993; Massey andParrado 1994).
http://www.ttc-switch.com/dissertation_writing/sociology/We believe there is justification for sucha restatement of this important migrationdevelopmentrelation because both the systemand people's adjustments have undergonerevision and restructuring recently.
Four dimensions characterize today's
American globalizing system: (1) increasing
diversity among regional and local economics,
both in terms of return migrants' incorporation
and in terms of wider fields of
investment opportunities in diversified
local economic bases; (2) the ever-evolving
nature of international migration and circulation
patterns and of interregional movement;
(3) the evolution of transnational
networks that tie immigrant communities
and local "home" communities together in
complex ways; and (4) the increasing significance
of gendered migration relations
and roles.
The remainder of the paper comprises
several sections. First, there is a case to be
made for reevaluating the contemporary
consequences of migration and remittances
for local communities in Mexico,#p#分頁標題#e#
Latin America, and the Caribbean.
Scholarship is increasingly at odds over
' "Migradollariss" a colloquiatl erm used by
scholars and migrants alike to depict the
transnational flows of U.S. currency that
Mexican migrants send or bring back home
(see Masseya ndP arrado1 994).
whether the impacts of migration and
remittances in rural transnational communities2
are positive or negative, and
whether they are progressive or destructive
and dependence-deepening. Next, we present
a "real-life" remittances investment
model that conceptualizes a wide array of
investments as progressive and satisficing.3
We include the changing scope of women's
roles in transnational households-as
migrants as well as "stay-at-homes"-in
household social and economic relations.
We draw specifically upon recent feminist
scholarship to characterize women's household
contexts, their relations with men,
children, and other dependents, their
negotiating power, and their remittance
and savings investment strategies. We
focus upon the potential range of recipient
strategies of investment of remittances and
the ways migration and circulation patterns
are related to remittance impacts on the
lives of individuals and households in rural
communities in peripheral regions of the
Americas: Mexico, Latin America, and the
Caribbean.
Three source literatures inform this theory:
gendered migration-development
work (Folbre 1988, 1992; Hondagneu-
Sotelo 1994; Pessar 1988; Katz 1991; and
others); accounts of the importance of
noneconomic and complementary or informal
economic involvements in Latin
American and Caribbean contexts (Conway
2 "Transnationacl ommunities" are characterized
by the incorporation of migration (and
remittances) cultures into the very adaptive
fabric of the social system, such that people live
between two worlds: North America and
"home" communities in Mexico, Latin America,
and the Caribbean (see Grasmuck and Pessar
1991; Glick-Schiller, Basch, and Blanc-Szanton
1992; Smith 1992).
3 Wolpert (1964) argues that because of contextual
constraints spatial decision-making
behavior is frequently boundedly rational, or
satisficing, and rarely utility maximizing and
optimizing. This behavioral concept is also
appropriate in our context.
27
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
and Glesne 1986; Ekins and Max-Neef
1992; Grasmuck and Pessar 1991; Perez-
Itriago and Guendelman 1989; Roberts
1994; Wheelock 1992; among others); and
current "revisionist" work on migration
and remittances, notably Russell's (1986)
remittances system of intermediary effects
and Massey, Goldring, and Durand's#p#分頁標題#e#
(1994) comparative analysis of 19 Mexican
communities (also Durand et al. 1996;
Massey and Parrado 1994).4
In the penultimate section, we draw
upon an ethnographic examination of the
sustenance strategies of individuals and
households in a rural Zapotec community
of south Mexico, Santa Ana del Valle,
Oaxaca, to illustrate our ideas. This villagelevel
inquiry demonstrates the dynamic
nature of contemporary international
migration and circulation processes in such
a peripheral locale and the growing importance
of their consequences: remittances,
return migration impacts, and repetitive
circulation outcomes. The conclusion
reemphasizes why such reappraisals of
contemporary migration-development
relationships are needed.
Revisiting the Consequences
of Migration and Remittances
Evaluations of the potential costs and
benefits of remittances on the migrantsending
communities in Mexico bemoan
the impacts. Drawing on numerous community
studies, conventional wisdom holds
4 Until recently, the most commonly held
assessment of remittances was that they
brought a host of negative influences to the
recipientst, hey increasedd ependentr elations,
and they were obstacles to development and
progressi n ThirdW orldc ommunitiesR. ecent
"revisionistr"e searchb y MasseyG, oldringa, nd
Durand (1994) and others (including the
authors) finds fault with these "conventional
wisdoms,"w hich prematurelyd ismiss remittances'
positive influences on the lives of rural
people in Mexico, Latin America, and the
Caribbean.
that remittances and migrants' savings are
largely spent on current consumptionfamily
maintenance and health, housing
and consumer goods-with little left over
for productive use (Reichart 1981, 1982;
Rubenstein 1983, 1992; Weist 1984).
Furthermore, a general consensus of Latin
American and Caribbean regional scholarship
is that return migrants are unsuccessful
agents of change and rarely contribute
to progressive transformations of their
home societies (Bovenkerk 1981; Stinner,
de Albuquerque, and Bryce-Laporte 1982;
Weist 1979).
Consumption expenditure should not be
so easily denigrated. Recent research on
remittances effects in El Salvador found
that the survival of many small businesses
in San Salvador depends on the continued
arrival of remittances (Lopez and Seligson
1991). Worrying about their countries'
reliance on underground economies, emigre
Guyanese and Haitians point to parallel
situations in the Caribbean, where remittances
of hard currency are essential for
those remaining behind (Percy Hintzen,
pers. comm., Havana, Cuba, 1991; Rene
Aubourg, pers. comm., Bloomington,#p#分頁標題#e#
Indiana, 1994). In such situations of social
crisis and widespread deprivation, spending
remittances on basic necessities like
food, fuel, clothing, and medicines cannot
be easily dismissed as negative.
Previous research among poor households
in St. Vincent found that remittances
were merely one source of capital among
several other unreliable means of acquiring
income. Recipient women and aged
dependents used remittances mainly to
purchase basic necessities for themselves
and their children. Recipients who were
better off, with other reliable sources of
local income and income-generating
opportunities, benefited more from remittances.
They either hoarded cash, began
savings accounts, or invested their remittances
in land purchase and/or development,
even in small-scale enterprises and
small farming operations (Conway and
Glesne 1986). In Santa Ana, remittances
range from trifling to substantial amounts.
28
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
Some families receive an estimated
U.S.$300 a month (Cohen 1994). Recent
investigations among the Miztec found that
the overseas community in New York
undertook a collective effort to remit the
total amount necessary to finance the construction
of a complete local sewer system
in their community "back home" (Smith
1992).
Recent work on "migradollar"im pacts in
Mexico suggests that remittances' positive
aspects have been underestimated or misrepresented.
The current annual sum of
U.S.-Mexico remittances is estimated to be
about U.S.$2 billion, and the flows of this
enormous transfer of foreign capital have
been relatively consistent through the
1980s (Durand, Parrado, and Massey
1996). Concentrating on the indirect
regional economic impacts of remittances,
Durand, Parrado, and Massey (1996) are
convinced that "migradollar" consumer
spending yields substantial and varied multiplier
effects in a wide range of Mexican
communities. Other related work by
Massey, Goldring, and Durand (1994) has
identified the determinants of migrant
remittances, highlighting the importance
of life-course transitions in remittances
decision making and of community-level
factors for determining migratory outcomes
and consequences. Several distinctions
explaining the variations in Mexican
household experiences with remittance
investments appear generalizable: the
maturity of the migration stream; the
degree to which productive resources and
community-level economic conditions
were favorable for investment, whether in
agriculture, manufacturing, sales, or services;
the geographic, political, and economic
position of the community within#p#分頁標題#e#
Mexico; and the U.S. labor market niches
where the communities' migrants first
established their bridgehead and developed
their labor-recruiting network
(Durand and Massey 1992).
