Adaptation for all? An intersectional and multidimensional perspective on translocal social resilience uncovers differentiated migration outcomes

Abstract

Despite a growing interest in migration-as-adaptation, the understanding of how, for whom, and under what conditions migration contributes to adaptation is still limited, and important aspects remain understudied: First, research often remains focused on “climate migrants” and migration as a reaction to climate risks, while neglecting the connected nature of vulnerabilities. Second, although there is increasing research on migration destinations, integrative assessments of both places of origin and destinations are rare. And third, studies of migration-as-adaptation often conflate migration outcomes in one or more dimensions of social scale, space or intersectional difference. To overcome these limitations, we employ the theoretical framework of Translocal Social Resilience, adding an explicit socio-spatial dimension to concepts of social resilience.

We draw on empirical material from a five-year research project in four rural sub-districts in North and Northeast Thailand, with a high dependence on rainfed agriculture, exposure to environmental risks and high internal and international migration.

Based on the empirical results, we develop a typology of five broad trajectories of resilience outcomes, explicitly considering socio-spatiality: 1. Sustainable gain: the well-being of households at origins and migrants at destinations is increased, vulnerabilities are reduced, and/or opportunities are realized for adaptive action. 2. Precarious resilience: The situation of households at origins is improved, but at the cost of decreased well-being of migrants at destinations. 3. Fragile balance: the situation of the migrant at the place of destination is stable, but the support provided to the household of origin is only sufficient to cope with daily challenges, and does not lead to real improvements. 4. Decoupled livelihoods: the situation of migrants at destinations is improved or stable, but the situation at the origin is deteriorating, where migration costs are higher than its benefits. 5. Translocal insecurities: the situation of both migrants at destinations and households at origins is in a state of decline after, and due to, migration.

These trajectories of translocal livelihood constellations depend largely on the interlinked situations and operational logics at places of origin and destination, as well as the different material and social positionalities and resulting vulnerabilities, roles, commitments and practices of individuals and households.

The framework draws attention to the intersectionally and spatially differentiated outcomes of migration on the capacities of individuals and households to deal with stress and perturbation, and to take opportunities to maintain or increase their livelihoods’ security. Knowledge on the differentiated outcomes of migration – and their reasons - can contribute to supporting actors to increase adaptive outcomes of migration, and to avoid forms of erosive coping or maladaptation.