Iztigsohnn Inmigrant incorporation.pdf

Immigrant Incorporation and Sociocultural TransnationalismAuthor(s): José Itzigsohn and Silvia Giorguli SaucedoSource: International Migration Review, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Autumn, 2002), pp. 766-798Published by: The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4149563 .

Accessed: 26/09/2014 03:51

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve andextend access to International Migration Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.204.192.85 on Fri, 26 Sep 2014 03:51:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cmigrations

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4149563?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Immigrant Incorporation and Sociocultural Transnationalism'

Josd Itzigsohn Brown University

Silvia Giorguli Saucedo Brown University

This article analyzes sociocultural transnational linkages among Colom- bian, Dominican, and Salvadoran immigrants in the United States. It emphasizes the importance of comparative analysis and yields three main findings. First, participation in any particular transnational activity is low, but participation over all the different forms of transnational practices is extended. Second, the process of incorporation does not weaken transnational participation. Third, there is more than one causal path that can account for the rise of transnational sociocultural practices. The different paths can be explained by reference to the context of reception and the mode of incorporation of each group.

The paradigm for the study of immigration has changed in the last decade.

Previously, studies of immigration focused on the process of incorporation/assimilation of immigrants to their new country (Alba and Nee, 1997; Gordon, 1964; Portes and Rumbaut, 1996). Immigration researchers, of course, were aware that immigrants send remittances home and many of them return, but the frame of analysis of the process of immigrant incorporation examined the country of origin and the place of reception of immi-

grants as two separate societies. The new paradigm argues that immigrants redefine but do not break their ties to their country of origin. They create a

multiplicity of ties in different areas of social action that transcend national barriers (Faist, 2000; Glick Schiller, 2000; Itzigsohn, 2000; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999; Vertovec, 1999).

The presence of immigration-related transnational communities has been amply documented (Basch, Glick Schiller and Szanton-Blanc, 1994; Guarnizo, 1994; Itzigsohn et al., 1999; Kyle, 1999; Landolt et al., 1999;

IThe data on which this paper is based were collected under grants from the National Science Foundation (SBR-9796286); Ford Foundation (#960-0527); and Andrew W. Mellon Foun- dation. The authors want to express their special thanks to Calvin Goldscheider, Greg Elliot, Michael White, John Model, Fran Goldscheider, and Catherine Stiff for their generous com- ments. The contents of the article are the authors' exclusive responsibility.

? 2002 by the Center for Migration Studies of New York. All rights reserved. 0198-9183/02/3603.0139

766 IMR Volume 36 Number 3 (Fall 2002):766-798



IMMIGRANT INCORPORATION AND SOCIOCULTURAL TRANSNATIONALISM 767

Levitt, 1997; Smith, 1998). We know less, however, about how extensive are different types of transnational practices. Moreover, we have had little direct research into what drives people to engage in transnational practices. This

study contributes to our expanding knowledge of immigrant transnationalism by exploring and analyzing three previously neglected issues: the scope and degree of participation of immigrants in transnational practices, the determinants of transnational participation, and the relationship between immigrant incorporation and transnationalism. Our focus is on sociocultural transnationalism, that is, transnational practices that recreate a sense of community based on cultural understandings of belonging and mutual obligations. We examine the scope and determinants of participation in institutionalized sociocultural transnational activities, that is, the formation of a community public space that spans national borders. The study of this form of transnationalism is key to understanding the construction of communities and social life across borders.

We pursue these goals through the analysis of data on Dominican, Colombian, and Salvadoran immigrants. Most studies of transnationalism derive their conclusions from the analysis of particular case studies. A key finding of our analysis is that conclusions and theories derived from the

analysis of only one immigrant group are bound to be limited in their

explanatory powers. There is a multiplicity of causes that can lead immigrants to engage in transnational practices. The particular path of transnational community building followed by different immigrant groups is mediated by their context of reception and the mode of incorporation. The differences in the determinants of transnational participation can only be established

through comparative research.

IMMIGRATION AND SOCIOCULTURAL TRANSNATIONALISM

A large number of innovative studies have documented the presence of transnational ties among diverse groups of immigrants in different parts of the world. These studies describe the various forms of linkages between immi-

grants and their country of origin. They show, among other things: * How immigrants construct identities that transcend national barriers

(Basch, Glick Schiller and Szanton-Blanc, 1994; Glick Schiller and Fouron, 1998).

* How immigrant communities abroad participate in the life of their

place of origin (Goldring, 1998; Landolt et al., 1999; Levitt, 1998; Roberts, Frank and Lozano-Ascencio, 1999; Smith, 1998).



768 INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW

* How transnational immigrants participate in the political life of their

country of origin (Guarnizo, 1998; Itzigsohn, 2000; Laguerre, 1999). * How immigrants build and conduct businesses in both their country of

origin and their place of reception and how those businesses contribute to the development of the country of origin (Faist, 2000; Portes, 1996; Portes and Guarnizo, 1991). A new set of studies has begun the task of systematizing what we know

about transnationalism, comparing different cases, creating typologies of transnational practices, and explaining the renewal of immigrant transnational

practices in the current historical period (Faist, 2000; Glick Schiller, 2000;

Itzigsohn, 2000; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999; Tambiah, 2000). These

writings have greatly advanced our knowledge concerning the structure, institutional organization, and relation to globalization of transnational communities. Nevertheless, there is still a dearth of systematic research on specific types of transnational practices, their scope, and their determinants. The study of

immigrant transnational communities needs to ask questions concerning how extensive are different transnational practices? How involved are immigrants in these practices? What accounts for participation in transnational linkages? How is transnationalism related to the process of incorporation of immigrants in the

receiving country? Transnational practices cover all spheres of social action. They can be sep-

arated, for analytical purposes, on three different fields of social action: economic, political and sociocultural (Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999). This

study addresses the field of sociocultural transnational practices. Sociocultural transnationalism refers to those transnational linkages that involve the re- creation of a sense of community that encompasses migrants and people in the

place of origin. Sociocultural transnationalism concerns the emergence of practices of sociability, mutual help, and public rituals rooted in the cultural under-

standings that pertain to the sense of belonging and social obligations of immi-

grants. These practices constitute the backbone of emergent communities without propinquity.

Political, economic, and sociocultural transnational practices are not nec-

essarily mutually exclusive, and many people can participate in all aspects of transnational life. But the goals of social action and the motives for participating in these different fields of transnational life are likely to vary, as is the extent of participation in such practices. Sociocultural transnationalism refers to social

practices that are more affective oriented and less instrumental than political or economic transnationalism. Hence the need to analyze these different transnational fields separately.




Transnational practices encompass a large variety of activities that range from individual linkages to transnational institutions. Faist (2000) distin-

guishes between three different levels of institutionalization of transnational communities: 1) transnational kinship groups based on the linkages and

obligations between family and household members or close friends; 2) transnational circuits such as trading or business networks or other forms of recurrent transnational instrumental activities; and 3) transnational communities that imply the emergence of public institutionalized practices that

involve mobilization of collective representations and the emergence of a sense of solidarity based on ethnicity, religion, nationality, or place of origin. We focus on the third level of Faist classification.

We examine the emergence of institutionalized public practices that link immigrants in the United States to their countries of origin (in this case,

Colombia, Dominican Republic, and El Salvador). The empirical expression of institutionalized sociocultural transnationalism is participation in immi-

grant organizations that promote cultural or social ties with the country of

origin. Examples of this type of organization are township committees, ethnic social and cultural clubs that bring or send people back and forth between the two countries, continuous participation in symbolic events in and of the

place of origin, etc. These are common activities in the lives of immigrants, and they sustain an emergent feeling of participating in a community that transcends the confines of the local and cross-national boundaries.

To be sure, the sociocultural transnational public space is not without conflicts. People in the country of origin often question whether the interests of migrants are the same as the interests of the people who remained

(Goldring, 1998). Moreover, immigrants who participate in transnational institutions are not necessarily driven by altruistic motives. They may be

engaged in the pursuit of an enhanced social status or motivated by the desire to leave a personal mark in the place where they were born. Yet, sociocultural transnational participation is guided more by affective and symbolic motives than by instrumental rationality.

