Systems of labor mobility across borders in which states assign a fixed duration to workers’ sojourn—temporary labor migration schemes (TLMSs)—have enabled employers to recruit workers while claiming to avoid the presumed negative consequences of settlement and integration. While existing explanations of TLMSs focus primarily on structural determinants, this article introduces a cumulative contextual model. It begins with a political-economic analysis of labor migration and addresses its gaps by adding an analysis of the ideological legitimations of TLMSs, as well as a consideration of the complex of rules and organizations that implement and regulate state-managed temporary migration. Building on this approach, I propose a typology of TLMSs according to dominant actors, rules that govern the labor relationship, and the gap between discourse about the goals of TLMSs and outcomes. The analysis has implications for immigration and citizenship regimes, for their assumptions of permanence, and for the nature of work.

This article reviews the literature that examines the potential, limitations, and consequences of robots and artificial intelligence (AI) in automation and augmentation across various disciplines. It presents key observations and suggestions from the literature review. Firstly, displacement effects from task automation continue to persist. However, one should not assume an unequivocally increasing efficacy of technology in automation or augmentation, especially given the declining productivity growth in high-income countries and some large emerging economies in recent decades. Jobs less likely to be negatively impacted are those that require diverse tasks, physical dexterity, tacit knowledge, or flexibility, or are protected by professional or trade associations. Despite countervailing effects, without policy intervention, automation and augmentation could widen inequality between social groups, labor and capital, and firms. Secondly, AI's promise in task automation and labor augmentation is mixed. AI tools can cause harm, and dissatisfaction and disengagement often arise from their opaqueness, errors, disregard for critical contexts, lack of tacit knowledge, and lack of domain expertise, as well as their demand for extra labor time and resources. The inadequate autonomy to override AI-based assessments further frustrates users who have to use these AI tools at work. Finally, the article calls for sociological research to specify conditions and mechanisms that ameliorate adverse consequences and enhance labor augmentation by embedding the study of automation and augmentation in concrete social and political contexts at multiple levels.

This article surveys the growing field of political demography, which explores the political consequences of structural population change. It underscores the importance of integrating demography and political sociology research to better understand the complex and nuanced relationship between demography and political dynamics. The existing research demonstrates profound and multifaceted impacts of demographic shifts on the political landscape, with different demographic factors having distinct political consequences. Notably, population composition and distribution tend to hold greater political significance than sheer population size and growth. Furthermore, while more research is needed, the existing work suggests that the effect of structural demographic factors is neither inevitable nor without limit; rather, the political consequences of demographic change often exhibit nonlinear patterns and interact with prevailing socioeconomic and institutional contexts. As demographic shifts continue to unfold globally, political demography stands as a promising and enlightening area of research that merits further inquiry.

This review examines cultural production and consumption through the lens of race and ethnicity. Although the sociological study of race, ethnicity, and cultural production and consumption (RECPC) is growing, it is scattered across various subfields. This review aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how race and ethnicity intersect with cultural production and consumption by bringing this scholarship together. I discuss five dominant themes in the scholarship: classification, valuation and evaluation, representations, market outcomes, and cultural capital. The article concludes with implications for future sociological research on RECPC.

Reporting—often by ordinary individuals—is the most common means by which authorities become aware of crimes, misconduct, and other types of deviant behavior. In this article, I integrate research across a variety of disciplines and domains to review the role of social influence in the decision to report. Such influences operate at the individual, group, and societal levels to shape reporting behavior, as potential reporters respond to both direct and indirect pressures, along with considering the anticipated reactions of others were a report to be made. Together, these influences can either suppress or promote reporting, which shapes who is identified, investigated, and ultimately punished for deviant behavior within organizations, communities, and states.

