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.
Highlights
Focusing on migrants’ local and ethnic social networks and ties, studies have shown how they can function as a resource bearing an impact on migrants’ adaptation and their upward or downward social mobility within the new host societies (Nannestad, Svendsen, & Svendsen, 2008)
It asks: To what extent do they intent to or have mobilised and capitalised on social resources existing as a result of them having been raised in the transnational diaspora space? I shed light on the workings of networks, ties, and mobilities in the lives of the second generation and discuss the extent to which they can be considered to be a form of migrant capital (Ryan et al, 2015)
Whereas previous research has shown that transnational networks can become a social resource for migrant communities (Faist, 2000a, 2000b; Ryan et al, 2008, 2015), little is known about how the second generation mobilises and capitalises on their transnational networks
Summary
Focusing on migrants’ local and ethnic social networks and ties, studies have shown how they can function as a resource bearing an impact on migrants’ adaptation and their upward or downward social mobility within the new host societies (Nannestad, Svendsen, & Svendsen, 2008). Not all transnational networks and ties automatically constitute a social resource for migrants: It has been suggested that only networks that can be mobilised as a social resource within particular (transnational) networks ought to be considered to be a form of social capital (Anthias, 2007; Ryan, 2011; Wahlbeck, 2018). Such mobilisable and transferrable networks and ties that have come about as a result of migration processes is considered to constitute and referred to as “migrant capital” in this article (Erel & Ryan, 2019; Ryan et al, 2015)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