The degree of immigrants' involvement and participation in transnational activities and institutions shows a large degree of variation. These vari- ations need to be taken into account in the study of the scope of transnational

participation and its determinants (Itzigsohn et al., 1999; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999). The intensity of people's involvement in transnational

activities varies. Hence, it is necessary to look at whether people immerse themselves in transnational linkages or are occasionally touched by them. For




that purpose, we need to differentiate between narrow and broad transnationalism (Itzigsohn et al., 1999). Narrow transnationalism refers to institutionalized and continuous participation in transnational activities and organizations; broad transnationalism refers to only occasional participation in transnational linkages. This distinction is very useful to understand how transnational linkages affect and condition people lives.

IMMIGRATION, TRANSNA TIONALISM, AND INCORPORATION

The previous paradigm for the analysis of immigration held that once

migrants entered a new country they broke the ties with their country of ori-

gin and engaged in the processes of incorporation/acculturation/assimilation (Gordon, 1964; Alba and Nee, 1997; Portes and Rumbaut, 1996). The study of transnationalism has questioned this assumption and led scholars to focus both on the process of incorporation and the emergence of transnational social fields. Scholars working within the new paradigm have argued that

incorporation-oriented studies fail to capture an important part of immi-

grants' social lives that takes place across national boundaries. Being a transnational immigrant implies living and being part of two societies linked

through the transnational social practices of the immigrants. The rise of transnational practices and linkages, however, does not mean

that incorporation into the receiving society does not take place. On the con-

trary, the transnational interests of the immigrants often assist the process of

incorporation. For example, Karpathakis (1999) describes how the drive for

incorporation of Greek immigrants into the American political system origi- nated in their desire to influence American politics toward the home country. It is necessary, then, to pose questions regarding the relationship between the

processes of incorporation and the emergence of transnational linkages. Are

incorporation and transnational participation opposing or parallel processes? Does participation in transnational linkages diminish as immigrants incorporate into their new country? What is the causal sequence between these

processes? This study links the analysis of incorporation and transnational

participation in the comparative exploration of Colombian, Dominican, and Salvadoran immigrants.

Our study focuses on the first generation of Colombian, Dominican, and Salvadoran immigrants. The process of incorporation and acculturation to the receiving society, however, spans across generations. Only the second or third generations are expected to have gained full access to the mainstream




society of the place of reception and to have fully adopted its culture (Gans, 1992, 1997; Portes and Rumbaut, 1996). Nevertheless, the study of the first generation is relevant for the analysis of the relationship between transnationalism and incorporation. Although the first generation is not expected to be fully immersed in mainstream society and culture, there is an expectation, both in the academic literature and public policy, that the first generation sever its ties with the country of origin.

The relationship between transnational practices and the process of incorporation is related to explanations concerning the determinants of participation in transnational linkages and practices. The emergence of transnationalism has been related to the characteristics of the contemporary global capitalist economy and to developments in communication and transportation technologies that allow people to experience life in more than one place with a sense of immediacy (Glick Schiller, 2000; Itzigsohn, 2000; Portes, 1999; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999). There are no theoretical guidelines, however, to generate hypotheses about why people participate in transnational practices.

There are, though, several explanations for the emergence of different transnational practices that wait to be tested. The first of these explanations views transnational practice simply as the continuation of the ties that link immigrants to their families and place of origin. Migrants abroad simply try to maintain their social ties with the families, friends, and places they left behind (Basch, Glick Schiller and Szanton-Blanc, 1994; Glick Schiller, 2000; Guarnizo, 1994). Immigrants send remittances, travel home, and build ethnic institutions in the country of reception to rebuild their social relations and the way of life from the country of origin. We call this form of transnationalism "linear transnationalism."

A different explanation for the rise of transnational linkages proposes that immigrants try to reconstitute their linkages to the country of origin, but they cannot do that immediately because of lack of resources. Immigrants who arrive into a new country do not have the time or financial means to engage in transnational practices. From this point of view, transnationalism emerges when immigrants have enough resources to engage in philanthropic or business projects in the country of origin (Goldring, 1998; Landolt et al., 1999; Mahler, 1995; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999). Portes (1996; 1999) argues further that transnationalism is a specific avenue of mobility for entrepreneurial immigrants. The connections that immigrants have in two (or more) countries open business opportunities for entrepreneurial immigrants allowing them a degree of social mobility that they could not attain by doing business in either the country of origin or the country of reception. In order to




engage in transnational entrepreneurship, however, immigrants need to have a certain amount of accumulated capital. From this point of view, then, those who engage in transnational practices are among the most economically successful migrants. The emergence of transnationalism is slow, as it depends on the accumulation of economic resources. We call this form of transnationalism "resource dependent transnationalism."

A third perspective views transnational practices as a reaction to a negative experience of incorporation. Immigrants engage in transnational practices as a result of their lack of satisfaction with their life in the country of reception. This could be, on the one hand, the result of frustration with occupational careers or the social status attained in the country of reception. Immigrants who can make monetary contributions to their family or their place of origin enjoy a higher level of prestige in the country of origin than in the country of reception (Goldring, 1998; Itzigsohn et al., 1999; Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999; Landolt et al., 1999). On the other hand, immigrants can engage in transnational practices as a result of discrimination or a negative perception of the reception society that leads them to retain an identification with their coun-

try of origin (Glick Schiller and Fouron, 1998; Portes, 1999). This explanation has been also proposed to explain the rise of transnationalism among some members of the second generation (Glick Schiller and Fouron, 1999). We call this form of transnationalism "reactive transnationalism."

These different explanations can be formalized into the following hypotheses: 1. The stronger the emotional ties immigrants maintain with the country of

origin, the more immigrants will engage in transnational practices. 2. The greater the amount of economic resources, the more immigrants will

engage in transnational practices. 3. The more an immigrant perceives his or her experience in the country of

reception in negative terms, the more that immigrant will engage in transnational practices.

These three hypotheses are not necessarily mutually exclusive, since they may account for the emergence of transnational practices in different cases. Many of the scholars involved in the study of transnationalism refer to more than one of them in explaining particular case studies. Only comparative studies of the sort

pursued here can assess the explanatory accuracy and scope of each of these

hypotheses and establish whether they represent complementary or competitive social mechanisms of determination.

Moreover, each of the three hypotheses has different implications for our

understanding of the process of incorporation. In the case of linear transna-




tionalism, we can expect that as time passes and migrants incorporate into the

society and culture of the receiving country, the linkages with and obligations toward people and places in the country of origin will slowly weaken. In other

words, as the process of incorporation advances, participation in transnational

linkages diminishes. If this is the case then traditional studies of immigration may have missed an important part of immigrants' social relations but identi-

fied the basic direction of the process correctly. The other two options, however, stand traditional studies of immigration

on their head. In the case of resource dependent transnationalism, the emer-

gence of transnationalism parallels successful economic incorporation. The rise of transnational practices will be related to the process of economic incorporation and social mobility. Successful economic incorporation will give rise to transnational practices and linkages. In the case of reactive transnationalism, transnational practices and identities emerge as a reaction to a negative process of incorporation. Transnationalism will be the result of experiences of discrimination and a negative subjective assessment of the experiences of the immigrant in the country of reception. In these two cases, transnationalism and incorporation are intertwined in complex ways, and immigrant experiences are more

complex and variable than argued by the traditional view.

DATA

The data to address these analytic questions come from a survey conducted in the framework of the Comparative Immigrant Enterprise Project (CIEP), a col- laborative study that involved a survey of immigrant households among three

immigrant communities - Dominicans, Salvadorans, and Colombians - in four cities of the United States - New York City, Los Angeles, Washington, DC and Providence, Rhode Island.2 The survey was conducted in the winter of 1997-98 in the following areas: Dominicans were surveyed in Washington Heights (Manhattan) and Providence. Colombians were surveyed in Jackson

Heights (Queens). The Salvadoran sample was conducted in central Los Ange- les, Adams Morgan (Washington, DC) and selected Washington suburbs. These places were chosen because they are key sites of residential concentration of these immigrant groups.

