“Kites” and “anchors”: the (im)mobility strategies of transnational Latin American families against the crisis in Spain

For Peer Review ‘Kites’ and ‘anchors’: the (im)mobility strategies of transnational Latin American families against the crisis in Spain Journal: Population, Space and Place Manuscript ID PSP-17-0094.R2 Wiley - Manuscript type: Research Article Keywords: crisis, transnational, (im)mobility strategies, Latin American migration, Spain, transnational families http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place For Peer Review 1 ‘Kites’ and ‘anchors’: the (im)mobility strategies of transnational Latin American families against the crisis in Spain ABSTRACT The impact of the recent global financial and economic crisis on migration to Spain has generated literature focusing mainly on demographic and labour impacts. Internationally, economic crises have also been linked to the increased vulnerability of migrants and return migration. However, this article reveals a more complex picture of how the crisis is producing new (im)mobilities between Latin America and Europe. It adopts a transnational family approach based on qualitative fieldwork with Colombian, Ecuadorean and Brazilian migrants. The article offers an analysis of their (im)mobility strategies framed by the socioeconomic impact of the crisis in Spain. Strategies include various configurations of return and remigration as well as permanence in the host country, involving the whole family or some members. They are the consequence mainly of the economic situation, but are also shaped by other ‘crises’ related to migrant status and migratory projects as well as gender, intergenerational and emotional factors. Keywords: Crisis, (im)mobility strategies, Latin American migration, Spain, transnational families Page 1 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 2 Introduction This article analyses the strategies of spatial (im)mobility put in place by Colombian, Ecuadorean and Brazilian families in Spain since the start of the global financial and economic crisis from a transnational and qualitative perspective. The crisis that unfolded in 2008 had severe consequences for Spain 1 , affecting the migrant population both at a demographic level through a reduction in inflows and an increase of outflows, and in the labour market due to growing unemployment and deteriorating working conditions (see for instance, Oliver Alonso, 2013). The studies available have focused mainly on some of these demographic and employment impacts, including the phenomenon of return. However, our in-depth qualitative data provides a much richer and complex picture of how Latin Americans in Spain, one of the largest migrant groups, have sought to respond to this crisis from a transnational family perspective. Responses include multiple configurations of return, remigration and permanence reflecting not only socioeconomic considerations, but also factors related to migrant legal status, the migratory project and gender and intergenerational relationships. We begin by situating our study within the most recent work on migration and crisis in the Spanish and international contexts, providing a brief explanation for our conceptual framework. This is followed by a short description of our methodological approach, and a section on how migration flows to Spain have evolved in the case of the three groups studied, with special emphasis on the most recent demographic trends. The rest of the text offers an analysis of the results of our qualitative research with Colombian, Ecuadorean and Brazilian migrants in Spain, focusing on the (im)mobility spatial strategies developed by transnational migrant families within the context of the economic crisis. Based on this, we start to develop a typology that includes returning to the home country and remigrating to other EU destinations, as well as remaining in the host society; such strategies can be performed by the whole family at once or in stages, or only by certain members, thus producing new family reconfigurations. Furthermore, they sometimes turn into repeated circular or multiple migrations. Such situations can generate feelings of being ‘trapped’ in (im)mobility. The final aim of the article is to contribute to wider theoretical and empirical debates about how the different factors identified (the diverse ‘crises’) articulate to produce new patterns of spatial (im)mobility. These (im)mobilities, approached from a transnational family perspective, contradict classical notions of migration and return as permanent and unidirectional movements (Cassarino, 2004; Sheller & Urry, 2006). We use some cases to illustrate this in detail. The article ends with some conclusions. The transnational (im)mobility strategies of Latin American migrants in Spain in the context of the economic crisis Latin American migration to Europe has been affected by the recent global financial and economic crisis, which has been particularly severe in Spain. Researchers have shown how economic crises have a disproportionate impact on migrant populations given their precarious socioeconomic and labour conditions or their lack of networks. In the 1 The crisis in Spain is part of the global financial and economic crisis that started at the end of 2007. According to official macroeconomic data, the economic crisis in Spain ended in 2014. However, the wider socioeconomic and political consequences are still very visible. Page 2 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 3 Spanish case, since 2008, several studies have elaborated on diverse aspects of this, looking mainly at demographic changes in the migratory cycle (growing outflows, diminishing inflows) as well as the impact on migrants’ labour conditions (López Salas & Oso, 2015; Domingo, Sabater, & Ortega, 2014; Garrido, Miyar & Muñoz Comet, 2010; Oliver Alonso, 2013). Few studies have analysed the case of Latin American migrants in Spain (Aysa Lastra & Cachón, 2015; among others). Yet, despite its relevance this literature could be criticised