ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

Culture Change (SOAN 808)

Article Reviewed on

A critical review of Curran, R. and Saguy, C. 2001. “Migration and Cultural Change: A Role for
Gender and Social Networks?” Journal of International Women’s Studies, 2(3), 54–77.

To Guday Emirie (PhD)

By Tilaye Zelealem Berhanu GSR/2340/15

Email: tilayezelealem40@gmail.com
 July, 2023

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

A critical review of Curran, R. and Saguy, C. 2001. “Migration and Cultural Change: A
Role for Gender and Social Networks?” Journal of International Women’s Studies,
2(3), 54–77.

Historical context
Curran and Saguy (2001) conducted a study on “Migration and Cultural Change: A Role for
Gender and Social Networks?” The link between culture dynamics, gender and social network is
a focus of recent research on migration. Culture is an essential component for understanding the
meaning given to individuals (gender), their actions (migration), and their relationships (network
ties) (p. 54). Different people have defined migration in different ways. However, the majority of
scholars tend to agree upon defining it as a permanent and semi-permanent change of residence.
It has both international and internal realms.

The article provides a brief synthesis of the available knowledge on migration through a
sociological cultural lens. Therefore, there are certain allocated reviews that argue diverse
perspectives on culture, gender, migration, remittance behavior and network ties in relation to
particular author’s empirical research. As such, Curran's and Saguy's (2001) article review is
divided into three parts. Part I: gender and migration literature covers “micro perspective” on
how women and men’s migration experiences differ, how the household mediates between
macro-economic structure and individuals, and how cultural expectations associated with gender
are both reproduced and transformed within the household (p. 58). Part II: Migration and
networks that summarizes the interaction between migrant and non-migrant networks in the
migration process how social norms and gender roles, social ties, gendered divisions of labor,
gender hierarchies and power relations come together to shape the way that migrant networks
operate for men and women, and further shape patterns and outcomes of migration in different
contexts (pp. 58–62).

Part III: Culture, gender, networks and migration covers the role of culture in a network theory
of migration, theorized as a "socially embedded" (Portes and Sensenbrenner, 1993) and “circular
and cumulatively caused” (Massey, 1990) process. So Curran and Saguy consider two ways that
culture enters this formulation. The first is through notions of relative deprivation (Stark, 1991)
and the second is through networks of obligation. The derivative expectations about the
consequences of migration assume that relative deprivation and networks of obligation link
individuals and communities across time and space. They discuss how the cultural meanings of
gender differentially affect the impact of relative deprivation and networks of obligation upon
migration processes, and they proceed to how structural changes in places of origin and
destination driven by different cultural meanings of gender, resulting in different networks and
migration outcomes (pp. 60–65).

Key questions/problems
Curran's and Saguy's article is an impassioned commentary research aimed to address a number
of questions raise on migration, gender and remittance a distinct, disparate behaviors and
practices, and the need for a more complete theory of migration to incorporate notions of
network ties with cultural dynamics as related to behavior and societal outcomes (p.54). Then the
authors raise questions and highlights systematic literature reviews that bring together the
various different dimensions of gender, migration, network ties and culture dynamics.

Their contribution to the need for a more complete theory of migration is not just an additive one
to previous theories but also suggest that migration theories, to be more complete, must consider
the meaning of the ties binding individuals within a network and the motivations for forming
network ties (p. 71) (the debates related to migrant network theory). Therefore, their discussion
centers on a number of potential problems to explore migration, gender, and remittances
behavior in the context of network ties. From both economic and non-economic perspectives,
gender differences in the link between migration and remittances behavior suggest difference.
For example, evidence from the Dominican-U.S migrants and Thailand rural–urban migrants
show distinct savings and remittance behaviors (p.55).

In the 21th century, social position (gender role and structure) is in the changing process (crisis).
Then, crises have the potential to alter gender relations at both the household and societal levels
(Peteet, 1991: pp. 18–20). Hence, social network plays an important role in the changing process
of gender role, social capital, structuring of identity formation as well as change has potential
impact upon the way resources are distributed within a society. Therefore, network ties emerged
as central determinants of migration, or increasing attention is being paid to it and the diffusion
of information and the role these factors play in determining migration patterns (Massey and
Espinosa, 1997: P. 952; Winters, de Janvry et al. 2001: P. 159). This implies that in migration
and social tie context, migrants and non-migrants are linked through networks of obligation and
shared understandings of kinship and friendship. Just as potential migrants expect kin or friends,
who have already migrated, to assist them, so households of origin expect migrants to “help out”
financially, by remitting a portion of their salary (Curran and Saguy, 2001: p. 60). Hence,
household’s decision to send migrants is based on information the household has on the expected
returns and the costs of migration. Indeed, information on migration flows from both family
migrant networks and community migrant networks (Winters, de Janvry et al. 1999: P. 2).
Because of these expectations, households encourage select family members to migrate.
Moreover, as dense social networks reduce the risks of migration, households use migration to
“diversify” economic risk.