Resource limitations prevented citywide surveys. Instead, the majority of the respondents were selected using a three stage sampling strategy. In the

2The project involved scholars at the Johns Hopkins University, University of California-

Davis, and Brown University. In 1998, the project's headquarters was moved to the Office of

Population Research, Princeton University.




first stage, key areas of residential concentration of Dominicans, Colombians, and Salvadorans were identified in each city. In the second stage, a random

sample of blocks was selected in those areas. These city blocks served as pri- mary sample units (PSUs). In the third stage, a systematic random sample of households was conducted within each block using a fixed sampling fraction, thus insuring identical probabilities of selection for eligible households (Kish, 1967). Close to two thirds of the sample (62.3%) was selected using the method described above. About a third of the sample (37.7%) was selected

through referrals and snowball chains with different points of entry. The reason for the purposive selection of one third of the sample was that the pri- mary focus of the survey was to study transnational practices. The referral section of the sample attempted to reach people who engage in transnational

practices to insure that there were enough cases of transnational migrants in the sample. The random sample was conducted to avoid the problem of sam-

pling on the dependent variable. Table 1 presents the distribution of the sam-

ple by location and type.3

TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF THE SAMPLE BY COUNTRY, LOCATION AND TYPE OF INTERVIEW

Country of origin City of Residence Block Sample Referral Total Colombia New York 160 151 311

51.4% 48.6% 100% New York 208 51 259

80.3% 19.7% 100% Dominican Republic Providence 86 73 159

54.1% 45.9% 100% Total 294 124 418

70.3% 29.7% 100%

Los Angeles 156 84 240 65.0% 35.0% 100%

El Salvador Washington, DC 139 94 233 59.7% 40.3% 100%

Total 295 178 473 62.4% 37.6% 100%

Total 749 453 1,202 62.3% 37.7% 100%

These three immigrant groups were chosen because the three are among the largest immigrant groups currently arriving from Latin America, and their

history of migration is diverse, allowing for a comparison among different

3For obvious reasons, these samples are not representative of the whole Dominican, Salvadoran, and Colombian populations in those cities. They do, however, encompass important segments of the population, and they show a range of transnational practices that are characteristic of the lives of these immigrant groups.




contexts of exit and incorporation. Table 2 presents the number and rank of Dominican, Colombian, and Salvadoran immigrants since 1965 reforms to the U.S. immigration law opened the gates of the country to people from the Third World. The table shows that the Dominican Republic has been one of the most important sending countries during the last four decades. Colom- bia has sent fewer immigrants, but it has been among the top 20 sending

TABLE 2 NUMBER OF IMMIGRANTS AND RANK AMONG SENDER COUNTRIES FOR THE LAST FOUR DECADES.

1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-1998 Number Rank Number Rank Number Rank Number Rank

Dominican Republic 93,292 8 148,135 8 252,035 6 300,065 5 El Salvador 14,992 34 34,436 28 213,539 8 179,050 8 Colombia 72,028 12 77,347 18 122,849 15 104,539 15 Source: INS Statistical Yearbook, 1998

countries during the last 40 years. Salvadoran migration was not very large during the 1960s and 1970s, but it took off during the last two decades -

coinciding with the civil war that ravaged the country. The histories of migration of these three groups differ. Dominican

migration started in the 1960s as political migration, but since the late 1970s the country experienced very large flows of outmigration due to economic reasons. Dominican migration encompasses all strata of Dominican society and is known for its close ties to the country of origin (Guarnizo, 1994; Itzig- sohn et al., 1999; Grasmuck and Pessar, 1991). The context of reception for Dominicans varied over time. In the 1960s and 1970s the United States

encouraged migration from the Dominican Republic as a way to relieve

political pressures in that country. Dominicans encountered in the United States a passive and neutral context of reception (for a typology of contexts of reception see Portes and Rumbaut, 1996). As the numbers of Dominican

immigrants grew as a result of the economic crisis of the 1980s, obtaining an

immigrant visa became increasingly difficult and the context of reception turned discriminatory (Grasmuck and Pessar, 1991; Itzigsohn et al., 1999).

The bulk of Salvadoran migrants, in turn, came for political reasons, escaping the civil war that ravaged the country during the 1980s. Although peace was achieved in El Salvador at the beginning of the 1990s, the social, economic, and cultural scars of the war are still very deep. During the 1990s, Salvadorans continued to migrate in search of a better economic future. Sal- vadorans encountered an actively discriminatory context of reception. In

spite of migrating as a result of a violent social conflict that uprooted their lives, Salvadoran immigrants were denied refugee status since the government



-I -,,,

z

z ? Z

TABLE 3 SELECTED INDICATORS OF SOCIAL AND CULTURAL LINKS WITH COUNTRY OF ORIGIN BY COUNTRY AND TYPE OF INTERVIEW

Colombians Dominicans Salvadorans Total Block Block Block Block

Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Percentage who: Has participated in a never 91.3 72.2 82.0 89.3 50.8 77.8 80.0 40.4 65.1 86.1 53.9 73.9 hometown association occasionally 5.6 16.5 10.9 8.6 22.6 12.8 14.9 24.7 18.6 10.5 21.4 14.6

regularly 3.1 11.3 7.1 2.1 26.6 9.4 5.1 34.8 16.3 3.5 24.7 11.5 Has sent money for never 91.3 70.9 81.4 87.6 58.1 78.7 82.4 40.4 66.6 86.3 55.4 74.6 projects in his/her occasionally 5.6 19.9 12.5 10.3 19.4 13.0 14.6 32.6 21.4 11.0 24.7 16.2 hometown regularly 3.1 9.3 6.1 2.1 22.6 8.2 3.1 27.0 12.1 2.7 19.9 9.2 Has traveled to attend never 91.7 80.7 86.3 87.2 57.4 78.4 92.9 67.2 83.3 90.4 69.0 82.4 public festivities occasionally 6.4 14.0 10.1 11.4 23.8 15.0 6.1 17.5 10.4 8.2 18.0 11.9

regularly 1.9 5.3 3.6 1.4 18.9 6.6 1.0 15.3 6.4 1.4 12.9 5.7 Has participated in never 93.1 86.8 90.0 89.3 46.7 76.8 89.8 64.0 80.1 90.4 67.0 81.5 local sport clubs with occasionally 2.5 6.6 4.5 8.2 22.1 12.3 8.1 20.2 12.7 7.0 16.2 10.4 links to his/her regularly 4.4 6.6 5.5 2.4 31.1 10.9 2.0 15.7 7.2 2.7 16.9 8.0 country of origin Has participated in never 83.1 56.3 70.1 86.9 43.9 74.0 85.1 23.0 61.7 85.4 39.8 68.1 charity organizations occasionally 10.6 23.2 16.7 11.8 30.9 17.5 10.8 32.6 19.0 11.2 29.0 17.9 linked to his/her country regularly 6.3 20.5 13.2 1.4 25.2 8.5 4.1 44.4 19.2 3.5 31.2 14.0 of origin Participates in at least never 69.4 44.4 57.2 71.8 21.8 56.9 65.8 14.0 46.3 68.9 26.3 52.8 one of the above occasionally 20.0 30.5 25.1 22.1 29.0 24.2 24.4 31.5 27.1 22.6 30.5 25.5

regularly 10.6 25.2 17.7 6.1 49.2 18.9 9.8 54.5 26.6 8.5 43.3 21.6 Sends money to his/her 67.5 64.2 65.9 65.3 80.6 69.9 86.8 74.2 82.0 74.3 72.6 73.6 family or friend in his/her country of origin Total 160 151 311 294 124 418 295 178 473 749 453 1,202




of El Salvador was friendly to the United States. This context left many of them in a tenuous legal position. Indeed, according to Immigration and Naturaliza- tion Service (INS) estimations, the number of undocumented Salvadoran immigrants is second only to Mexicans4 (Coutin, 1998; Immigration and Nat- uralization Service, 1999; Landolt et al., 1999; Mahler, 1995; Repak, 1995).