We propose a new conceptualization of
the consequences of migration and remittances
for local communities in Mexico and
elsewhere in Latin America and the
Caribbean in this contemporary era, where
noneconomic relations, gender relations,
and complementary (informal) economy
involvements are specifically highlighted
and afforded their due recognition.
A "Real-Life" Remittances
Investment Model
Recently, Russell (1986) presented a
"remittances system of intermediary
effects" depicting three sets of potential
determining factors affecting the size and
nature of remittance flows and the decision-
making choices of the remitters.
Macro-level contexts, currency exchange
conditions, and demographic attributes
were posited as intermediary influences on
the decision to remit, the amount to remit,
and the uses or investments of the cash and
kind remitted.5 Russell's "remittances system"
does not pay much attention to the
range of recipient strategies in sending
communities, however. Rather, the construct
relies on the conventional categories
of consumptive or productive investments
as categorizations of recipient uses. Our
conceptualization of recipient strategies
broadens the analysis and specifically
focuses on noneconomic returns in the
progressive spheres of human and social
capital (Fig. 1). In addition, the demographic
characteristics of the recipients
(households, family members, dependents)
and the changing geographic and socioeconomic
contexts of local and regional
economies influence the distribution patterns
of remittances investments and
propensities for circulation, for return
migration, or for emigration. Taking
account of life-course influences on the
short-term, goal-setting strategies of circulating
migrants and their recipient dependents,
we suggest remittance investments
5 Russell's (1986) article provides a fuller
rationalef or the directiono f effects these sets
of determinantas nd intermediatee ffects have
on the flow and volumes of remittances.
29
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
Househ
Recipient Strategies
old Negotiating Model Consumption Expenditures
Productive Investments
___S_a_v_in_ gs
Internal/External / * future investments/securities
Resources */ (Fixed) Location-specifciacp ital
underlying / land/housing/businpesrso perty
bargainingp ower of ? Humanr esource(sf lexiblec apital)
household members Temporal * educationh, ealthw, elfare
ordering * circulationop portunities#p#分頁標題#e#
lntrahousehold - and * familyn etworksu pport
labor, time, and substitution - * Diversifiemd icroeconominc vestments
income allocations K through * small business/self-employment
life * skill/technologtyr ansfer(sv iac irculation)
course * mainland-islandet workd evelopment
Nonmoneiary of productionc,o mmerciaeln terprises
contributors to\ Communitsyu pporst ytems
household welfares * maintenancaen ds ustenance
'Migration Decisions
* Returnm igratiosnu pported
* Familyr eunificatiovni ae migration
Figure 1. Remittance flows and household strategies.
will have a temporal ordering as priorities
change with life-course transitions (Warnes
1992).
Further, our construct depicts remittance
investments in the complementary
(informal) sectors-the self-employed,
irregular, and petty competitive sectorsand
in the household social economy as
fundamental private transfers of capital,
progressive and satisficing (Ekins and Max-
Neef 1992). Return migrants are conceptualized
as people endowed with cultural
capital,6 potential and realized, as well as
economic human capital. Both remittances
and returnees contribute to communal
social and cultural knowledge (social capital),
7 the entirety comprising a significant
bundle of reinvestments (see Bourdieu
1986). We view these investments as significant
resource endowments helping to sustain
the rural poor of the hemisphere.
6 Anthropologisthsa ve coined the term cultural
capital to represent the full complement
of a people's cultural practices (see Bourdieu
1986). Migrants accumulate cultural capital
from two sources: their home society and the
culturarl ealmt hey arev isitingo r to whicht hey
are emigrating.
Differentiating between the formal
economy and the complementary economy,
Wheelock (1992) illustrates how the
system of total economic activity, and families
and households within it, is regulated.
She emphasizes the central importance of
the household (domestic) and voluntary
sectors, both to human life and to the operation
of the formal economy. We concur
that the household social economy is fundamental,
whereas "human societies have
got along well without formal markets or
states. . .none have without families and
voluntary, productive structures of interpersonal
relations" (Wheelock 1992, 123).
More specifically, it is from the work on
gender relations within households (Folbre
1988, 1992; Hondagneu-Sotelo 1994; Katz
1991; Perez-Itriago and Guendelman 1989;
among others) that we construct a house-
7 A recent sociological perspective on
Mexican migration distinguishes between the
(economic) human capital resource bases of
individuals and social capital as communal#p#分頁標題#e#
returns of cultural learning and socialization to
social groupings, families, and kin networks
(Massey 1997). We find the distinction
extremely useful in our construct.
30
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
hold negotiating model to explain the complex
variations in family income disbursement
that are likely among rural Mexican
households.
Following Katz (1991), and as an alternative
to the widely used neoclassical "new
home economics" models such as the
household bargaining model (see Sen
1990), we rely upon a household negotiating
model (HNM) in our investment construct.
Our HNM has three major components:
the internal and external resources
underlying the bargaining power of all
household members; the mutually interdependent,
intrahousehold labor-, time-, and
income-allocation processes; and household
members' welfare reconceived to recognize
the existence of multiple welfares in
the same household (Fig. 1). Our conception
of human social welfare goes beyond
留學生社會研究dissertationeconomic relations to incorporate the part
of the nonmonetary household economy
that includes production within the home:
housework, child care, and emotional labor
(Folbre 1992).
Women who stay at home, women who
initially stay then follow their spouses on an
international sojourn, and women who
migrate and return either as tied-movers or
independently all assume negotiating positions
and bargaining rights over household
relations, household resources, and decisions
made on behalf of other household
members. Also note that absent men
empower women as well as estrange them
(Hondagneu-Sotelo 1994). Remittance
expenditures figure prominently in such
negotiations and their conflicts. The household
is the domain in which time and space
budgeting and resource allocation and reallocation
are contested, negotiated, and
decided by men and women. Women, as
recipients and the primary dispensers of
remittances, take responsibility for their
investment decisions, and women's management
acumen appears to strengthen as
time passes. We firmly believe that women's
responsibility for the human welfare of
their dependents is better cast in terms of
household bargaining for nonmonetary
returns (such as time-release, dependent
care, sharing household duties) than by
reducing the explanation to fit within neoclassical,
home economics calculations.
Recent work suggests that alterations in
remittance investment patterns, which
evolve through phases of "family maintenance"
to a "business investment" phase,
have a rational microeconomic basis (see#p#分頁標題#e#
Chevannes and Ricketts 1997; Guarnizo
1994; Massey and Parrado 1994). The evolution
is not expected to be a necessary or
linear succession. The different phases
depict different investment priorities, and
recipients may never become entrepreneurs.
Some may progress through the succession
of phases, but even for those who
do not, the objective may be an important
motivator for remitters and recipients. We
specifically qualify this HNM decisionmaking
model by adding the gendered perspective
just summarized, concentrating
particularly upon how such investment
decisions are negotiated in relation to gendered
power relations in household negotiating
over noneconomic as well as economic
returns (Fig. 1).