Objectives of the Study

The major aim of the article is to advance an understanding of migration processes as part of
broader social change/cultural dynamics through the following specific objective:

 To incorporate a more complete theory of migration to the notions of cultural dynamics

relate to behavior and societal outcomes.
 To demonstrate gender and social networks are essential elements for understanding
migration and culture dynamics (refers to international, internal, permanent, and
temporary migration).
 To provide insights on how inequality is exacerbated or redressed through migration.
 To examine how varying gender identity, household relations, and the role of networks in
different contexts might be related to understand migration processes

Research Methods
Curran’s and Saguy’s (2001) methodology is focusing on network ties in the migration process.
Their study is an empirical paper which focuses on qualitative approach. It is more of
interpretive rather than demonstrating a quantifiable research investigation. It centers on “social
network ties” and its effect using qualitative methods in order to understand migration behavior.
This means that the research method is not grounded on quantitative data. Curran and Saguy
evaluate meanings people used to make sense of migration, gender role, social networks and
social position from primary and secondary data (in and out of their community) that is crucial in
understanding their behaviors (origin and destination of transnational behavior).

Therefore, they use the qualitative approach to interpret migration, gender and network ties. This
helps them to gain deeper insights on migration and culture change issues to interpret gender
role, identity, social networks, power structure and relation. Accordingly, they used primary and
secondary data from Thailand, and secondary data from Latin America and the Caribbean
migrant experiences. Also, their primary data collected through fieldwork, observation and
interview (semi structured and focus group interview). There is the voice of informants in their
article (pp. 65–68). Their secondary data has got from previous field notes and interview that
complied from other cultures (different countries).

Conceptual and Theoretical frameworks

In this article, Curran and Saguy raise some theoretical and conceptual frameworks regarding the
nature and role of migration and culture change. As such, Curran and Saguy reviewed the
empirical work on culture, gender, social networks and migration. Questions about where people
migrate, their reasons for migration, the pace at which they travel, the ways their lives change as
a result of their travels, and how their original communities change all are addressed within this
conceptual framework. Therefore, they conceptualize gender, identity, remittance behavior,
power relation, power structure, household relations, and the role of network ties in relation to
migration and culture change.

First, they conceptualize gender and migration from different literatures and backgrounds. Thus,
gender and migration literature reveals how women’s and men’s migration experiences differ,
how the household mediates between macro-economic structure and individuals, and how
cultural expectations associated with gender are both reproduced and transformed within the
household. For instance, a review of the migration literature by Massey (1990, pp. 60–65) is
useful for Curran and Saguy to understand how patterns of migration and networks can catalyze
large, national and international patterns of social change. Second, they conceptualize migration
into networks and networks of obligation that links individuals and household relations with time
and space to its migration process, migration outcomes and culture change. Finally, their overall
conceptualization presents notable theoretical frameworks to explain the interrelationships
between culture, gender, networks and migration. Therefore, these concepts have clear
implications to operationalization and theoretical backgrounds to contextualise in important
ways.

In terms of theoretical model, Curran and Saguy (2001) raise some theoretical frameworks
regarding the nature and role of migration and culture change. They summarize theories and its
insights for migration and social change in some detail. Its key insight is that network ties serve
to link individual and household decisions to larger social structures and have a cumulative effect
over space and time (p. 59). They focus upon how networks of obligation link individuals (both
migrating and non-migrating), relative deprivation motivates migration, and trust structures the
content and formation of migrant network ties.