Adverse environmental exposures—war and violence, natural disasters, escalating heat, worsening air quality—experienced in pregnancy are consequential for multiple domains of well-being over the life course, including health, cognitive development, schooling, and earnings. Though these environmental exposures become embodied via biological processes, they are fundamentally sociological phenomena: Their emergence, allocation, and impact are structured by institutions and power. As a result, consequential early-life environmental exposures are a critical part of the sociological understanding of social stratification, intergenerational mobility, and individual and cohort life course trajectories. We review theory and evidence on prenatal exposures, describe enduring methodological issues and potential solutions for elucidating these effects, and discuss the importance of this evidence for the stratification of opportunity and outcomes in contemporary societies.

Sociology operates with an impoverished understanding of conservatism and the natural environment. The discipline's focus on antiregulatory and antiscience dimensions of conservative politics can obscure a more comprehensive, historically deep, and theoretically rich understanding of conservatism's connection to nature. We review and integrate sociological research with a large multidisciplinary global literature on conservative and far right environmental thought. Our analysis shows an intellectual tradition built around three commitments concerning the moral order of nature and society: naturalism, organicism, and pastoralism. Rather than being antiscientific, these traditions have drawn heavily on natural science for their authority. After tracing their history, we consider several contemporary manifestations, sometimes in ways that are counterintuitive to sociology's dominant understanding of conservatism. Conservative thought, including its far right edges, maintains a firm hold on global politics while climate change transforms the planet. To better understand these dynamics, sociology must continue to integrate work from other socioenvironmental fields. This review begins to correct this neglect and charts a path for future research at this increasingly impactful intersection.

The growing visibility of transgender and nonbinary people raises important sociological questions about how the structure of sex and gender is shifting and underscores necessary changes to research practice. We review what is known about emerging gender identities and their implications for sociological understandings of the relationship between sex and gender and the maintenance of the sex/gender system of inequality. Transgender and nonbinary identities are increasingly common among younger cohorts and improved survey measurements of sex and gender are expanding information about these changes. In the United States, an additional gender category seems to be solidifying in public usage even as the higher status of masculinity over femininity persists. The continuing power of the normative binary contributes to both violent backlash and characteristic patterns of discrimination against gender diverse people; yet, underlying support for nondiscrimination in the workplace is stronger than commonly recognized. New, more consistent efforts to account for gender diversity in social science research are needed to fully understand these changes.

The study of policy alone often means domestic policy, of interest to generalist sociologists interested in how political ideas are turned into domestic legislation, executive action, and/or court litigation. Foreign policy, as the financial, commercial, diplomatic and military relations of a state with foreign states, remains a niche subfield. But foreign relations should be conceived of as the broader set of entanglements between societies, encompassing transnational movements, expert networks, and fields. Then, sociological theories of foreign relations can interest generalist sociologists. In this review, we illustrate how this broad view of foreign relations applies to the study of the United States in the world today (USitWT) by first surveying how sociologists of the world society and world system have focused on transnational relations and the place of the United States in their dynamics, and how they have engaged with the question of power. We then demonstrate how field theorists’ study of transnational fields can allow sociologists to reconceptualize the historical role of the USitWT by highlighting continuities between European colonial governmentalities and current US transnational practices. This field perspective can allow sociologists to understand the USitWT as transnational, postcolonial, or neo-colonial governmentality, depending on the sociological and historical depth and range of its relation with different parts of the world.

This methodological review starts one step before Small's classic account of how many cases a scholar needs. We ask, “Which cases do I need?” We argue that a core feature of most qualitative research is case construction, which we define as the delineation of a social category of inquiry. We outline how qualitative researchers construct cases and observations and discuss how these choices impact data collection, analysis, and argumentation. In particular, we examine how case construction and the subsequent logic of crafting observations within cases have consequences for conceptual generalizability, as distinct from empirical generalizability. Drawing from the practice of qualitative work, we outline seven questions qualitative researchers often answer to construct cases and observations. Better understanding and articulating the logic of constructing cases and observations is useful for both qualitative scholars embarking on research and those who read and evaluate their work.