Remittances as Productive
Investments
Let us now consider the various strategies
open to Mexican recipients.
Remittances, returning migrants and circulators
with their pocket transfers,8
returnees with their enhanced human and
cultural capital, and the household recipients
with their enhanced social capital constitute
transnational transfers at the appropriate
scale (and scope) of investment
effectiveness-the household level (Du-
8 Migration researchers refer to cash carried
personally by couriers or by returnees as
"pocket transfers," to differentiate such personal
shipments of remittances from more regular
shipments of money orders and cashiers
checks mailed or electronically transferred
using formal financial institutions. Pocket transfer
amounts can be substantial (see Lozano-
Ascencio 1993).
31
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
rand, Parrado, and Massey (1996) agree
with us on this point). Here, we narrow the
focus to conceptualize the behaviors of one
group involved in household negotiating
processes, the recipients of remittances in
local rural communities in Mexico (and
potentially in Latin America and the
Caribbean as well).
As purposeful decision makers, the
recipients of remittances and of gifts and
in-kind transfers of goods from overseas
sojourners make choices among investing
in productive activities, saving for future
investment opportunities, or spending on
immediate necessities. Their choice(s) are
influenced by the migrant or circulating
donor to varying degrees, with household
negotiating dependent upon the strength
and nature of the family and structured by
obligatory relationships (Philpott 1973).
Decisions at odds with the expressed
wishes of the overseas donor are to be
expected, and how remittances are used
will be influenced by the circulating and
migration behaviors of the donors. Long
absences might contribute to a growth of
independence by the recipient, while#p#分頁標題#e#
shorter-term sojourns should reinforce the
strength of the donor's influence on remittances
expenditures and investment decision
making.
The donor's need to be certain of the
implementation of his or her investment
wishes will in turn affect return intentions.
Communal and familial mores also influence
remittances investment. The heightened
status acquired through the symbolic
demonstration of affluence-redistribution
of wealth via gifts, "throwing large parties,"
donating extravagantly to community projects,
to the church, to relatives-also
influences remittances dispensation. Such
externally created relative affluence might
be beneficial to recipient families if it
secures their place in their community. It
only becomes a source of disruption and
social tension when the mores of civil society
are severely compromised (see
Greenberg 1995).
Remittances investments are likely to
change over the life course as priorities
change (Warnes 1992). Young people with
few family responsibilities will place priority
on using remittance investments to
build a cache to afford to marry, pay for
festival expenses, have good times, or to
finance another sojourn. Among married
migrants, priorities are saving to buy land
and a house and investing in children's
expenses, especially education investments.
As the circulating migrant matures
through his or her life course, he or she
may very well undertake more transnational
circulations to accumulate skills.
With maturation, he or she begins saving to
invest in small business ventures, or diverts
investments to support maturing dependents,
such as financing the migration of
male prodigy to acquire higher education.
Also, household decisions on mobility
and negotiations over disbursements of
resources (including remittances) are conducted
within family networks, which are
themselves shaped within broader community
networks. Individuals undertake longduration
migrations or shorter circulations
depending upon the objective(s) of the
sojourn. Some might replace others, a
strategy Lomnitz (1977) has characterized
as "relay migration." Others may join or
rejoin other family members, with obligations
to continue support of the household.
Even the long-absent migrant does not
always sever his or her connections with
"home." Repeated circulations may
become a life-course strategy, where the
success of previous sojourns fuels another.
Remittances and pocket transfers are likely
to become institutionalized aspects of the
household resource bundle, relied upon in
times of severe need and potentially available
when additional needs warrant.#p#分頁標題#e#
Especially in this latest global restructuring,
opportunities abroad, redeployment of
household members' roles and contributions,
and remittances investments have
come to be major strategies to guard
against uncertainty for the migrant
donor(s) and household and family recipients
alike. One further qualification needs
emphasis, however, lest remittances and
migration come to be characterized solely
32
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
as structurally induced responses of the
powerless and disenfranchised. We conceptualize
household negotiating, familynetwork
development, people's mobility,
remittances, and recipient investments as
self-determined and relatively autonomous
"resistance" actions of people attempting
to survive in a crisis-ridden structure of
dependent capitalist relationships, with all
their accompanying hostility and destructive
potential (Bach and Schraml 1982;
Conway 1988). Such purposive action even
by those with little space to maneuvre is
empowering. Vulnerable they may remain,
but not totally bereft of options (see Watts
and Bohle 1993).
Productive Strategies of
Remittance Investments
As depicted in our modified remittances
system (Fig. 1), the range of productive
investment portfolios can be summarized
under five categories: (1) savings strategies;
(2) (fixed) location-specific capital ventures;
(3) (flexible) human capital resource
investments; (4) diversified microeconomic
investments; and (5) community support,
maintenance and sustenance, and "social
capital" realizations. These are discussed
below.
Remittances are often spent immediately
to meet the basic needs of recipient
families. In St. Vincent, however, small and
irregular remittances tend to be added to
other savings, with the accumulated
amount eventually being spent on home
improvements, building materials and the
like (Conway and Glesne 1986). Among
Santa Ana migrants, young males circulate
in order to accumulate savings for marriage
purposes. More importantly, pocket transfers
of returning migrant heads repatriate
savings accumulated while away, and these
are likely to be transferred to a savings
account when home, to serve as a basis for
future investment and interest accumulation.
Massey and Parrado (1994) estimated
that among their large sample of Mexican
returnees pocket transfers converted to
savings were in smaller amounts than accumulated
amounts of regular cash transfers
of remittances. They also found that
returnees had a tendency to spend their
savings on what they referred to as "productive
ends": 17 percent of savings versus
only 3.7 percent of remittances were spent#p#分頁標題#e#
on productive pursuits (Massey and
Parrado 1994). Saving for future investment
does not appear to divert a major proportion
of remittances received. Rather,
saved accumulations appear to be spent
relatively quickly.
Investments in fixed, location-specific
capital are expected to influence return
migration propensities in two ways. First, it
serves to tie the migrant to the source community,
with the propensity to return being
proportional to the location-specific capital
invested. Second, the propensity to return
varies with the length of absence, because
the location-specific capital depreciates in
value. This second effect might not occur,
however, if migrants intended to return
and conscientiously rekindled their location-
specific capital stock via frequent visits,
retaining ownership of property, initiating
a small business, diversifying their
reinvestment strategies, and generally reinforcing
their ties with the home community
(DaVanzo 1981).
In our portfolio of recipient strategies,
the notions of "fixed capital" stocks such as
land, housing, and business property are
contrasted with "flexible human capital,"9
inherent in people (see below).
Remittances when eventually invested in
land acquisition or property improvement
will likely have been accruing in savings
9 We agree with Carnegie (1982), among others,
that endowing mobile people with human
and social capital enables them to utilize both
theirm obilitya ndt heire ndowmentsin creative
andf lexiblew ays,s o thatt hey areb ettera blet o
counter,o r adjustt o, the vicissitudeso f their
impoverished existences, their limited lifechances,
a nd their opportunitiesB. y contrast,
investmentsin land and housinga re subjectt o
structuracl ontexts,a re subjectt o factorso utside
the poor's control, and are immobile.
33
ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY
accounts, and it is unlikely that such savings
accumulations are derived solely from
overseas sources. The resultant constant
flow of modest remittances might gradually
add to the savings account to the point that
a "fixed" capital investment can be undertaken.