They are clearly articulated the theoretical model being used in their study. Their contribution is
not just an additive one to previous theories. They also suggest that migration theories, to be
more complete, must consider the meaning of the ties binding individuals within a network and
the motivations for forming network ties (p. 71). They used theories of migration, development,
and networks, advanced most convincingly by Portes and Sensenbrenner (1993) “social
embeddedness”, which macro cultural and economic influences work through networks to affect
individual behavior (to understand immigrants overall behavior in their destination). Hence,
social actions are embedded in both social structure and culture. Based on “social
embeddedness” (p.1346),

Curran and Saguy (2001) argue that networks (interpersonal interactions) are not only powerful
channels for instrumental information but that they also transmit values and cultural perceptions.
Thus, societal norms, values, beliefs, and practices are reproduced and transformed within
interpersonal interactions (social networks). A central aspect of the social networks approach,
then, is its emphasis on the networks that connect individuals across time and space. This is why
it is so well suited to the study of migration. As such, social networks most commonly involved
in the migration process are labor, personal (family) and illegal migrant networks.

In a similar way, Curran and Saguy use Massey’s (1990) sophisticated theory of networks
“circular and cumulative causation” and the concept of “relative deprivation” to link individual
experiences with societal structures (to understand migrants overall behavior from their origin).
Cumulative causation offers one obvious direction to explore, both because it is widely
integrated in theories of gender and migration, and because it describes a dynamic process (pp.5–
7). Also, Massey uses the concept of relative deprivation to designate strong desire for material
goods, accompanied by a sense of entitlement, stemming from the realization that one’s peers
possess these goods. The theory of migration networks, proposed by Massey (1990) allows
describing the mechanism of internal dynamics of migration processes, explaining the formation
of links between countries of destination of migrants and countries of origin at the individual kin
level. When a certain number of migrants have already settled in the destination country, they
begin to use economic benefit and the forces of social interaction based on kinship or ethnic
proximity (pp. 13–26). Moreover, Curran and Saguy use Stark’s (1991) “relative deprivation”
that presumes a sense of individuality, the capacity to evaluate one’s own fortune against others,
and a sense of which people are comparable to one another (feelings of relative deprivation
involve contrasting habitual lifestyles at the place of origin with new ones at the place of
destination and coming to desire the latter) (p. 125).

Subsequently, these theories and frameworks accommodate and provide a complete perspective
on migration theories in addition considering the meaning of the ties binding individuals within a
network and the motivations for forming network ties. Because, Curran and Saguy (2001) in
their article review indicate that “recent research on migration, gender and remittances shows
distinct and disparate behaviors and practices that raise a number of questions and suggest the
need for a more complete theory of migration that incorporates notions of cultural dynamics as
they relate to behavior and societal outcomes”(p. 54). Then, these compelling theories have
broad implications for social and cultural changes; this implies that multiple theories give
varying perspectives on the same issue across time and space.

Therefore, Curran and Saguy are using these integrated theoretical frameworks through the
analysis of earlier and more contemporary theories and these frameworks sought to address this
gap. Even integration theory became more applicable by the emergence and/or expansion of the
migration and culture change. For example, these integrated theoretical frameworks (migration
and social network theory) indicate essential instruments in migration process and outcomes that
generates thrust and cause the increase of migration over time. They also show how patterns of
migration and networks transform internal economies, for instance, when remittances result in
greater inequality in the community of origin (Massey and Garcia; 1987: p. 734). Finally and
most importantly, they show how social structures and individual positions within structures
(social capital and embeddedness), such as migrant enclaves, can influence individual identity
and behavior (for better or worse) (Portes and Sensenbrenner 1993).

Summary and Critical remarks

It is qualitative and presents interpretive approach for analysis. The article suggests that
migration theories, to be more complete also bind with network ties to get new insights on
migration processes and outcomes. Thus, migration theory to be more complete Curran and
Saguy integrate migration theory with network ties to get new insights on gender, migration and
culture dynamics in migration process.

This helps to conceptualize migrants and non-migrants behavior on migration and culture change
in the context of gender, identity, power relation, remittance, social network and social
obligation with community, family and individuals in time and space notions. Also, their study is
a conceptual piece that provides a complete theory (social network ties with migration theory) to
understand migration process and outcomes. Therefore, through several illustrative examples,
they present arguments based on empirical evidence how gender, migration process, migration
outcomes, power relation, social networks/obligation and remittances behavior to address
essential elements for considering ‘migration and cultural changes’.

