diaspora engagement
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

108
(FIVE YEARS 53)

H-INDEX

6
(FIVE YEARS 3)

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-187
Author(s):  
Dr. Fahad Khan Afridi ◽  
Dr. Muhammad Asif ◽  
Dr. Rashda Qazi ◽  
Dr. Waleed Afridi

The research aims to assess the effect of CPEC on reversing the brain drain of Pakistan’s human capital. The research study is based on secondary data by using research articles, economic surveys, Bureau of Immigration and Overseas Employment etc. CPEC being a multibillion-dollar “Game Changer” can enhance the socio-commerce dimensions by reversing the brain drain of human capital of the country. It can only be possible by devising a viable strategic plan by the government for “Diaspora engagement policies”. The local and overseas Pakistanis should be involved in the projects only through their mobilization and engagement just like China and India did. Although, the present research article gives an insight to socio-economic impact of CPEC on Pakistan.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0308518X2110453
Author(s):  
Gisela P Zapata

Although the debate on the migration–remittances–development nexus in Latin America has advanced considerably in recent years, the literature has yet to analyse the socio-political implications of the process of Financialisation of Remittances (FOR) in the region. This paper sheds light on the relationship between the FOR and diaspora engagement policies in Colombia, thus contributing to a growing body of critical analyses on diasporas as agents of development and processes of financialisation beyond the global north. Since the turn of this century, Colombian governments have invested in consolidating part of the state apparatus to capture and maintain the diaspora and their resources connected to the motherland. The paper uses a case study approach centred on a systematic examination of the political–institutional apparatus developed to engage the diaspora and financialise remittances in Colombia over the past 20 years, incorporating a temporal and historical perspective of the triad migration–development–financialisation trends at the national level. It argues that the FOR is a centrepiece of the state's broader strategy for the symbolic and material redefinition of (transnational) membership, in which both, embracing – by extending social and political rights – and tapping – into migrant households’ connections to global circuits of capital and finance – elements co-exist This case is illustrative of how a growing number of states are adopting models of diaspora engagement that, on the one hand, feed into the dominant financialised model of development; and on the other, serve as an instrumental strategy in the emerging architecture of the global governance of migration.


2021 ◽  

In 2020, according to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 281 million individuals, or 3.5 percent of the world’s population, live outside their country of origin. Some of them, in addition to native-born individuals who identify with their ancestors’ country of origin, are among the members of what is commonly conceptualized as diasporas, dispersed people outside a homeland. Scholars define diasporas in multiple ways, emphasizing more dynamic conceptions or fixed belonging (Diaspora Definitions). Diasporas have gained increased importance, both in academia and among policymakers. Relevant institutional and policy changes related to diaspora politics include the fact that dual citizenship toleration has grown cross-nationally as has the number of countries that allow overseas voting. What happens after individuals choose to or are forced to exit their homeland, following Albert Hirschman’s famous conceptualization? To what extent do political and other ties matter across national boundaries (Political Transnationalism) and, in turn, how do states manage their relations with members of the national community abroad (Country of Origin’s Diaspora Engagement)? In what ways are state–diaspora relations different for authoritarian states than for liberal democracies, and are diasporas democratizers (General Works; Authoritarianism and Extraterritorial Repression)? Why do some states tolerate dual citizenship while others do not (Dual Citizenship)? Turning to other facets of relations between countries and their diasporas—in matters of homeland conflicts, do actions of diasporas increase or decrease the likelihood of conflict, and what is their role in post-conflict resolution and development (Diasporas and Conflict)? How have debates evolved since scholars across a range of disciplines established the foundations of transnationalism in the early 1990s (Political Transnationalism)? Ethnic interest groups have influenced foreign policy (Diasporas, Foreign Policy and International Relations) in both host and home states, and diasporas’ growing role in diplomacy has been reflected in the emerging subfield of diaspora diplomacy. In an effort to answer the questions posed by this diaspora activity, scholars have made a plethora of contributions in the last three decades. This article gives an up-to-date overview of the academic literature addressing the role of diasporas in political science, beginning with General Works that present an overview of the state of the field, and proceeding to address these categories of knowledge creation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-82
Author(s):  
Timothy C. Lim ◽  
Changzoo Song

This article endeavors to explain South Korea’s institutional turn to “diaspora engagement,” which began in earnest in the late 1990s. This shift can easily be attributed to instrumentalist calculations on the part of the South Korean state, i.e., as an effort to “tap into” or exploit the human and capital resources of ethnic Koreans living outside of the country. But instrumental calculations and interests, while significant and clearly proximate, were not the only nor necessarily the most important (causal) factors at play. Using a discursive institutional and microfoundational approach, we argue that underlying the institutional shift to diaspora engagement, was both an intentional and unintentional reframing of the Korean diaspora as “brethren” and “national assets,” a powerful discursive combination. This reframing did not come about automatically but was instead pushed forward by sentient or discursive agents, including Chŏng Chu-yŏng (the founder of Hyundai) and Yi Kwang-gyu, who was a Seoul National University professor and later the third president of the Overseas Koreans Foundation. Journalists, religious leaders and other activists within South Korea’s NGO community, as well as ethnic Koreans themselves, also played key roles as discursive agents in this reframing process. Central to our discursive institutional and microfoundational approach is the assertion that ideas and discourse were key causal factors in the institutional shift to South Korea’s engagement with the Korean diaspora.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document