Circulators invest their human capital
in "fixed capital" through construction
efforts, home improvements, utilities
upgrades, and the like. Symbolically, such
fixed-capital investment reaffirms the
return commitment of the overseas
sojourner(s), while serving to satisfy placeutility
aspirations of the recipient(s) at
home.
Retirement home construction, selfbuilding
of homes, family-land maintenance,
house and land improvements,
investments in water, sewerage, and electricity
services, even elaborate and ornate#p#分頁標題#e#
construction of modern residences, are
fixed location-specific capital ventures that
strengthen return propensities. Research
on urban and suburban return migrants'
investment strategies in Barbados
defended the rationality of home purchasing
prior to return (Gmelch 1987). Among
Mexican and other Caribbean communities,
remittance investments in fixed capital
stock and housing upgrading is noted but is
invariably characterized as unproductive,
or consumptive (Grasmuck and Pessar
1991; Stinner, de Albuquerque, and Bryce-
Laporte 1982; Reichart 1982). On the
other hand, Ishmael (1988) found that
among the urban poor in Dominica and St.
Vincent who resorted to self-help housing
strategies to acquire shelter remittances
scarcely figured as sources of revenue for
their house building and property improvements.
Rather, local sources, loans from
formal and informal sources, and sweatequity
exchanges helped finance and construct
shelter for these underprivileged
urban householders.
Spending remittances on children's
health, education, and welfare is productive
investment. Investments in such flexible
human capital stock-in youth, the
innovative, and the creative-is progressive,
because such incremental effects
endow human energies, expand human
capabilities, and develop human flexibilities.
Remittances invested to maintain and
develop family linkages, to widen transnational
networks, and to facilitate family network
relationships might also be considered
adaptive and "flexible" productive
responses. Maintaining ties to overseas
family and kin and strengthening links
between urban-based kin and their ruralresident
"stem" family are coming to be
necessary accommodations to the vagaries
of Latin American and Caribbean subsistence
livelihood chances at "home"
(Roberts 1994). We also insert the notion
of circulation (temporary sojourning away
from home) as another means for enhancing
the human resource potential of
Mexican, Latin American, and Caribbean
people, whereby remittances are, or can
be, productively spent. Skills gained from
overseas experience may or may not be
immediately translated into productive
capabilities at home in local economies,
however, because the opportunities available
at home might very well be limited
(Conway 1988).
Returnees are not only endowed with
new technical proficiencies, they still possess
considerable local knowledge, education,
and expertise. For example, the
recent flourishing of local nongovernmental
organizations in some Caribbean islands
and their efforts to undertake progressive
and successful conservation and environmentally#p#分頁標題#e#
sensitive initiatives are prompted
by the active involvement of young professionally
trained returnees (Conway and
Lorah 1995). In Santa Ana, the current
mayor's experience gained from his laboring
in the United States was one instrumental
factor that helped guide and determine
the design and construction of local
roads and infrastructure (Cohen 1994).
Capital, skill, and technology transfers
via international circulation are likely to
assist in the incubation and establishment
of new microeconomic enterprises within
and outside the household. In a recent project,
Portes and Guarnizo (1991) found
dynamic relationships between the New
34
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
York-based Dominican community business
sector and those thriving in the small
business sector in Santo Domingo (see also
Smith 1992). Such bilateral support
included skills acquisition, capitalization
initiatives, and acquisition of production
inputs. In Jamaica, Chevannes and Ricketts
(1997) found similar investment dynamism
in the incubation of tourism-related ventures.
Both in the formal and complementary
economic sectors of "home" communities,
such investments have the potential to
diversify the small business mix and build
transnational ventures. Whether such
investments in Santa Ana, or in other small
communities in rural Mexico, will result in
the projects evolving through logical
phases of "family maintenance" to "business
investment," as Portes and Guarnizo
(1991) found in the Dominican Republic,
is difficult to predict because of the widely
differing contexts.
Whereas the other forms of investment
focus on individual or household decision
making and assume autarkic relations,
community support and social capital realizations
assume a collective identity. They
involve investments to endow communities
with increased social (and cultural) capital.
The emergence of "transnational"n etworkreinforcing
communities-one abroad, the
other the home base-involves the circulatory
flow of remittances and people.
Remittances commitments to local community
endeavors can explicitly demonstrate
the community support of overseas
members. Demonstrations of the success
of those temporarily absent can be managed
easily via remittance transfers or the
showering of gifts, presents, and fashionable
commodities. There is growing evidence
that local community systems are
receiving valuable and essential inputs of
remittances and goods in kind-either as
more and more families become significant
recipients, or as overseas community organizations
actively become participants and
investors in local community development#p#分頁標題#e#
and infrastructure improvement projects
(Hulshof 1991; Smith 1992).
Remittances influence future migration
decisions, for both the sojourner or
migrant and the members of the recipient
household: in essence, future mobility is
fostered by the "reproduction of remittances."
Shorter-term, repetitive circulations
are likely to reinforce other family
members' propensities to move, the repetitive
"demonstration effect" being influential
in this regard. Equally common, return
migration is supported, and the return
intention of the remitter realized, in part
owing to the "success" of the remittance
investment strategies. Mexican, Latin
American, and Caribbean communities
have social histories where migration traditions
are bolstered by the folklore of the
success of many returning "prodigal sons
and daughters." Nowadays, return migration
is viewed in more positive terms,
rarely as detrimental to the societal good.
Success of the "tropical capitalist" ventures
Portes and Guarnizo (1991) depict fuels
circulation, and stays movement. These
opposing tendencies should be expected.
On the other hand, successful remittance
investments can also foster additional
migration. Wife and family reunifications
occur, with the recipient householders
eventually joining the remitter and effecting
an emigration of the entire unit.
Remittances spent on children's emigration
might initiate their estrangement and
foster a dislocation that becomes permanent.
Long-term absences might be justified
to satisfy the continuous need for
remittance investments. But unless social
and familial obligations prevail, returns to
the household and those left behind might
not be realized if the donor abrogates his or
her responsibilities and separates, divorces,
or merely stops payments.
Santa Ana del Valle, Mexico:
A Transnational Community
One of the authors (Cohen) conducted
ethnographic research from June of 1992
to June of 1993 and over the summer of
1996 in Santa Ana del Valle, Oaxaca,
35
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
Mexico (Fig. 2).10 Santa Ana is a typical
rural peasant community, located away
from centers of production and power, yet
intimately linked to national and transnational
spheres. Santa Ana's history as a
craft-producing village where wool textiles
are made places Santafieros increasingly
into Mexico's booming tourist industry.
Additionally, increases in tourism, the
expansion of educational opportunities
locally (with the construction of new
schools and growing access to area high
schools, technical schools, and universities),
improved media access, and the presence#p#分頁標題#e#
of more consumer goods in local markets,
lead to what Alarcon (1992) calls
"norteiizacion"-increasing links between
the community and external markets, culture,
fashion, and tastes. And, this self-reinforcing
process (Massey, Goldring, and
Durand 1994) brings cash, goods, and new
expectations to villagers. With little opportunity
in the village for expansion of livelihood
options, Santafieros are turning more
and more to wider markets to make a living.
One alternative is wage labor in nearby
towns. Some Santafieros commute daily to
Oaxaca City for work. Young girls are often
10 Standard ethnographic methods were
employed,c ombiningp articipanot bservation,
interviews with key respondents and others.