Colombian migrants arrived to the United States during the 1960s in search of employment. These immigrants consisted mostly of middle class and skilled blue-collar workers. During these years, the context of reception for Colombians was neutral and even positive in some cases as they were recruited as skilled workers to work in the manufacturing economy of the northeast. During the 1980s and particularly the 1990s, Colombians have migrated to escape the political and drug-related violence in the country and a deep economic crisis. Colombian migration became more diverse, encompassing people from all social strata, including a large number of professionals that often cannot validate their credentials in the United States and as a result find initial employment doing menial work. Because Colombians are stigmatized as responsible for the drug trade, the context of reception towards them turned discriminatory (Guarnizo, Sanchez, and Roach, 1999; Guarnizo and Diaz, 1999).

THE SCOPE AND INTENSITY OF SOCIOCULTURAL TRANSNATIONAL PARTICIPATION

Transnational communities are an established fact. The extent of participation in transnational linkages, though, has not been thoroughly researched. This section analyzes the extent of participation in sociocultural transnational activities and institutions among Dominican, Salvadoran, and Colombian immigrants. The CIEP study included a number of questions designed to measure this field of transnational practices. The survey asked about participation in the following sociocultural transnational practices: participation in a hometown association, sending money for projects in the immigrant's hometown, traveling to participate in public festivities in the place of origin, participation in local sport clubs or leagues that maintain links with the country of origin, and participation in charity organizations linked to the country of origin. These are practices that have been extensively documented in descriptions of transnational communities (Glick Schiller, 2000; Itzigsohn et al., 1999; Landolt et al., 1999; Levitt, 1997; Smith, 1998).

4According to the INS, Colombians and Dominicans are 8th and 12th respectively in number of undocumented immigrants in the country (INS, 1999).




These five are different sets of social practices that are involved in the construction of a sense of community for the transnational immigrant. They relate to the space in which immigrants conduct their close social relations such as

sport clubs or hometown associations. They address the desire of immigrants to

keep the place of origin within their lifeworld by traveling to important festivities or contributing to hometown projects.5 Some of these practices involve

joining an organization, such as a hometown association, others involve individual acts, such as sending money for particular projects in the town of origin. What all of them have in common is that they are all related to the close social world of the immigrants and to their sense of belonging. All involve crossing the boundaries between country of reception and country of origin. Moreover, all these practices go beyond the realm of private life. All of them imply some measure of involvement in the public realm. They point, in fact, to a degree of institutionalization of a public transnational space. This is important because in this study we focus on the institutionalization of community rather than in activities conducted in the private realm.

Table 3 presents the results of the survey concerning a number of practices in the field of sociocultural transnationalism. These transnational practices are presented by country, type of sample, and by intensity of participation. The data show traits of transnational participation. Between 43 percent (in the case of Colombians) and 54 percent (in the case of Salvadorans) of the sample participate in some form in one of these activities. If we look only at the random-

ly drawn sample, close to a third of the cases are involved in transnational activities. This indicates that there is a diffuse transnational space that encompasses large segments of these immigrant communities.

When we look at particular activities, among the three immigrant groups the most extended transnational practice is participation in charity organizations linked to the country of origin. These practices include churches that have links and projects in the country of origin of their parish members, ad hoc organizations created to help in the relief of natural disasters (hurricanes, earth-

quakes, and the like), or organizations created to send money or equipment to a particular region. In the rest of the transnational practices, there are country differences. Among Dominicans, participation in sport clubs with links to the

country of origin is widespread; among Colombians, this is the least common

5This aspect of sociocultural transnationalism could be thought as instrumental, as it involves concrete developmental goals in the place of origin, but the immigrant is not the direct ben-

eficiary of these projects. Her or his participation in them is the result of a cultural sense of obligation to the place.




activity. Dominicans also travel back to their place of origin more than both Sal- vadorans and Colombians. Hometown associations are more widespread among Salvadorans.

The table indicates that the degree of participation is different in the three cases. Participation in transnational activities is higher among Salvadorans and lower among Colombians. Also, the referral part of the sample is more transnational than the block sample. This is expected, as the referral sample was selected searching for transnational migrants. In most cases, although not always, the number of people who participate occasionally in transnational activities is larger than the number of people that regularly engage in these types of social practices.

All these activities imply a degree of institutionalization (e.g., participation in an organization), movement (e.g., traveling to public festivities), or com- mitment toward a community beyond the immediate circle of relatives (e.g., sending money for projects in the hometown). As such, they point to the creation of an institutionalized transnational public space not dependent on location propinquity. Although only a minority of the community is involved in this institutionalized public space, the table shows that relatively large propor- tions of the population participate in some form in its institutions. The results indicate a high degree of sociocultural transnational civic engagement. The data also points to the usefulness of the distinction between broad and narrow transnationalism. Many people participate in some broad form in transnational practices, but there is only a core group who is deeply committed to transnational activities and maintaining the institutional skeleton of the transnational

community. Yet, if we look at more private activities of a transnational charac- ter, such as sending remittances - a practice that remains within the close circle of family and friends and that does not demand institutionalization or movement - we note that this practice is much more diffused and that there are no differences between the random and referral samples.

DETERMINANTS OF TRANSNATIONAL PARTICIPATION

What accounts for participation in transnational activities? Why do so many immigrants who are working hard to make a life in the country of reception devote scarce time and resources to transnational endeavors? In order to answer these questions, we carried out a multivariate analysis using sociocultural transnational activities as a dependent variable. For this analysis, we cre-

ated an index of sociocultural transnationalism. In building the index, we wanted to account for different degrees of involvement in transnational activ-




ities. People who do not participate in any of the transnational activities presented in Table 3 were coded 0. People who participate in at least one of these activities in an occasional manner were coded 1. We consider these people as

engaged in broad transnationalism. People who participate regularly in at least one of these activities were coded 2. We consider these people as engaged in narrow transnationalism.

Because the dependent variable is categorized in ordinal responses, we estimated ordered logistic regression models, which predict the cumulative

probabilities of different degrees of participation in transnational linkages for the pooled sample and for each country.6 The coefficients resulting from the models estimated describe the effect of the independent variable on the log odds of response in a category j or below, where j stands for each category of

participation in transnational linkages (never, occasionally and regularly). The model assumes an identical effect of an independent variable for all J-1 collapsings of the response into binary outcomes (Agresti, 1996; McCullagh and Nelder, 1989). A positive and significant coefficient on any of the covari- ates indicates a higher probability of participation in sociocultural transnational linkages, and a negative and significant coefficient implies the opposite. The general form for an ordered logistic model is the following:

g.-

P(Y )j)j=

loavg[Pl,(Y<)]=lg1-(<)

= aj

+ [x, ..

where

j = different degrees of involvement in transnational practices (never, occa-

sionally and regularly); a, = the intercept for each binary outcome resulting from collapsing j up to

J- 1; X = a vector of independent variables; p = a vector with the estimated effect of xi on the log odds of occurrence of the event (participation in transnational practices); 3 is assumed to be the

6Since the random sample was not representative of whole cities or their immigrant populations, but only of certain neighborhoods in cities, we feel that we can pool the random and

purposeful parts of the sample without compromising the results. We do not claim that our results are representative of all Dominicans, Salvadorans, and Colombians; still, the sample allows us to begin to estimate participation in different forms of transnational practices and to

analyze their determinants. We also conducted separate analysis by type of sample and by country.




same over all the binary outcomes resulting from collapsingj up to J-1. The variables included in our analysis reflect the hypotheses concerning

the determinants of transnationalism and the relationship between transnationalism and incorporation. They include the following sets of variables: * Demographic control variables: age, gender, education, marital status,

and number of children. These are standard demographic variables that control for background factors. To these we add controls for country of

origin and whether the person belongs to the random or the referral sam-

ple. * Incorporation variables: citizenship status and time in the United States.

