To evaluate this question, the global dimensions of social networks and the economic incorporation of immigrants need to be consider here.
Diaspora entrepreneurship refers to the development of businesses by immigrants who are in a position to take advantage of diaspora policies and organizations set in place by countries that are attempting to promote such entrepreneurship on the part of their nationals living abroad.
This kind of economic development relies mostly on organizational ties between migrants and the governments, institutions, and agencies that are promoting it. And its effects are much more global or transnational in nature when compared with the commonly cited local effects of ethnic economies (Calavita, Kitty. 2005).
Diaspora entrepreneurs can serve as a conduit for organizational ties between their home countries and countries of immigration. Though not always successful or effective, diaspora entrepreneurship has had a significant impact on development in much the same way as have remittances.
In contrast to diaspora entrepreneurship, remittance economies are constituted largely by financial exchange between migrants and their interpersonal ties to family, friends, and community.
Transnational social networks are comprised of people who essentially live dual lives by speaking more than one language, having homes in two or more countries, or making a living through regular contact across borders. Transnational activities can be economic, political, or social, and they depend on both interpersonal and organizational types of ties.
Additionally, transnational managerial elites who shuttle back and forth between global cities as intercompany transferees have also become more prominent in recent years, as have cases of ordinary immigrants who make repeated trips back to their homelands for social purposes, such as for religious pilgrimages (Richard J. Barnet and Ronald E Müller 1975).
Transnationalism facilitates the development and the transfer of remittances to migrant’s home countries, and all transnational activities rely fundamentally on migrant networks and the exchange of goods and resources between social ties (Herbert Hymer.et al. 1979).
Although migrant social networks clearly hold many benefits, they can also work to disadvantage immigrants by allowing for cultural isolation, limiting their opportunities to ethnic resources, or prompting labour market exploitation.
But there are other policy areas that have not yet benefited from close examination of migrants’ social networks and how they impact migration processes (World Bank. 2011).
Immigration is another high interest policy area for many countries, and one in which the influence of social networks might also be considered. Many policymakers have relied purely on economic and legal explanations when speaking in terms of migration flows, believing that immigration is simply a function of supply and demand and that adequate control and legal categorization can successfully regulate the number of immigrant admissions into a country (World Bank. 2011).
In the future, policymakers might do well to focus more on the effects social networks can have on migration flows and the incorporation of immigrants into economies and societies.
Calavita, Kitty. (2005) Immigrants at the Margins: Law, Race, and Social Exclusion in Southern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Herbert Hymer.et al. (1979) The multinational corporation: a radical approach; International business enterprises; Multinational companies: Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
Richard J. Barnet and Ronald E Müller (1975) Global reach: the power of the multinational corporations; International business enterprises; Political aspects; Multinational companies Political aspects: London; Cape.
World Bank. 2011. Migration and Remittances Fact book. Available online
By Alex NT374@live.mdx.ac.uk