Curran’s and Saguy’s (2001) paper is important (Strength) for several reasons because it
highlights the role of gender and social network ties in migration process and outcomes to
influence culture change. First, they provide an outstanding review of the research on migration
process and outcomes including conceptualization, analysis of key findings, critique of
interpretation used in their studies, and methods used to analyze and interpret migration and
culture change. Second, they introduce migrants’ (men and women) distinctive insight behavior
in migration process and outcomes. For example, understanding of men and women migrants’
behavior does not always reflect objective value demand (material possession) but it can be
personal value demand (social position), especially in their social environment. Third, they
construct validity of culture, gender, and migration into network ties and networks of obligation
to link individuals (gender) with time and space in migration process, outcomes and culture
change. Therefore, migrants have moral obligation and character in mind when they deciding
migration. This is supported by Curran’s and Saguy’s extensive review of research findings and
demonstrates that (1) migrants’ post styles are more governed by network and social obligation,
(2) gender role and migration varies depending on their social position, and (3) migrants are
significantly differ in their decision to migrate or to return into their origin. Fourth, they provide
an in-depth review using some theoretical frameworks regarding the nature and role of gender,
migration and culture change. These theories (migration theory and network ties) accommodate
and provide a comprehensive understanding on migrants’ and non-migrants’ behavior in culture
change. Fifth, methodologically, the voices of informants (primary data) are included in their
article review.

However, evaluates critically the whole of the paper, there is also limitation (weakness) to be
further improvement. First, their ethnographic method to data collection does not mention the
exact local study area (specific local area) in Thailand. Second, their conceptual framework
‘migrant network, obligation and its effect’ focuses on “horizontal relationships” between
migrants and non-migrants. This implies narrow view to different types of migrant networks.
Hence, it does not allow for an accurate assessment to different types of migrant network ties
with government, employers, labour and other agents involved in the origin and destination of
migratory flows. Third, in migration process and outcomes, network members do not occupy
equal positions of power because migrants can be exploited by actors within their own network
as a result of their gender, age, and identity so that more in-depth analyses of the dynamics and
inequalities within networks are needed (Hellermann, 2006: p. 1135). Fourth, in their article,
‘network’ refers to situations where network ties that are seen to excite migration. However,
individual may be migrated independent from network ties. Therefore, network behavior and its
effect on (horizontal relationship) individual migration becomes in question mark. Fifth,
relatively, Curran and Saguy focusing on network approaches in migration process and outcomes
reduce the quality of their research because, if migrations solely depend on network chains,
immigrants would continuously migrate to the areas where networks are previously recognized.
Six, although men and women are migrated, no evidence is mentioned who show passive
resistance to change. Seven, this article also failed to demonstrate who have generally borne the
brunt of its destructive effects on cultural dynamics caught between two opposing forces:
between a practical pressure to change, and a moral (male and female) pressure not to change.
Eight, the conceptual framework lacks in use to analysis women’s issues to incorporate the
sevens roles women play in life and work: parental, conjugal, domestic, kin, occupational,
community and self-actualizing individual in relation to migration process and outcomes.
Reference.
Curran, R. and Saguy, C. 2001. “Migration and Cultural Change: A Role for Gender and Social
Networks?” Journal of International Women’s Studies, 2(3), 54–77.
Hellermann, C. (2006), Migrating alone: Tackling social capital? Women from Eastern Europe
in Portugal, Ethnic and Racial Studies 29 (6): 1135-1152.
Massey, D. (1990). Social Structure, Household Strategies, and the Cumulative Causation of
Migration. Population Index 56(1):3-26.
Massey, D. (1990). The Social and Economic Origins of Immigration. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 510, World Population: Approaching the Year
2000. (Jul., 1990), pp. 60-72.
Massey, D. and Garcia, E. (1987). The Social Process of International Migration. Science
237(4816): 733-738.
Massey, D. and Espinosa, E (1997). What's driving Mexico-US migration? A theoretical,
empirical, and policy analysis. American Journal of Sociology 102(4): 939-999.
Peteet, J. M. (1991). Gender in crisis: women and the Palestinian resistance movement. New
York, Columbia University Press.
Portes, A. and Sensenbrenner, J. (1993). Embeddedness and Immigration: Notes on the Social
Determinants of Economic Action1. American Journal of Sociology 98(6):1320-1350.
Stark, O. (1991). The Migration of Labor. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
Winters, P., A. de Janvry, et al. (2001). Family and community networks in Mexico-US
migration. Journal of Human Resources 36(1): 159-184.
Winters, P., A. de Janvry, et al. (1999). Family and community networks in Mexico-US
migration. Graduate School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, No. 99-12 – August 1999.