Time in the United States does not necessarily imply incorporation, but there is a strong correlation between the two. Acquiring citizenship is also considered an important landmark in the process of becoming part of the country of reception.

* Linear transnationalism variables: the plans of the respondent upon migration, and whether the respondent has children who live in the country of origin. Plans upon migration measures whether the respondents intended to move to the new country permanently or saw themselves more as sojourners. It indicates degree of attachment to the country of

origin at the time of migration. Similarly, having children in the country of origin implies the presence of close family contacts and obligations toward people in the home country.

* Resource dependent transnationalism variables: labor market position and labor market mobility. These two variables point to the position of the immigrant in the labor market - in other words, to the form of their economic incorporation. People with different positions in the labor market command different amounts of economic resources. Labor market mobility implies a process of gradually acquiring control over increas-

ingly more resources. * Reactive transnationalism variables: whether the person experienced dis-

crimination, an index of satisfaction, and the Perception of Society and Discrimination Index - PSDI. These variables refer to the experiences confronted by immigrants in the country of reception and to their subjective assessments of those experiences. Appendix Table 1 describes how the variables were constructed and

their codification, and Appendix Table 2 provides mean values and percentages for each of these variables for the whole sample and for each country.




We conducted the analysis in two stages. First we estimated models for the whole pooled sample. Then we estimated the models for each country separately to see if the determinants of transnationalism vary in each of the cases. Table 4 presents the results for the whole sample. We estimated three different models. The first one includes only the demographic and the incorporation variables. This model is an initial test of the relationship between

incorporation and transnationalism. The second is the full model, including the linear transnationalism, resource-based transnationalism, and reactive transnationalism variables. Since we are pooling samples gathered in different

ways, we ran a third model that includes the interactions of the type of sam-

ple variable with country of origin. The goal of this model is to check whether the determination of transnational practices is different in the two samples.7

The results for the three models are remarkably consistent. In terms of the demographic variables, the picture that emerges is that men and people with a larger number of children are more likely to engage in the field of institutionalized sociocultural transnationalism than women. Education also has a positive statistically significant effect in the three models. The interpretation of this last result presents us with a puzzle because there is no a priori theoretical reason to believe that education in itself will lead people to engage in transnational practices. Ethnographic descriptions present people with all levels of education participating in the transnational community (Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, 1999; Landolt, et al., 1999).

The effects of education, however, could be providing indirect support for the resource dependent transnationalism hypothesis. In most studies of social stratification, educational levels and occupational statuses are assumed to be consistent with each other. Usually this is a safe assumption, but not in the case of immigrants. Immigrants confront language barriers, difficulties in

getting foreign educational credentials accepted in the country of reception, and other obstacles that delay the translation of educational achievements into occupational status. There often is status inconsistency between the education and occupation of migrants. Hence, the effect of education may be

picking up the presence of resources not captured by occupation, such as social networks or previous socialization in participation in the public sphere either in the country of origin or in the United States.

The effects of education can also support the reactive transnationalism

hypothesis. Those with a higher level of education could be more exposed to

7We ran interactions between type of sample and all the independent variables related to the three different hypotheses and included in the model those that were statistically significant.




TABLE 4 ORDERED LOGIT MODELS OF THE DETERMINANTS OF SOCIOCULTURAL TRANSNATIONAL LINKAGES.

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Demographic Variables

Age -.009 -.008 -.010 Gender .747c .697c .663c Education .476c .402c .411c Marital Status: Single .176 .283a .321b Married/consensual union (ref) - - Divorced/Widowed/Other .223 .242 .223 Number of children .096b .120c .130c

Country of origin: Colombia (ref) - - Dominican Republic .539' .661c .069 El Salvador .970c .920c .360 Type of interview 1.557c 1.406C .674c

Incorporation Variables Time in the U.S. .016a .018a .022b American citizenship .141 .090 .029

Linear Transnationalism Variables Plan to return .303b .282b Children in country of origin -.241a -.219

Resources Based Transnationalism Variables Labor Mobility -.081 -.078 Occupation: Unemployed/Not working -.499b -.483b Laborers (ref.)

Semi-skilled and self-employed .068 .022 Business owners and professionals .375 .320

Reactive Transnationalism Variables Index of satisfaction -.018 -.022

with jobs and opportunities Experienced discrimination .287b .248a

Perception of society and discrimination index .066b .068b

Interactions Type x Dominican Republic 1.115c Type x El Salvador 1.028c Pseudo R2 .154 .167 .172 LR Chi(2) 372.88c 404.24c 418.00c

Notes: ap.0.10 bp~;0.05 cp<0.01

mainstream society and culture and hence more likely to encounter discrimination (Faist, 2000; Glick Schiller and Fouron, 1998). Bivariate analysis of education and discrimination also supports this possibility. People with higher levels of education report having experienced discrimination more than those with low levels of education (these results are available upon request). These results point to the need for conducting further research on the different ways in which education affects transnational participation.




The background control variables for country and type of sample are

positive and significant in the first two models. This indicates that Domini- cans and Salvadorans are more likely to engage in transnational practices than are Colombians (and Salvadorans are also more likely to engage in transnational practices than are Dominicans since the size of the effect is larger for that country). Also, as expected, our referral sample is more likely to participate in the transnational community than our random sample. When we added the interactions to our model, however, the main effects for type of

sample (random sample/referral) and country of origin were not statistically significant, but the interactions were. This suggests that the differences between the samples are significant for the Salvadoran and Dominican cases, but not the Colombian one (the results of the country-specific models con- firm this). It also suggests that the differences between the countries are significant among the referral sample and not so among the random sample.

Concerning the incorporation variables, being a citizen is not statisti-

cally significant in any of the models. Time in the United States, however, is

marginally significant (at the .10 level) in the first two models and significant in the third one. The direction of the effect indicates that people with longer time in the United States are more likely to participate in transnational activities. This result indicates that the process of incorporation and the creation of sociocultural transnational linkages are intertwined in complex ways, and the latter does not diminish with the progress of the former, calling for further investigation into the ways in which these two processes are connected.

The linear transnationalism variables present complex results. Planning to return at the moment of migration has a positive and significant effect on

engaging in transnational practices. Having children in the country of origin, on the other hand, is marginally significant in the second model and non-

significant in the third one. Unexpectedly, the direction of the effect is negative, suggesting that people with children in the country of origin are less like-

ly to be part of the transnational community. This is one of the more puzzling results of our analysis. A possible explanation for this result is that the

presence of children abroad does not affect the public sociocultural transnational realm, but it may affect private transnational engagement. Moreover, the public and private arenas may compete for the scarce resources of immi-

grants, and this competition may lead to gender differences in involvement in different transnational fields. Indeed, the literature suggests that women may be more involved in transnational activities related to household management rather than in the public space (Pessar, 2000). This is an area that needs to be




further explored.8 The results then provide some support for the linear transnationalism hypothesis. Linear transnationalism seems to be related to attitudes toward the country of origin and not to the presence of contemporaneous close social linkages.

In regard to the resource dependent transnationalism variables, the only significant variable in the two models is the dummy variable for being unem-

ployed or not in the labor market. This indicates that having no resources can

impede the engagement in transnational practices, but once immigrants can insure their basic livelihood there are no resource barriers to engage in transnationalism. The dummy variables for skilled workers and self-employed and professionals and business owners have the expected direction, but they are not statistically significant. As mentioned above, the fact that education is significant may provide some indirect support for the resource dependent hypothesis.

Finally, two of the reactive transnationalism variables are significant and have the expected direction.9 Experiences of discrimination and a negative perception of the society of reception do increase the likelihood of participating in the transnational sociocultural field. The third variable, the index of satisfaction, is not significant but has the expected direction, the more satisfaction with the employment situation the less one is likely to engage in transnational practices. So the results provide strong support for this hypothesis.