Also,a surveyw as conductedw ith5 0 randomly
selectedh ouseholdsin 1993a ndf ollowedu p in
1996. Community-levecle nsusd ataf rom 1993
and 1996 were collected locally and at city
offices of INEGI (Instituto Nacional de
Estatistica, Geografia y Informatica).
Household surveys combined open-ended and
controlled questions. Questions were posed
around the subjects of education, family lifestyle
and structures, employment strategies,
incomea ccumulations,a vinga nd consumption
patterns, goods and property bundles owned,
migratione xperiencea, ndp articipatioinn communala
ndr eciprocarl elationshipsT. hese relationshipsi
nclude guelaguetza( reciprocalg ift
and service exchanges), tequio (communal
labor),s ervicio( communityse rvice),a ndc ooperacion
(giving of funds to community projects),
among others.
Xl F J $SMat
jmh IW
Figure 2. Santa Ana del Valle, Oaxaca,
Mexico.
employed as domestics in Tlacolula (an
important market town 4 kilometers south
of Santa Ana), and men take part-time temporary
jobs in car repair shops, construction,
and agriculture outside the village.
Local jobs, however, are difficult to find
and bring scant returns. In 1992, the daily
wage in Oaxaca was only 15,000 pesos
(converted on 1 January 1993 to 15 nuevos
pesos), or U.S.$5.00. In 1996, the minimum
wage had increased, but only to 30
pesos, barely keeping pace with inflation.
In Santa Ana, many workers were still
earning 15 pesos a day on average for their
efforts as weavers or as hired help. Given
these comparative wage levels, the growing
attractiveness of unauthorized immigration
into the United States is scarcely surprising.
Migration and Transnational
Transfers
Migration has been a livelihood option in
Santa Ana for decades. Older informants
recall parents working on plantations in
Chiapas and traveling as far as Mexico City.
Other Santafieros joined the ranks of
36
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION#p#分頁標題#e#
"braceros,"f inding work on contract in the
United States." However, it was during
and following the protracted economic crisis
of the mid-1980s that migration grew as
a widely used survival and sustenance strategy
for members of this Zapotec community.
12 U.S.-bound transmigration became
the Santafiero strategy of choice for earning
cash for fiestas, house construction,
investments, or, as villagers describe the
situation, "to advance themselves" in
response to the continued decline in wages
and the ongoing crisis in Mexico's economy.
Migration follows two primary patterns
in Santa Ana, long-term and cyclical
(short-term). Long-term migration takes a
Santafiero away from the village for 10 to
20 years. In some cases there is no return.
Four families from Santa Ana have settled
in Tapachula, Chiapas, where they work as
bakers. More typically, Santafieros follow a
short-term, cyclical, and repetitive movement
pattern (also see Hulshof 1991).
Santafieros circulate back and forth from
their community to destinations both near
and far afield for periods averaging approximately
two years. Circulators from Santa
Ana go to Mexico City and Southern
California, including San Diego and Santa
Monica.
J1T he Bracerop rogramo, r the Emergency
Farm LaborP rogramb, roughtM exicansi nto
the United States as visiting workers on contract
from 1942 through 1964. The program
was ended because of organized labor's complaintso
f waged epressiona ndt he ill treatment
of workers( Cockcrof1t 983).
12 La Crisis (the Mexican national economic
crisis and resultant Structural Adjustment
Program) saw the collapse of the peso and a
dropi n the minimumw ageo f nearly4 0 percent
between 1980 and 1990. For the decade, the
inflationr atea veragedn early9 0 percent,a ndi n
1980, the worst year on record, it topped 159
percent( "FreeT rader'Vs irtue"1 993).
Household Negotiating: Circulation,
Networks, Individual Obligations
Santafieros migrate for a number of reasons,
but most are associated with improving
family or household livelihoods.
However, the decision for someone to seek
work in the United States is typically made
by the household, which in Santa Ana generally
takes the form of a nuclear family.
There are times when the Santafiero family
functions like an extended unit: when
unmarried adult children remain at home
with their parents, or when young couples
remain in the household of a parent until
they are able to afford a separate home.
Many family-households continue to live
near each other even after they are independent
nuclear units, often sharing a
common patio or adjoining home sites.#p#分頁標題#e#
Importantly, kinship and reciprocal networks
are used at home and abroad.
Especially in the United States, many current
migrants from Santa Ana live with relatives
or friends. Such patterns lower the
risks and costs associated with migration
while increasing security and a sense of
well-being through familiarity (also see
Lomnitz 1977). Additionally, the non-kin
relationships migrants have with others in
(and outside)'3 the community can be as
important as household ties or obligations-
the social and communal networks
are highly interconnected and mutually
reinforcing. In the Caribbean context,
Carnegie (1982) has coined the term
"strategic flexibility" to characterize this
form of social adaptability of marginalized,
yet innovative young people.
Many times, the decision to migrate is
tied to the life course of the household
13L astingf riendshipws itho therZ apotecsa nd
mestizosa ref orgedd uringt he tripsn ortha s the
common purpose of crossing the U.S.-Mexican
border establishes personal bonds and crisissupportr
elationshipsT. hesec an becomes ignificante
xtensionso f localc ommunityn etworksin
the transnationacli rcuits.
37
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
(Wames 1992). The needs of the entire
family take precedence over individual
objectives (under conditions of negotiation).
For example, a young man's first
migration is often made to accumulate savings
in anticipation of the celebration of his
wedding. A common pattern is for a young
man and woman to declare themselves
married according to common law; this
usually entails living together in the home
of one of their parents. During pregnancy
or following the birth of a child, the man
will prepare to leave for the United States.
Once in the United States, he will stay with
a brother or cousin and begin saving money
for a formal wedding. Upon returning to
the village, the young man will often serve
the first of his many positions in the community's
political hierarchy. Following the
wedding, the groom and possibly the bride
as well return to the United States to work
to save for their house, to cover the social
and economic debts they have acquired,
and to save for the support and education
of children.
Every Santafiero is asked to give service
(servicio) from time to time in the local
government/cargo system of the village.
Indeed, the remittances of migrants allow
such "benevolent" Santafieros to take a
more active role in the governance and
development of the community. For example,
the village president from 1991 to 1993
was able to work nearly full time because of
the financial support of his son who was
working in the United States (totaling#p#分頁標題#e#
nearly $300.00 a month). With more time,
the president and his associates were able
to plan for and manage development projects,
including the construction of a new
school, expansion of a water system for the
village, and the refurbishment of the central
plaza. Often, periods of migration follow
particularly expensive and time-consuming
committee positions where a
family's cash surplus is used.'4
14 Like most rural peasant communities in
Mexico,S antaA nah asa vibranta ndl argep olitical-
cum-religiouhsi erarchyo, r cargo system.
Usually, heads of household will return
for a second and third (or more) round of
transmigration following the completion of
community service. The job they hold in
the United States (typically a dishwasher in
an Asian cuisine restaurant) often becomes
the "property" of a family or network of
cousins. As individuals cycle into the overseas
migrant community, they spend time
at this transnational job. Migrants come to
depend on one another, in reciprocal relationships
that closely approximate those
found in their Zapotec community in
Mexico. Hirabayashi (1993) calls these
associations paizanazago and argues that
they are a structure through which practical
knowledge and experience rooted in the
natal society and compadrazgo (godparenthood)
is adapted to the new social situation-
in this case a transnational Zapotec
community located in both Santa Ana del
Valle and the United States.