for its methodological and epistemological nationalism (Wimmer & Glick Schiller, 2002), or for being based mostly in secondary statistics. Qualitative research has sought to address this by analysing the various strategies of migrant households against the crisis, which may include the incorporation of new family members into the labour market, the use of savings and a restructuring of remittances, as well as permanent or temporary return and remigration (Torres Pérez, 2014; Bastia, 2011; Cavalcanti & Parella, 2013; López de Lera & Pérez-Caramés, 2015; Sanz Abad, 2015, among others). Echeverri Buriticá’s (2014) contribution, for instance, draws attention to the fact that after long processes of family reunification in Spain, the economic crisis has divided Colombian families again due to the return and remigration of some members, revealing gender and generational differences. As for international studies, work on return migration has been approached from diverse theoretical positions, although more recently the transnational perspective has enriched this literature by questioning the idea of permanent and unidirectional migration movements and highlighting the existence of multiple types of mobility (Carling & Bevand Erdal, 2014; Cassarino, 2004; Constant & Zimmerman, 2011). Moreover, the transnational perspective helps to make visible the multiple links that migrants maintain not only with their countries of origin, but also with co-nationals in other destinations (Glick Schiller, Basch, & Blanc-Szanton, 1992; Levitt & Sørensen, 2004). For Latin Americans in Europe, studies have explored the relations that bind communities in different countries (Bermudez, 2016; McIlwaine, 2012), which can be a consequence and a cause of the emergence of new ‘migrant corridors’ (Bermudez, 2018), as well as the role of sending countries’ policies in encouraging return (Boccagni & Lagomarsino, 2011). In addition, the mobilities paradigm, applied to migration studies (Sheller and Urry 2006), has focused on the increased variety of movements and their consequences, but also, from a more critical perspective, on the different factors conditioning who can move and where (Glick-Schiller & Salazar, 2013). Factors can relate mainly to the economic crisis, but also interact with other key aspects such as legal status, as Ahrens (2013) demonstrates in her study of Nigerians in Spain. Our article borrows from these debates and looks at the new (im)mobilities generated as a result of the crisis, taking into account different types of mobility (returns, remigrations, circulation…), but also those left immobile (resisting in Spain) (Oso, Saíz & Cortés, 2017). By adopting a transnational family perspective (Baldassar & Merla, 2014; among others), thus overcoming methodological and epistemological nationalism, it also analyses how families separate and reunite again as different members leave or stay in response to a complex mixture of factors that go beyond socioeconomic and legal conditions. Finally, our approach seeks to situate at the forefront the agency of transnational migrant Page 3 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 4 families, looking at their ability to act (Godinho, 2017) as a complex game of ‘kites’ and ‘anchors’ develop, leaving migrants sometimes trapped in (im)mobility. Methodological approach The analysis that follows is based on the data obtained during various research projects. These studies share some characteristics: they were mostly qualitative, involved multisited fieldwork, were carried out during a period of time that includes the economic crisis and adopted a transnational approach. Qualitative fieldwork involved in-depth, semi-structured individual and group interviews, family life histories, informal conversations and participant observation with Latin American migrants and key informants (migrant organisations, churches, ethnic businesses, social workers, public functionaries, etc.). Migrants were selected using contacts and snowballing techniques, trying to represent a wide array of experiences and profiles. The samples in London and Brussels included cases of recent Colombian remigration from Spain, while the fieldwork in Quito included return migrants. The Colombian data is the result of a study carried out in 2014-2015 mainly in Madrid, London and Brussels that included 47 qualitative interviews. This completed almost two decades of research on Colombian migration to Europe (Bermudez, 2016). This last project focused specifically on the impact of the economic crisis on Colombian migrant communities previously studied (Madrid and London), adding the case of Brussels given transnational connections between them 2 . The interviews with Ecuadoreans were carried out in Madrid and Quito, where we contacted the families of migrants living in Spain. Fieldwork was carried out in 2007-2009 and 2013-2015, before and after the crisis. In total, 44 people were interviewed. In addition, a total of 12 Brazilian migrants were interviewed in A Coruña and Madrid as part of the same project. These last two projects included family life histories (interviewing several family members separately) and one group interview (6 women and 5 men) in an association of returned migrants in Quito 3 . The cases analysed in some detail below have been chosen to illustrate the heterogeneity of strategies that Latin American transnational migrant families have put in place in response to diverse crises. Since the data forms part of different projects the objective of our article is not to offer a comparative perspective based on nationality, there are only some references to national factors that might explain diverse strategies. The objective is to use our cases to try to understand the interplay of various factors behind the (im)mobility strategies of transnational migrant families. 2 The project was “Crisis, migration and integration: the experiences of Colombian migrants in Madrid, London and Brussels”, and was conducted as part of a Marie Curie-COFUND Fellowship at the Université de Liège. 