Overall, the picture that emerges is a complex one. The field of institutionalized sociocultural transnationalism appears to be one that is mostly male dominated, with people with relatively high levels of education but also with

larger families participating more often (these two results are slightly contradic- tory as these two demographic traits usually do not go together). The results indicate that transnational engagement does not decrease as the process of

incorporation advances. On the contrary, incorporation and transnationalism seem to go hand in hand. All three hypotheses receive some degree of support, although sociocultural reactive transnationalism is the one that receives the

strongest support. Table 3 indicated differences in scope and area of participation in

transnational activities between the different countries. Table 4 also showed that country of origin is a significant variable in predicting transnational par-

8This is the topic of a paper currently being worked on by the authors. There is initial evi- dence that this is indeed the case. The data shows that women participate in larger propor- tions in transnational economic activities that contribute to the maintenance of the household than in either sociocultural or political transnational practices. 9In the third model the variable for experience of discrimination almost reaches statistical significance. Its level of significance is .056.




ticipation. Therefore, it is important to test whether the determinants of transnationalism are different for each of the three countries of origin. Table 5 presents the full model for each of the countries.1'

Table 5 shows some commonalties among the three cases but also very interesting and important differences. A look at the demographic variables indicates that in the three cases men are more likely than women to be involved in institutionalized sociocultural practices. Education has a positive and significant effect in the Colombian and Salvadoran case, but not in the Dominican case. Number of children has a significant and positive effect only in the Colombian case, and being part of the referral sample has a significant and positive effect in the Dominican and Salvadoran cases but not in the Colombian case. The incorporation variables are not significant in any of these models (the direction of their effects, however, continues to be positive).

The more relevant differences appear in the analysis of the variables

concerning our three hypotheses for participation in transnational linkages. In the Colombian case, the only variable with a significant and positive effect is the dummy variable for professionals and business owners. In the Domini- can case, the only significant and positive variable is the intentions of the

immigrant upon arrival. In the Salvadoran case, two variables are significant. One is the dummy variable for people who are unemployed or out of the labor market. This variable has a negative effect. The second significant variable is experience of discrimination, and that has a positive effect.

These results suggest that in each of the cases a different mechanism underlies participation in transnational activities. The Colombian case supports the resource dependent hypothesis. The Dominican case supports the linear transnationalism hypothesis. The Salvadoran case supports the reactive transnationalism hypothesis. There is also some support in the Salvadoran case for the resource dependent hypothesis, but only to the extent that hav-

ing no resources due to being unemployed affects the possibility of transnational participation. Apparently, however, once Salvadoran immigrants can

guarantee their basic livelihood, the barriers to transnational participation are no longer resource dependent.

These results emphasize multiple paths that lead to similar social con-

figurations and point to the need for studying the particular circumstances of

'lWe ran interactions between type of sample and the variables related to the different

hypotheses for the Dominican and Salvadoran samples, but none of these interactions were significant. We did not run interactions for the Colombian sample because Table 5 indicates that the type of sample variable is not significant in that case.




TABLE 5 ORDERED LOGIT MODELS OF THE DETERMINANTS OF SOCIOcuLTURAL TRANSNATIONAL LINKAGES BY

COUNTRY

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Colombians Dominicans Salvadorans

Demographic Variables Age .024 -.027a -.020 Gender .676b .727c .555b Education .447b .247a .522c Marital Status: Single .309 .344 .313a Married/consensual union (ref) - - Divorced/Widowed/Other .277 .026 .348 Number of children .213b .108 .119 Type of interview .305 2.118c 1.969c

Incorporation Variables Time in the U.S. .006 .018 .025 American citizenship .016 -.149 .295

Linear Transnationalism Variables Plan to return .218 .426b .130 Children in country of origin -.425 -.430a -.034

Resource Based Transnationalism Variables Labor Mobility .072 -.064 -.083 Occupation: Unemployed/ Not working .610 -.598a -1.110b Laborers (ref.) - - Semi-skilled and self-employed .092 .049 -.103 Business owners and professionals 1.045b .100 -.205

Reactive Transnationalism Variables Index of satisfaction with jobs

and opportunities -.147 -.011 .035 Experienced discrimination -.030 .079 .634c Perception of society

and discrimination index .075 .048 .075 Pseudo R2 .141 .191 .216 LR Chi(2) 85.12c 155.04c 214.99c Notes: ap0.10

bps0.05 c'p0.01

each immigrant group. Moreover, the conclusions drawn from one case are

generalizable to the others. We think that the differences in the three cases can be explained, at least in part, by reference to the different contexts of reception and modes of incorporation of each immigrant group. The contextual circumstances of each group shape the determinants for their transnational

engagement. As mentioned above, Salvadorans have the more vulnerable legal position in this country, and as a result they are more likely to encounter discrimination based on legal status. A cross-tabulation of experiences of discrimination by country shows that a higher percentage of Salvadorans report having experienced discrimination than Colombians and Dominicans and




that the differences between the countries are statistically significant (results available upon request).

The differences between Colombians and Dominicans could be

explained in part by reference to their different modes of incorporation. Dominicans migrated in larger numbers, and their pattern of settlement shows a higher degree of residential concentration. Moreover, studies of Dominican

migration show a high density of ethnic-based organizations (Guarnizo, 1994; Grasmuck and Pessar, 1996; Itzigsohn et al., 1999; Pessar, 1995; Torres-Saillant and Hernandez, 1998). These conditions are likely to be a fertile ground for the

emergence of linear ethnicity and linear transnationalism since the country of

origin and its culture is present in the daily life of immigrants. On the other hand, studies of Colombian immigrants in the United

States suggest that the stigma created by the stereotype that relates Colom- bians to the drug trade has created a climate of suspicion and lack of trust within the community that is not conducive to the emergence of dense ethnic organizations (Guarnizo, Sanchez and Roach, 1999; Guarnizo and Diaz, 1999). In these conditions, transnational participation will be more likely an individual decision, and it is reasonable to expect that the level of resources a

person commands is going to have a strong effect on that person's choices. These are tentative explanations that should rather be considered hypotheses for further research. There is indeed a need for more research on the rela-

tionship between the context of reception, mode of incorporation, and

transnational participation. Our analysis, however, indicates that is a promis- ing direction of research.

CONCLUSIONS

We had three goals in this article: to measure the extent of participation in transnational activities; to analyze its determinants; and to explore the rela-

tionship between incorporation and transnationalism. We pursued these

goals through the analysis of survey data on Colombian, Dominican, and Sal- vadoran immigrants. We focused on the field of sociocultural transnational-

ism, that is, the emergence of transnational social practices and institutions that. create a field of sociability and identification among immigrants and

people in the country of origin. In addition, we focused on activities that

belong in the public rather than the private realm, on the emergence of communities without propinquity based on shared cultural understandings of

belonging and mutual obligation. Thus we look at the institutionalization of transnational civic engagement.




The picture that emerges from this study is that the percentage of participation for any particular activity is low. When we look, however, at civic

engagement in transnational practices over all the different forms of transnational participation, the percentages are rather high. Between a third and a half in each of the three cases is involved in some form of sociocultural activ-

ity. The narrow/broad distinction proves useful to understand the structure of the transnational community. As expected, the broader the activities, the

larger the degree of participation. To borrow a phrase that has become pop- ular in the academic literature on civic engagement, relatively important segments of these immigrant communities are not "bowling alone." Not only are they not bowling alone, they are bowling in transnational alleys.