Savings, Fixed and Flexible Capital
Transfers
Because migration is difficult, stressful,
and sometimes dangerous, many Santanieros
hope to accomplish more than simply
meet basic needs and expenses through
their sojourns. Remittances, even when
small, are hoarded and saved, often in bank
While there is the expectation that cargo systems
will collapse under the pressure of migration
and the demands of growing national
bureaucraciesS, anta Ana's situations uggests
that the cargo system can be rearticulatedto
meet the demands of new political and social
realities.I n SantaA na approximatel2y0 committees
manage the majority of the village's
politicala nd religiousn eeds. Committeest ypically
serve for one to three year terms and usuallya
ref illedb y sevenm embersO. ne issuet hat
hasc omet o lightf romt he surveysin 1996i s the
changei n contestso verp restigiousc argop ositions.
T herei s somei ndicationth att he morea n
individuaml igratesth e less likelyi t is thath e or
she will fill high-statusp ositions.I nstead,t he
migrant may be asked to fill costly but lowerstatus
positions in one of the growing number
of cargos that the state and federal governments
have asked the village to form.#p#分頁標題#e#
38
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
accounts, and not just hidden in the house.
The motive most often noted by return
migrants in the 1996 survey was family
maintenance. However, maintenance was
not defined simply as covering the daily
needs of the family (food, clothing, medicine,
and so forth). Rather, the accumulated
remittances were earmarked for
house improvements (important in a community
where dirt floors are normal and
few modern kitchens are present), then
education, kin and community relationships,
and business start-ups. Again, investment
strategies of a given family depended
upon their life-course situations. Younger
families dedicated more funds for subsistence
needs and house improvements.
Settled families with young adult children
who could work as weavers or local wage
workers invested more funds in business
and education.
Diversified, Microeconomic
Investments
Given their changing circumstances and
continuing vulnerability, some Santafieros
are trying to start local businesses.
Between 1993 and 1996, a number of businesses
were opened in the village: at least
three new stores, two restaurant/cafes, two
barbershops, and, in response to the home
building boom begun in the late 1980s, a
glass shop, two door shops, and at least
three local contractors. By 1996, there
were four phone lines in the community,
whereas in 1992 there were none. Other
developments include a continued growth
in local arts programs, the construction of a
two-storied Casa del Pueblo (archive,
library, and performing arts center), and a
new health center, staffed every day and
funded by the state.
Many of these ventures remain labor
intensive (the expansion of family-based
craft production, for example) and were
built through the exploitation of household
labor power. Furthermore, their success is
not measured in rates of return on investments;
rather, it is calculated in terms of
sales. Profit margins are often slim, and
capital, rather than being invested, is simply
replaced. Although it has doubled in
population size in the last 20 years, Santa
Ana remains a small village market economy
with little infrastructure, few local
businesses, and even fewer employment
opportunities. These remittance-sponsored
businesses may be more important as forerunners,
or incubators, of a future expansion
and diversification of the village economy
than as definitive local economic
successes in their own right.
Community Support and Social
Capital Realizations
Many of the aforementioned microeconomic
enterprises and "fixed capital"
investments build upon and reinforce local,
reciprocal social and cultural ties among#p#分頁標題#e#
Santafieros, as much as they represent
monetary entrepreneurialism (also see
Greenberg 1995). Like the Mastiche
(Miztec) community described by Smith
(1992), Santafieros are investing in their
village infrastructure. In 1996, nearly 800
adult members of the community contributed
an average of 550 pesos each (or
nearly U.S.$100) in support of village projects.
The money collected is matched peso
for peso by the state. The village also provides
much of the labor for each project.
Santafiero workers are paid subminimum
wage, but in exchange for their work each
earns credit toward community service.
Money is currently earmarked for five projects:
reforestation of local land, construction
of a freshwater reservoir, expansion of
the community's electrical grid, construction
of a communitywide drainage and
sewer system, and repavement of local
roads.
Much of the money funding these projects
is earned in the United States and
comes to the community as remittances. In
an interesting turn of events, Santa Ana has
had to go outside of the community in
search of workers to fill jobs on the reservoir
and drainage project, since there are
not enough working-age adult men to fill
all positions. As Durand, Parrado, and
Massey (1996) point out, the multiplying
effect of using such migration remittances
39
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
can stimulate local economies. Spending
on home building, consumer goods, meals
at one of Santa Ana's two new restaurants,
and infrastructural projects increase
demand for Mexican-made goods and services
and lead to higher employment and
incomes. Working in a similar community
in Michoacan, Adelman, Taylor, and Vogel
(1988) estimate that each migrant dollar
raised local incomes by U.S.$1.78 and
increased output by U.S.$1.88.
"Reproduction" of Remittances-
Fostering Mobility
Both cyclical and long-term migration
strategies are practiced by Santafieros, but
the trajectories differ markedly. For the
long-term migrant, securing their migration
status is an important concern. For
this reason many long-term migrants
endeavor to become legal aliens in the
United States, sometimes marrying a legal
alien and "green card" holder in the
process. Among today's villagers, most
families have at least one member or close
relative involved in a long-term migration
situation. Males predominate among this
absent group of long-term sojourners.
Often one or two "respectable" long-term
migrants act as resource persons of stature
and responsibility in the overseas migrant
community. Their homes are often where
short-term circulators will go for temporary#p#分頁標題#e#
accommodation and their job search in the
United States.
Although long-term migrants might
leave the village for periods of up to ten
years without returning, most maintain
connections with their home family and
their community through organizations in
receiving communities.15 Male Santanieros
15 Long-term single migrants tend to be
younger men who have left the village before
marriagea nd children.M anyi nformantsh ave
children who follow this pattern. While this
does lead to "braind rain,"it also takes those
individualws ho no longerw antt o participatien
the sociall ife of the communitya waya ndt hus
reduces the stress and conflict that surrounds
who are away from home continue to support
their families, sending remittances to
cover school expenses, household improvements,
and paying individuals to cover the
costs of community service, including committee
positions, communal labor, and
cooperacion (a form of community tax paid
throughout the year to support work projects
and festivals). Of course, remittances
are not the same as real participation, and
the stress that long-term migration places
on the household is evident in marital
strife, familial conflicts, and constant discussion
of the issue of migration in local
government.
A growing trend in the community, and
one that signals the consolidation of migration
and its cumulative effect (see Massey,
Goldring, and Durand 1994), is the movement
of entire families to the United
States. As migration becomes commonplace
in a community, the risks and costs of
movement diminish. In Santa Ana, migration
traditions are so entrenched that it is
no longer a risky undertaking open only to
those villagers with resources to afford
movement or those most desperate for
change. Rather, migration and circulation
are common strategies to consider and
undertake, centered as they are upon social
networks, developed out of kinship ties,
and rooted in traditions of accomplishment
and "success." It is a rite of passage for
young men, a way to finance household
expenses for young families, and for older
villagers a way to cover the costs of festival
and political expenses.
Pros and Cons
Is migration positive or negative for
Santa Ana? Certainly it causes problems.
Some children may never see their fathers.
Some wives are left to cover a household's
entire expenses. On the other hand,
women are gaining economic independence
as they become primary breadwinners
for families whose male members are
the reproductiono f local models of practice
and morality.
