Migration trajectories and the migration industry: Theoretical reflections and empirical examples from Asia

Abstract

In the analysis of international migration flows, an important but overlooked area in research and policy is the crucial role of the migration industry (MI). We assume that human mobility requires knowledge, skills, time and financial investments-assets that individual migrants often lack. The prospective migrant takes the decision to move or not, depending among other things on (partial) information of political, social and economic conditions in the country of origin, entrance regulations in the country of destination, and access to transnational social networks and supportive products and services along the spatial migration trajectory. The latter implies that migration generates new (employment) opportunities and economic activities for those who link to the flow of migrations and in locations where migration is rife. Various public and private agencies and actors provide for such infor-mation, products and services relating to migration, thereby promoting, facilitating and organizing the process of migration. The information provided by intermediaries is not necessarily accurate or complete; indeed, many provide partial or distorted information, sometimes intentionally. Information has become a commodity that can be capitalized upon for profit and with which migrants can be manipulated. These transactions can be of an informal and formal nature, institutionalized or incidental, regulated and unregulated, and/or reciprocal or commoditized. Once MI has come into existence it will have its own dynamics and impact on migration projects of individuals and will shape the structure of movement-it is the basis for the self-sustainment of migration flows. MI networks straddle various borders, social categories, economic sectors and jurisdictions, and MI has the potential to forge cooperativelinkages between various actors. However, given that sovereign states have an interest in guarding their borders, economies, legal jurisdictions and citizenship, MI can undermine these interests and thereby cause friction, conflicts of interest and countervailing forces. Government policies and regulations create demand for migration-related services, and governments are outsourcing services linked to migration management and monitoring to non-state (commercial) agencies (see Chapter 5, this volume). These non-state intermediary actors function to enhance flexibility, externalize costs and risks, while simultaneously creating business networks.1