The relationship between transnationalism and incorporation proved to be rather complex. A clear finding from this research is that the process of

incorporation does not weaken transnational participation, at least not in the first generation. Neither citizenship nor time spent in the United States has a negative effect on transnational participation. On the contrary, the results indicate that in some cases the longer the time spent in the United States, the more likely a person is to engage in transnational participation. The process of incorporation can promote transnational participation, depending on the

particular experiences of each group. Furthermore, the analysis shows that there is more than one set of cir-

cumstances that can give rise to transnational sociocultural practices. Our three explanations - linear transnationalism, resource-based transnationalism, and reactive transnationalism - receive support. Each explains participation in transnational activities in one of the cases. We propose that this result can be explained by reference to the context of reception and the mode of incorporation of each group. Salvadorans have the more vulnerable legal position and experience more discrimination, hence the prevalence of reactive transnationalism in this community. Dominicans are characterized by a dense pattern of residential concentration and ethnic organization, hence the

strength of linear transnationalism in this community. Colombians are much less organized and more individually oriented than Dominicans. Their incor-

poration depends on individual class resources, hence the strength of resource dependent transnationalism.

These arguments need to be explored further. They suggest, however, the importance of deepening our understanding of the connection between transnationalism and incorporation. We need to explore whether these pat- terns of determination hold for other fields of transnational activities, in par-




ticular, the political and economic fields. We also need to explore differences between the public and private transnational spaces. Our data indicate that the community public space is mostly a male dominated field of social action. This is not surprising as this is the case with the public space in general in

patriarchal social systems. It is necessary, however, to compare these results with an analysis of private and kinship-based transnational practices. This is

strongly suggested by the puzzling effects of the presence of children abroad. The exploration of the differences in participation in the public and private transnational realms should be complemented with an intensive analysis of

gender differences in transnational participation (Pessar, 2000). All these

comprise a large and dense agenda of further research, but it shows how the

study of different types of transnationalism is important for the understand-

ing of contemporary immigration processes.




APPENDIX TABLE 1 DESCRIPTION INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Variable Description Demographic Variables

Age Age in years Gender Female (coded 0), Male (coded 1) Education No education, 1 to 5 years, 6 to 12 years, 13 to 17 years,

18 to 23 years Marital Status Single

Married or consensual union (reference category) Divorced, widowed, other

Country of origin Colombia (reference category) Dominican Republic El Salvador

Type of interview Whether the respondent was reached through Random sample (coded 0) or Referrals (coded 1)

Number of children Response to the question: How many children do you have? Incorporation Variables

Time in the U.S. Number of years a person has been living in the United States Citizenship American citizens at the time of the interview (coded 1),

Other (coded 0) Linear Trasnationalism Variables

Plans to return At arrival, plans to: Return to the country of origin (Coded 1), Other (Coded 0)

Children in country of origin Whether respondent has at least one child in the country of origin. Coded as a dummy, No child in country of origin (0), at least one child in country of origin (1)

Resource Based Trasnationalism Variables Labor mobility This variable subtracts first occupation in the United States from

current occupation. The sign of the variable indicates upward or downward mobility and the size of the variable indicates the scope of the mobility. Minimum value -3, maximum 3

Current occupation Unemployed/not working Laborers (reference category) Semi-skilled and self-employed Business owners and professionals

Reactive Trasnationalism Variables Index of satisfaction with jobs and opportunities This index is constructed adding the following items:

- Does your current occupation correspond to your education and skill? - Does your current occupation satisfy the aspirations you had when you first arrived to the United States? - Given your education and skill, do you think you have had enough opportunities for success in the United States? Yes=0, no/other= 1, so that the minimum value of the index is 0 and the maximum value is 3.

Experienced discrimination Have you personally felt discrimination in the United States? (Yes=1)

Perception of society and discrimination index Based on the addition to the answers to the following items:

- In the United States there is discrimination in economic opportunities. - The American life-style strengthens the family. - Relations between white Americans and Dominicans are generally distant.




APPENDIX TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) DESCRIPTION INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Variable Description Reactive Trasnationalism Variables

- Relations between white Americans and Dominicans are generally friendly. - Relations between white Americans and Dominicans are generally cold. The possible answers were: strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree. The answers were given values so that the higher the value the more negative the perception of the receiving society. Minimum value 0, maximum 20.



z

0

0 z

0 0 0

C)

C?

q

z

V)

z

0 z

..

APPENDIX TABLE 2 MEAN VALUES/DISTRIBUTION OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES BY COUNTRY AND BY TYPE OF INTERVIEW


Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Demographic Variables

Sample distribution within each national group (%) 51.4 48.6 100.0 70.3 29.7 100.0 62.4 37.6 100.0 62.3 37.7 100.0

Mean Age 42.5 44.1 43.3 41.4 41.7 41.5 38.0 41.1 39.1 40.3 42.2 41.0 % Male 46.3 58.3 52.1 34.4 78.2 47.4 55.9 73.6 62.6 45.4 69.8 54.6 % Female 53.8 41.7 47.9 65.6 21.8 52.6 44.1 26.4 37.4 54.6 30.2 45.4

Years of Education No schooling 0.6 0.7 0.6 2.4 1.7 2.2 8.5 1.1 5.7 4.4 1.1 3.2 1 to 5 years 6.3 2.0 4.2 12.9 5.2 10.7 24.4 7.3 18.0 15.9 4.9 11.7 6 to 12 years 48.1 22.5 35.7 53.1 32.2 47.2 55.6 33.9 47.5 53.5 31.1 45.1 13 to 17 years 36.9 51.7 44.1 23.8 34.8 26.9 10.2 39.0 21.0 21.0 41.3 28.6 18 to 23 years 8.1 23.1 15.4 7.8 26.1 13.0 1.3 18.7 7.8 5.2 21.6 11.4

Marital Status Single 20.0 15.9 18.0 28.9 14.5 24.6 35.9 16.3 28.5 29.8 15.7 24.5 Married/Consensual Union 55.6 58.3 56.9 52.7 68.5 57.4 57.6 70.8 62.6 55.2 66.0 59.3 Divorced/Widowed or other 24.4 25.8 25.1 18.4 16.9 17.9 6.4 12.9 8.9 15.0 18.3 16.2 Mean Number of Children 1.7 1.6 1.7 2.9 2.5 2.8 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.1 2.3

Incorporation Variables Median years in the U.S. 13.0 18.0 15.0 12.5 15.0 13.0 12.0 17.0 13.0 13.6 17.6 15.1 Median years in current city of residence 13.0 18.0 15.0 10.0 12.0 11.0 11.0 15.0 12.0 12.7 16.0 13.9 U.S. citizens (%) 38.4 49.0 43.5 37.6 52.5 41.9 7.9 56.2 26.2 23.5 50.1 33.5

Linear Transnationalism Variables Plan to return to country of origin 56.9 51.7 54.3 44.9 50.8 46.7 65.1 70.2 67.0 55.4 58.7 56.7 Has children in country of origin (%) 24.4 25.8 25.1 36.1 48.4 39.7 41.4 16.3 31.9 35.6 28.3 32.9



z

0 z

APPENDIX TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) MEAN VALUES/DISTRIBUTION OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES BY COUNTRY AND BY TYPE OF INTERVIEW


Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Sample Referral Total Resource Based Transnationalism Variables

% who experienced upward mobility between the first and current occupation in the U.S. 41.3 62.9 51.8 46.6 55.6 49.3 26.4 69.0 42.4 37.5 63.4 52.8

Current occupation in U.S. Not working/ Unemployed 8.7 2.7 5.8 32.3 4.8 24.1 10.9 1.1 7.2 18.8 2.7 18.8 Laborer 38.1 9.3 24.1 36.4 10.5 28.8 63.0 11.2 43.6 47.3 10.4 47.3 Semi, skilled workers/Self employed 24.4 19.2 21.9 16.0 20.2 17.2 21.3 20.8 21.1 19.9 20.1 19.9 Prof./Administrators/Business owner 28.8 68.8 48.2 15.3 64.5 29.9 4.8 66.9 28.1 14.0 66.9 14.0

Reactive Transnationalism Variables: Index of satisfaction with jobs and opportunities 4.3 3.7 4.0 4.5 4.2 4.4 4.7 3.8 4.4 4.6 3.9 4.3

Experienced discrimination 46.9 43.7 45.3 33.3 47.6 37.6 46.8 65.2 53.7 41.5 53.2 45.9 Perceptions of society and discrimination 13.7 13.9 13.8 13.7 14.2 13.9 13.9 13.7 13.8 13.8 13.9 13.8

Total 160 151 311 294 124 418 295 178 473 749 453 1,202



IMMIGRANT INCORPORATION AND SocIocULTURAL TRANSNATIONALISM 795

REFERENCES

Agresti, A. 1996 An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Alba, R. and V. Nee 1997 "Rethinking Assimilation Theory for a New Era of Immigration," International Migra-

tion Review, 31(4):826-874.