40
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
absent. Women are also the decision makers#p#分頁標題#e#
for remittance investment, negotiating
with an absent spouse, while supported by
their matrilinear family and others sympathetic
to their situation. As more
Santafieros migrate, women may also
become important in the structure and
maintenance of local government. Villagers
are also gaining important experience
working outside their community. The best
example of this is in the development of a
water and sewer system for the community.
Initiative for the project grew out of
the experience of migrants in the United
States. Funding is also coming primarily
from the remittances migrants send home
to the community. Migration is problematic,
but a necessary evil, perhaps. The
"stay-at-homes" in Santa Ana are still vulnerable,
the separated households are positively
and negatively affected, and remittances
are not fundamentally revitalizing
the local economy. However, the nonmonetary
returns to remittances appear considerable
for the many Santafieros households
incorporated into the Mexico-U.S. circuits
of migration and circulation.
Conclusions
In this paper, we have focused attention
on remittance consequences for local people
in Mexico, Latin America, and the
Caribbean at the individual and household
level. Remittance recipient strategies are
conceptualized as one set of decisions
made in a multilocal and dynamic "open
system" of inputs, through-puts, outputs,
and of fluctuating enlargements and contractions
in response to contextual and
structural conditions. These remittances
are influential in the lives of women and
men, children and the aged. There is a
broad portfolio of investment strategies to
consider, as our construct depicts (Fig. 1).
Women and men negotiate their decisionmaking
authority within the household;
they agree, disagree, agree to disagree,
compromise, arrive at consensus, decide on
behalf of the other. But the recipients primarily
undertake responsibility for decisions
about remittances and savings accumulations
and investment strategies. And
they spend the money, take responsibility
for altering expenditures, and justify or
rationalize their decisions if called upon.
The absence of the remitter essentially
structures the negotiating context, as does
the circulation and return visiting.
Commonly, the women left behind-the
spouse, her mother, aunt, sister, perhaps
other female relatives in a matriarchal support
system-make the majority of remittance
investment decisions. Investments
are made on behalf of dependent children,
less commonly on dependent elderly,
except perhaps when life-threatening
health concerns need to be addressed.
Investments are made in noneconomic#p#分頁標題#e#
and economic realms, and throughout the
life-course investment strategies will
change, as priorities change, as negotiating
powers shift, and as new or different decision-
making contexts restructure the
options and ensuing realizations.
Household social economies constitute the
space in which remittances are invested
and progressively utilized. Recent work by
Massey, Durand, and others has convincingly
demonstrated the significant size of
the local and regional economic contributions
of "migradollars" to the Mexican
economy.
The following anecdote illustrates how
widespread and important remittances
have become, not only for Mexico but for
the United States as well. Martin (1996)
reports that Mexicans may remit between
U.S.$4 to $6 billion per year, much of it
transferred through the electronic services
of Denver-based First Data Corp., which
owns Western Union and Moneygram.
Despite high transfer fees, Mexicans now
appear to be using automatic teller
machines in preference to other means,
such as pocket transfers, cashiers checks,
and money orders. In competition, the
U.S. Postal Service launched a Dinero
Seguro service in August 1996, which permits
the transfer of up to U.S.$3,000 from
any U.S. Post Office to any branch of
Mexico's Bancomer Bank. These private
41
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
sector initiatives clearly recognize the volume
of U.S.-Mexico transactions and signify
their importance, now and in the
future.
The consequences of remittances for
productive enterprise in Mexico, as elsewhere
in Latin American and Caribbean
local communities, appear to be important,
significantly diverse, but nevertheless progressive
and supportive. We have identified
a broader portfolio than has previous
commentary, countering the dichotomous
distinctions between "consumptive" and
"productive" alternatives, which previous
analysts used either disparagingly or uncritically.
A fuller, more complete range of
consequential productive investments
awaits a more comprehensive inventory
than was possible using our Mexican, Santa
Ana community. Other contributions in
this issue of Economic Geography do, however,
lend our construct some welcome
support.
References
Adelman, I.; Taylor, J. E.; and Vogel, S. 1988.
Life in a Mexican village: A SAM perspective.
Journal of Development Studies 25:5-24.
Alarcon, R. 1992. Nortefnizacion: Selfperpetuating
migration from a Mexican
town. In U.S. Mexico relations: Labor market
interdependence, ed. J. Bustamante, R.
Hinojosa, and C. Reynolds, 302-18.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Bach, R. L., and Schraml, L. S. 1982. Migration,#p#分頁標題#e#
crisis and theoretical conflict. International
Migration Review 16:320-41.
Bourdieu, P. 1986. The forms of capital. In
Handbook of theory and research for the
sociology of education, ed. J. G. Richardson,
241-58. New York: Greenwood Press.
Bovenkerk, F. 1981. Why returnees generally
do not turn out to be "agents of change": The
case of Suriname. Nieuwe West Indische
Gids 55(3/4):154-73.
Brana-Shute, R., and Brana-Shute, G. 1982.
The magnitude and impact of remittances in
the eastern Caribbean: A research note. In
Return migration and remittances:
Developing a Caribbean perspective, ed. W.
F. Stinner, K. de Albuquerque, and R. S.
Bryce-Laporte, 267-89. Occasional Paper
no. 3, Research Institute on Immigration and
Ethnic Studies, Smithsonian Institution.
Washington, D.C.
Carnegie, C. V. 1982. Strategic flexibility in the
West Indies: A social psychology of
Caribbean migration. Caribbean Review
11:10-13, 54.
Chevannes, B., and Ricketts, H. 1997. Return
migration and small business development in
Jamaica. In Caribbean circuits: New directions
in the study of Caribbean migration, ed.
P. Pessar, 161-95. Staten Island, N.Y: Center
for Migration Studies.
Cockcroft, J. D. 1983. Mexico: Class formation,
capital accumulation and the state. New
York: Monthly Review Press.
Cohen, J. H. 1994. Cooperation and community:
An ethnography of economic change in
southern Mexico. Ph.D. diss., Indiana
University, Bloomington.
Conway, D. 1988. Conceptualising contemporary
patterns of Caribbean international
mobility. Caribbean Geography 2:145-63.
. 1994. The complexity of Caribbean
migration. Caribbean Affairs 7(4):96-119.
Conway, D., and Glesne, C. 1986. Rural livelihood,
return migration and remittances in St.
Vincent. CLAG 1986 yearbook, Vol. 12,
3-11. Muncie, Ind.: Conference of Latin
Americanist Geographers, Ball State
University.
Conway, D., and Lorah, P. 1995. Environmental
protection policies in Caribbean small
islands: Some St. Lucian examples.
Caribbean Geography 6(1):16-27.
DaVanzo, J. 1981. Microeconomic approaches
to studying migration decisions. In Migration
decision making, ed. G. F. Dejong and R. W.
Gardner, 90-129. New York: Pergamon
Press.
Durand, J.; Kandel, W.; Parrado, E. A.; and
Massey D. S. 1996. International migration
and development in Mexican communities.
Demography 33:249-64.
Durand, J., and Massey, D. S. 1992. Mexican
留學生社會研究dissertationmigration to the United States: A critical
review. Latin American Research Review
27:3-42.
Durand, J.; Parrado, E. A.; and Massey, D. S.
1996. Migradollars and development: A#p#分頁標題#e#
reconsideration of the Mexican case.
International Migration Review 30:423-44.
Ekins, P., and Max-Neef, M. 1992. Real-life economics:
Understanding wealth creation.