3 The fieldwork with Ecuadorian migration was carried out in the framework of the following research projects: “El impacto de migración en el desarrollo: género y transnacionalismo” (Oso, dir. 2007-SEJ2007/63179), “Género, Transnacionalismo y estrategias inter-generacionales de movilidad social” (Oso, dir. 2011- FEM2011-26110) and “Género, movilidades cruzadas y dinámicas transnacionales” (Oso, dir. 2015-FEM2015-67164-R), funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (Spain)-FEDER. Page 4 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 5 ‘Kites’ and ‘anchors’: The ambiguous game of who leaves and who stays among Latin American migrants in Spain Latin Americans are one of the largest migrant communities in Spain, with Ecuadoreans and Colombians being the first and second most numerous groups, and Brazilians well behind. Ecuadorean and Colombian migrants arrived in Spain mainly from the turn of the century onwards, especially between 2000 and 2004 (during the economic boom), while Brazilians, in general, migrated later, especially between 2004 and 2009 (see Figure 1). The statistics offered by Spain’s municipal registries (Padrón Municipal de Habitantes, Instituto Nacional de Estadística, INE) on the stock of the population born abroad and regarding inflows and outflows (those registering and deregistering from the Padrón-Estadística de Migraciones) provide an initial insight into the spatial mobility of migrant families from Colombia, Ecuador and Brazil in recent years and since the start of the crisis. [Figure 1 here] Initially women were among the pioneers in these migrations, as Table 1 shows, with feminisation rates (women born abroad as a percentage of the stock of registered migrants) being higher amongst Colombians (64.9% in 1999), followed by Brazilians (63.2% in 2002) and Ecuadoreans (58.7% in 1998). During the consolidation of the migration process, a greater equilibrium between the sexes was achieved due to the arrival of more men through family reunification and the pull effect of the economy during the construction boom (which attracted male workers) (Oso & Catarino, 2013). However, the arrival of the crisis had a severe impact on the construction sector, thus affecting male employment more (Gil-Alonso & Vidal-Coso, 2015). This is reflected in recent increases in the feminisation rate (reaching up to 58.5% among Colombians and 53% among Ecuadoreans from 2011, and up to 65% for Brazilians from 2010), which partly suggests that men are returning or remigrating in greater quantities than women. [Table 1 here] Emigration rates are also higher amongst men than women in all three cases, with Colombian and Ecuadorean women showing the greatest tendency to remain in Spain (see Figure 2). It seems then that, as opposed to the initial period, when women were pioneers in transnational family migration projects, this time men are implementing new mobility strategies (as ‘kites’) owing to the severe impact of the crisis on male employment, while the women remain in Spain (as ‘anchors’). However, our qualitative research shows a greater plurality of situations, indicating that the (im)mobility strategies of Latin American transnational migrant families in response to the crisis include multiple options, so that the game between ‘kites’ and ‘anchors’ is far more ambiguous and dependent on various factors that include but go beyond the socioeconomic impact of the crisis as analysed next. [Figure 2 here] Towards a typology to analyse the (im)mobility strategies of Latin American transnational families in a context of economic crisis Page 5 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 6 In response to some of the negative impacts of the economic crisis, Colombian, Ecuadorean and Brazilian transnational migrant families have shown a wide array of strategies of spatial (im)mobility. Based on this, our article establishes an initial typology, which we seek to illustrate analysing some cases in detail. Although our qualitative data does not allow for generalisations, it provides rich empirical material that helps identify the complex interplay of factors that explain such strategies. 1) Versatile ‘returns’. Amongst our data, there are cases of migrants returning to the home country as a result of the crisis on employment and socioeconomic conditions. These family strategies include: the return of the men (husband and/or sons), while women remain in Spain working; the return of the women and children, with the husband staying in Spain seeking to rebuild the migration project; the return of the entire family in stages or simultaneously; and the return of one or both members of the couple to reunite in the home country with family members that did not migrate. However, these strategies do not necessarily fit the classical idea of return as a result of ‘success’ or ‘failure’ (Gmelch, 1980). Men returning and women staying In the Ecuadorean case, we found several instances of men returning to Ecuador while the women remained in Spain. Some of the women, who had been the mobile pioneers in the family migration project, were now adopting the opposite role of ‘anchors’, while the men were leading the process of return (as ‘kites’). This is the situation of Carlos 4 , and his brother Daniel. Carlos, aged 53, was interviewed in Quito in 2015 after returning with his adult son, while the women in the family remained employed in the domestic service in Spain. Talking about his wife, he explains: ‘I’m not going to be selfish and tell her to come if she has work there’. Carlos’ wife was the pioneer in the family’s migration to Spain, arriving there in 1997 and later bringing her husband and teenage children (son and two daughters). For a while they were all working and bought their own flat in the outskirts of Madrid. However, rising interest rates and the fact that Carlos and his son, both employed in the construction sector, became unemployed as a result of the crisis meant they could not continue paying the mortgage and eventually lost their flat. It