Migration affects people’s lives on multiple levels, including financial, economic, and social ones, to name just a few. The political effect of migration might seem to be unnoticeable at first, yet it reveals unexpected depth on closer scrutiny. When assessing political effects of immigration, one will have to acknowledge the intrinsic connection between political, social, and economic changes. Whenever a political shift occurs, it immediately sends ripples across the community, altering its economic and social perspectives accordingly. Likewise, immigration affects communities on a sociopolitical level, causing vast changes. In his paper, Castles (2010) explains that the social changes are to be taken into consideration when evaluating the effects of immigration. For instance, the author emphasizes that the general theory of migration needs to be connected to the social ones in order to explain the key alterations that immigration causes.
Simultaneously, Castles (2010) connects the sociocultural impact of immigration to the economic one, indicating that the phenomenon in question affects the economy of the state. Particularly, the author posits that the increase in the amount of labor force that immigration entails leads to the improved performance of local companies, hence the rise in GDP rates and the overall increase in the economic performance (2010). Therefore, the interconnectedness of political, economic, and sociocultural effects that immigration cause within the fabric of a specific state and its sociopolitical environment becomes a crucial factor to consider.
In addition, the fact that Castles challenges the traditional idea of migration being perceived as a problem is worth considering as an innovative suggestion. Indeed, although migration is often caused by the problems faced by migrants in their home state, it also implies new opportunities for the specified population. In addition, the community that welcomes immigrants also receives significant support in the form of new resources. Namely, when being integrated into the local community, immigrants contribute to the economic and sociocultural development thereof, as Castles (2010) explains. Consequently, it is essential to consider socio political and economic consequences of migration as a combination of effects that have a reciprocal effect on one another. Otherwise, the assessment of the impact that immigration produces will be incomplete, at best, and erroneous, at worst.
Another important contribution to the understanding of the political impact of immigration has been provided by Kapur (2014). Remarkably, Kapur (2014) emphasizes the role of the concept known as temporality in the development of political changes caused by immigration. According to the author, the notion of temporality, specifically, its aspects, including “duration, acceleration, and timing,” shape the attitudes toward the very idea of a citizen’s political identity (Kapur, 2014, p. 45). Therefore, the political impact of immigration includes changing not only the environment into which diversity is introduced but also the internal perspective of community members. Namely, the process of self-identification and the development of the sense of political identity undergo numerous iterations as the level of immigration increases.
In a broader sense, the observed phenomenon of the political identity being changed by the increase in migration levels leads to a vast change within the political setting of the target state. As Kapur (2014) explains, the specified example should not be deemed as entirely positive or negative but, instead, needs to be treated as a neutral one. By referring to the colonization of America and the immigration of European citizens into it, Kapur (2014) provides a very accurate example of how the rise in immigration shapes the political identity in a rather unpredictable way. Namely, Kapur (2014) emphasizes that the changes experienced by European settlers could be defined as the loss of a political identity rather than its evolution. Kapur (2014) uses this example to prove that the increase in immigration rates also may entail the consequences such as the loss of a political identity and the development of an entirely new one that will substitute the one that has been abandoned. The described change, according to Kapur (2014), also challenges the institutional norms previously accepted by the target demographic. Specifically, the need to centralize power could be the reason for the development of authoritarian tendencies when forming the state (Kapur, 2014). Therefore, the increase in immigration does not necessarily cause a positive outcome with a rise in diversity and the creation of new opportunities for multicultural communication.
At the same time, it is important to bear in mind the historical perspective that Kapur adopts. In the context of the modern socio political environment, where colonialist moods are typically frowned upon and generally condemned, the rise in imperialism as a result of immigration is barely a possibility. Thus, Kapur’s (2014) paper in the sociopolitical effects of immigration and especially the loss of a political identity could be seen as crucial in understanding the struggle of migrants, yet the colonialist tendencies do not seem to be applicable to the present-day demographic represented by migrants. Instead, the threat of losing a political identity in the specified demographic may pose a threat to their own well-being and safety due to the economic, political, and cultural challenges that the specified population typically suffers.
Addressing the issue of conflict as a possible outcome of immigration, one may also need to expand the analysis beyond the sociocultural impact of the subject matter and consider the environmental factors as well. In their recent research, Abel, Brottrager, Cuaresmac, and Muttarak (2019) address the effects that environmental pressures have on the rise in immigration rates. In addition, the authors outline the effects of immigration on the lives of those migrating and the communities that welcome them. According to the results of the research, the environmental changes have a direct effect on changes in migration trends (Abel et al., 2019). Notably, the authors interpret the concept of climate as a combination of sociopolitical, socioeconomic, and environmental factors. Thus, the ideas that Abel et al. (2019) purport circle back to the argument made by Castles (2010), who insists on the intrinsic connection between political, economic, and social factors facilitating immigration, as well as the outcomes that follow it.
However, in their argument concerning the prerequisites for and outcomes of immigration, Abel et al. (2019) add the factor of climate to the chain of factors that facilitate immigration. Specifically, the authors prove that the combination of hostile climate and strenuous political environment compels citizens to flee. The research posits that environmental changes affect the intention to immigrate directly, especially in the communities that can be described as mostly agricultural (Abel et al., 2019). Indeed, with changes in the environment, the threat of a drop in the number and quality of crops increases, leading to the development of an economic crisis within a state (Abel et al., 2019). Hypothesizing about the mot drastic outcomes, one may conclude that environmental changes may ultimately result in famine unless citizens decide to immigrate. Therefore, the role of thee environment in increased immigration is not to be underestimated. In the context of the political aspect of immigration, changes in the environment might seem as irrelevant, yet Abel et al. (2019) manage to connect them in a string of logical arguments. Additionally, the research points to the presence of the military conflict as one of the possible factors in shaping the political perspective of migrants, as well as the population that receives immigrants into the community.
Although each of the articles mentioned above deals with a unique aspect of migration and its connection to political changes, all of them point to the necessity to consider a multifaceted, intersectional analysis of the effects that immigration causes, a sell as the factors by which it is defined. For instance, Abel et al. (2019) draws a rather unusual parallel between environmental factors and political ones. Namely, Abel et al. (2019) states that the environmental perspective allows understanding how climate change restricts economic opportunities of agricultural communities, thus inciting confrontations that lead to the necessity to immigrate. In turn, sociocultural factors defining migration and occurring as a result of it, as Castles (2010) explains, are crucial to developing an understanding of how migration shapes the political environment and the political agenda within a community. Finally, Kapur (2014) posits that immigration alters people’s political identity and contributes to its evolution, yet also creates multiple grounds for conflicts and military confrontations that may possibly result in a genocide, as seen in the example of colonizing North America. Thus, the three studies in question have provided an important insight into the political changes that migration causes.
Reference List
Abel, G. J., Brottrager, M., Cuaresma, J. C., & Muttarak, R. (2019) Climate, conflict and forced migration. Global Environmental Change, 54, pp. 239-249.
Castles, S. (2010) ‘Understanding global migration: a social transformation perspective’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(10), pp. 1565-1586.
Kapur, D. (2014) ‘Political effects of international migration’, Annual Review of Political Science, 17, pp. 479-502.