London: Routledge.
Folbre, N. 1988. The black four of hearts:
Towards a new paradigm of household economics.
In A home divided: Women and
42
CONSEQUENCES OF MIGRATION
income in the Third World, ed. D. Dwyer
and J. Bruce, 248-62. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
. 1992. Introduction: The feminist
sphinx. In Women's work in the world economy,
ed. N. Folbre, B. Bergmann, B.
Agarwal, and M. Floro, xxiii-xxx. New York:
New York University Press.
Free trader's virtue. 1993. Economist, 13
February, 7. Special supplement.
Gardner, R. W. 1981. Macrolevel influences on
the migration decision process. In Migration
decision making: Multidisciplinary approaches
to microlevel studies in developed
and developing countries, ed. G. Dejong and
R. W. Gardner, 59-89. New York: Pergamon
Press.
Glick-Schiller, N.; Basch, L.; and Blanc-
Szanton, C. 1992. Towards a transnational
perspective on migration: Race, class, ethnicity,
and nationalism reconsidered. New York:
New York Academy of Sciences.
. 1995. From immigrant to transmigrant:
Theorizing transnational migration.
Anthropological Quarterly 68(1):48-63.
Gmelch, G. 1987. Work, innovation and investment:
The impact of return migrants in
Barbados. Human Organization 46:131-40.
Grasmuck, S., and Pessar, P. 1991. Between two
islands: Dominican international migration.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Greenberg, J. B. 1995. Capital, ritual, and the
boundaries of the closed corporate community.
In Articulating hidden histories:
Exploring the influence of Eric R. Wolf, ed. J.
Schneider and R. Rapp, 67-81. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Guarnizo, L. E. 1994. Los Dominicanyorks: The
making of a bi-national society. Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social
Science 533:70-86.
Hirabayashi, L. R. 1993. Cultural capital:
Mountain Zapotec migrant associations in
Mexico City. Tucson: University of Arizona
Press.
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. 1994. Gendered transitions:
Mexican experiences of immigration.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hulshof, M. 1991. Zapotec moves: Networks
and remittances of U. S. bound migrants from
Oaxaca, Mexico. Nederlands Geographical
Studies no. 128. Amsterdam: University of
Amsterdam.
Ishmael, L. 1988. Informal sector factor mobilization:
The process by which poor people
shelter themselves and implications for policy
focus on the Caribbean: St. Vincent and
Dominica. Ph.D. diss., University of
Pennsylvania.#p#分頁標題#e#
Katz, E. 1991. Breaking the myth of harmony:
Theoretical and methodological guidelines to
the study of rural Third World households.
Review of Radical Political Economics 23(3 &
4):37-56.
Lomnitz, L. 1977. Networks and marginality.
New York: Academic Press.
Lopez, J. R., and Seligson, M. E. 1991. Small
business development in El Salvador: The
impact of remittances. In Migration, remittances,
and small business development:
Mexico and Caribbean basin countries, ed. S.
Diaz-Briquets and S. Weintraub, 175-206.
Boulder, Colo.: Westview.
Lozano-Ascencio, F. 1993. Bringing it back
home: Remittances to Mexico from migrant
workers in the United States. Monograph no.
37, Center for U.S.-Mexico Studies,
University of California, San Diego.
Martin, P. 1996. Mexico, polls, remittances and
economy. Migration News, October [e-mail
version].
Massey, D. S. 1997. The social process of border
crossing. Paper presented at the 20th
International Congress of the Latin
American Studies Association, held in
Guadalajara, Mexico, 17-19 April.
Massey, D. S.; Goldring, L.; and Durand, J.
1994. Continuities in transnational migration:
An analysis of nineteen Mexican communities.
American Journal of Sociology
99:1492-1533.
Massey, D. S., and Parrado, E. 1994.
Migradollars:T he remittances and savings of
Mexican migrants to the USA. Population
Research and Policy Review 13(1):3-30.
Perez-Itriago, A., and Guendelman, S. 1989.
Role models and parallel lives: Mexican
migrant women return home. In The impact
of international migration on developing
countries, ed. R. Appleyard, 269-86. Paris:
OECD.
Pessar, P. 1988. The constraints on, and release
of female labor power: Dominican migration
to the United States. In A home divided:
Women and income in the Third World, ed.
D. Dwyer and J. Bruce, 195-215. Stanford:
Stanford University Press.
Philpott, S. 1973. West Indian migration: The
Montserrat case. London: Athlone Press.
Portes, A., and Guarnizo, L. E. 1991. Tropical
capitalists: U.S. bound immigration and smallenterprise
development in the Dominican
Republic. In Migration, remittances, and
small business development: Mexico and
43
ECONOMICG EOGRAPHY
Caribbean Basin countries, ed. S. Diaz-
Briquets and S. Weintraub, 101-31. Boulder,
Colo.: Westview.
Reichart, J. S. 1981. The migrant syndrome:
Seasonal U.S. wage labor and rural development
in central Mexico. Human
Organization 40(1):56-66.
. 1982. A town divided: Economic stratification
and social relations in a Mexican
migrant community. Social Problems
29:411-23.
Roberts, B. R. 1994. Urbanization, development,
and the household. In Comparative#p#分頁標題#e#
national development: Society and economy
in the new global order, ed. D. Kincaid and
A. Portes, 199-236. Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina Press.
Rubenstein, H. 1983. Remittances and rural
underdevelopment in the English speaking
Caribbean. Human Organization
42:295-306.
. 1992. Migration, development and
remittances in rural Mexico. International
Migration (Geneva) 30(2):127-51.
Russell, S. S. 1986. Remittances from international
migration: A review in perspective.
World Development 14:677-96.
Sen, A. K. 1990. Gender and cooperative conflicts.
In Persistent inequalities: Women and
world development, ed. I. Tinker, 123-49.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, R. 1992. Mixteca in New York; New York
in Mixteca. NACLA, Report on the Americas
26(1):39-41.
Stinner, W. F.; de Albuquerque, K.; and Bryce-
Laporte, R. S., eds. 1982. Return migration
and remittances: Developing a Caribbean
perspective. Occasional Paper no. 3,
Research Institute on Immigration and
Ethnic Studies, Smithsonian Institution.
Washington, D.C.
Warnes, T. 1992. Migration and the life course.
In Migration processes and patterns. Vol. 1,
Research progress and prospects, ed. T.
Champion and T. Fielding, 175-87. London:
Belhaven Press.
Watts, M. J., and Bohle, H. G. 1993. The space
of vulnerability: The causal structure of
hunger and famine. Progress in Human
Geography 17(1):43-67.
Weist, R. E. 1979. Anthropological perspectives
on return migration: A critical commentary.
Papers in Anthropology 20:167-88.
. 1984. External dependency and the
perpetuation of temporary migration to the
United States. In Patterns of undocumented
migration: Mexico and the United States, ed.
R. C. Jones, 110-35. Totowa, N. J.: Rowman
& Allenhand.
Wheelock, J. 1992. The household in the total
economy. In Real-life economics: Understanding
wealth creation, ed. P. Ekins and M.
Max-Neef, 123-36. London: Routledge.
Wolpert, J. 1964. The decision process in a spatial
context. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers 54:537-58.
Wood, C. H. 1981. Structural changes and
household concepts: A conceptual framework
for the study of rural migration. Human
Organization 40:338-44.
44