Basch, L. G., N. Glick Schiller and C. Szanton-Blanc 1994 Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects, Post-colonial Predicaments, and De-territorial-

ized Nation-States. Langhorne, PA: Gordon and Breach.

Coutin, S. B. 1998 "From Refugees to Immigrants: The Legalization Strategies of Salvadoran Immigrants

and Activists," International Migration Review, 32(4):901-925.

Faist, T. 2000 The Volume and Dynamics of International Migration and Transnational Spaces. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Foner, N. 1997 "What's New about Transnationalism? New York Immigrants Today and at the Turn of

the Century," Diaspora, 6:355-375.

Gans, H. 1997 "Toward a Reconciliation of 'Assimilation' and 'Pluralism': The Interplay of Accultura-

tion and Ethnic Retention," International Migration Review, 31(4):875-892.

1992 "Second Generation Decline: Scenarios for the Economic and Ethnic Futures of the Post-1965 American Immigrants," Ethnic and Racial Studies, 15:173-192.

Glick Schiller, N. 2000 "Transmigrants and Nation-States: Something Old and Something New in the U.S.

Immigrant Experience." In The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience. Ed. C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz and J. DeWind. Russell Sage Foundation. Pp. 94-119.

Glick Schiller, N. and G. Fouron 1999 "Transnational Lives and National Identities" and "Terrains of Blood and Nation: Hait-

ian Transnational Social Fields," Ethnic and Racial Studies, 6:340-366.

1998 "Transnational Lives and National Identities: The Identity Politics of Haitian Immi- grants," Comparative Urban and Community Research, 6:130-161.

Goldring, L. 1998 "The Power of Status in Transnational Social Fields," Comparative Urban and Commu-

nity Research, 6:165-195.

Gordon, M. 1964 Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University Press.

Grasmuck, S. and P. Pessar 1996 "First and Second Generation Settlement of Dominicans in the United States:

1960-1990." In Origins and Destinies: Immigration, Race and Ethnicity in America. Ed. S. Pedraza and R. Rumbaut. Belmont: Watsworth Press.




1991 Between Two Islands: Dominican International Migration. Berkeley: University of Cali- fornia Press.

Guarnizo, L. E. 1998 "The Rise of Transnational Social Formations: Mexican and Dominican State Respons-

es to Transnational Migration," Political Power and Social Theory, 12:45-94.

1994 "Los Dominicanyorks: The Making of a Binational Society," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 533:70-86.

Guarnizo, L. E., A. Ignacio Sanchez and E. M. Roach 1999 "Mistrust, Fragmented Solidarity and Transnational Migration: Colombians in New

York City and Los Angeles," Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22:367-396.

Guarnizo, L. and L. M. Dfaz 1999 "Transnational Migration: A View from Colombia," Ethnic and Racial Studies,

22:397-421.

Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) 1999 The Triennial Comprehensive Report on Immigration. U.S. Department of Justice, Immi-

gration and Naturalization Service and U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Interna- tional Labor Affairs.

1998 Statistical Yearbook. <www. ins. usdol.gov/graphics/aboutins/statistics/1998yb.pdf>

Itzigsohn, J. 2000 "Immigration and the Boundaries of Citizenship: The Institutions of Immigrants' Polit-

ical Transnationalism," International Migration Review, 34(4):1126-1154.

1995 "Migrant Remittances, Labor Markets, and Household Strategies: A Comparative Analysis of Low-Income Household Strategies in the Caribbean Basin," Social Forces, 74(2):633-657.

Itzigsohn, J., C. D. Cabral, E. H. Medina and O. Vazquez 1999 "Mapping Dominican Transnationalism: Narrow and Broad Transnational Practices,"

Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22:316-339.

Karpathakis, A. 1999 "Home Society Politics and Immigrant Political Incorporation: The Case of Greek

Immigrants in New York City," International Migration Review, 33(1):55-78. Kish, L. 1965 Survey Sampling. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kyle, D. 1999 "The Otavalo Trade Diaspora: Social Capital and Transnational Entrepreneurship,"

Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22:422-446.

Laguerre, M. S. 1999 "State, Diaspora, and Transnational Politics: Haiti Reconceptualised," Millennium:

Journal ofInternational Studies, 28(3):633-651. Landolt, P., L. Autler and S. Baires 1999 "From Hermano Lejano to Hermano Mayor: The Dialectics of Salvadoran Transna-

tionalism," Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22:290-315;




Levitt, P. J. 1998 "Social Remittances: Migration-Driven, Local-Level Forms of Cultural Diffusion,"

International Migration Review, 32(4):926-948.

1997 "Transnationalizing Community Development: The Case of Migration between Boston and the Dominican Republic," Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26(4):509-526.

Mahler, S. J. 1995 American Dreamin: Immigrant Life on the Margin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University

Press.

McCullagh, P. and J. Nelder 1989 Generalized Linear Models. London and New York: Chapman and Hall.

Perlmann, J. and R. Waldinger 1997 "Second Generation Decline? Children of Immigrants, Past and Present - A Reconsid-

eration," International Migration Review, 31(4):893-922. Pessar, P. R. 2000 "The Role of Gender, Households, and Social Networks in the Migration Process: A

Review and Appraisal." In The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience. Ed. C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz and J. DeWind. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Pp. 53-70.

1995 A Visa for a Dream: Dominicans in the United States. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Portes, A. 2000 "Immigration Theory for a New Century: Some Problems and Opportunities." In The

Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience. Ed. C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz and J. DeWind. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Pp. 21-33.

1999 "Conclusions: Toward a New World - The Origins and Effects of Transnational Activ- ities," Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2):464-477.

1996 "Transnational Communities: Their Emergence and Significance in the Contemporary World System." In Latin America in the World Economy. Ed. R. P. Korzeniewicz and W. C. Smith. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Pp. 151-168.

Portes, A. and L. E. Guarnizo 1991 "Tropical Capitalists: U.S. Bound Immigration and Small Enterprise Development in

the Dominican Republic." In Migration, Remittances, and Small Business Development: Mexico and Caribbean Basin Countries. Ed. S. Diaz-Briquets and S. Weintraub. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Pp. 101-131.

Portes, A., L. E. Guarnizo and P. Landolt 1999 "Introduction: Pitfalls and Promise of an Emergent Research Field," Ethnic and Racial

Studies, 22(2):217-237.

Portes, A. and R. Rumbaut 1996 Immigrant America: A Portrait (second edition). Berkeley, CA: University of California

Press.




Repak, T. 1995 Waiting on Washington: Central American Workers in the Nation's Capital. Philadelphia,

PA: Temple University Press.

Roberts, B., R. Frank and E Lozano-Ascencio 1999 "Transnational Migrant Communities and Mexican Migration," Ethnic and Racial

Studies, 22:238-266.

Smith, R.C. 1998 "Transnational Localities: Community, Technology, and the Politics of Membership

within the Context of Mexico and U.S. Migration," Contemporary Urban and Commu- nity Research, 6:196-238.

Tambiah, S. 2000 "Transnational Movements, Diaspora, and Multiple Modernities," Daedalus,

129(1):163-194. Torres-Saillant, S. and R. Hernandez 1998 The Dominican Americans. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Vertovec, S. 1999 "Conceiving and Researching Transnationalism," Ethnic and Racial Studies,

22:347-462.



Iztigsohnn Inmigrant incorporation.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Iztigsohnn Inmigrant incorporation.pdf