is then that the men in the family decide to return to Ecuador, partly to escape from the mortgage debt they had accrued. Carlos adds: “My brother’s story is similar, his wife also migrated first and she is still there. But my brother wants to return to Spain, he has Spanish nationality, I don’t, I lost my papers”. The difference in migrant status between Carlos and Daniel means that while for the former return assumes a more permanent quality, for the latter it appears as a temporary strategy, until the situation improves in Spain. Carlos, by contrast, has started settling in Quito and has no expectations to ‘return to Spain’. However, migrant status might not be the only factor explaining this, since Carlos also considers that his decision was influenced by problems with his wife: 4 All names used are pseudonyms, to protect anonymity. Page 6 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 7 You see, we tend to think that the man is the head of the family, the one who takes care of the household economy, and there, in Spain, I was suffering, because I had to ask my wife for money, and on top of that she started acting despotic, telling me I had to cook, participate in housework… and that’s not for me… also, other things happened between us… I’m better here. Soon after Carlos and his son returned to Ecuador, one of the daughters arrived as well. She lost her job at a hairdresser’s in Madrid after becoming pregnant. Facing new care responsibilities and difficulties finding new work, it was decided that she should return to Ecuador where she can access more family support to help her look after the baby. Meanwhile, the mother sends remittances to keep the family afloat. In this case then, kites become those members of the family who cannot contribute economically to the household and become dependent, while the anchors are those who can continue assuming the role of family breadwinners. Thus, the direct impact of the economic crisis on male employment is important, but it interacts with other factors to explain the different strategies. Factors include legal status (which might lead to different return strategies), care responsibilities (in this case those of Carlos’ pregnant daughter) and emotional crises linked to gender roles and relations. As highlighted in other work, return here can also be understood as part of a crisis of masculinity experienced by migrant men who have lost their role as breadwinners (Cortés & Oso, 2017). Return of the women and children Research with other migrant groups in Spain, such as Moroccans, has also shown cases of the opposite, when the women and/or children return to the home country, while the husband tries to survive in the host society and send remittances (Torres Pérez, 2014). This was the strategy put in place by Gabino, a 44-year old Colombian man interviewed in Madrid in 2014, and his family. He migrated to Spain with his wife in 1996 leaving their young son in Colombia. Initially employed in the care sector, the couple managed to achieve a stable economic and legal situation that allowed them to bring their son and have other children. With time, Gabino set up two businesses in the construction and service sectors. Nevertheless, as a result of the crisis both businesses collapsed, and later he lost his job in sales. As a result, his wife, who was not working at the time, and the children (aged 21, 10, nine and four) returned to Colombia: “my family, right now, is living in Colombia because the economic situation here in Spain, well, it has changed a lot and it was more economical and favourable to keep them there, so I have had to displace them”. For Gabino, the return to Colombia of part of his family is mainly an economic strategy, hopefully temporary (he is starting a new business). He does not contemplate returning himself, because after 18 years living in Spain: “I must stay… my life is tied to Spain, because of many… situations… my family, my children, they were practically born here”. As in the situation of Carlos’ brother, in this case the return of part of the family is thought of as provisional, affecting those members that are less productive and more dependent, which this time around are the woman and children. The labour market situation here seems to be key in explaining who are the kites leaving, and the anchor Page 7 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 8 that stays seeking to rebuild the migration project to be able to reunite the family again. However, as before, other emotional factors interact with this. When Gabino explains in more detail the decision for his family to return in 2009, it emerges that in the midst of all the economic difficulties they were experiencing, and after the birth of their last child, his wife had become depressed, a situation aggravated by the death of her mother. So he thought it would be better “to keep her near her family, where she could be fully supported… here, next to me, she was going into a strong depression”. As in the case of Carlos’ brother, Gabino and his family’s (im)mobility strategy is also facilitated by having Spanish nationality. In this case, the extra costs associated with having young children (not only economic but also reproductive) seems also important in deciding who are kites or anchors, while other work equally emphasises how migrant women might be inclined to return as well by the care needs of the transnational family (Cortés & Oso, 2017). Return of the entire family and family reunification Return can also mean the migration of the whole family. For Ecuadoreans, this has been encouraged by the policies pursued by the Correa government through support programmes and public interventions inviting migrants to go back (Cortés & Oso, 2017; Boccagni & Lagomarsino, 2011). Such policies have been weaker, or even absent, in the Colombian case, which could partly explain why return seems to be a less popular option for this group (Bermudez, 2014). Brazil has also created policies and measures to assist returnees but their efficacy has yet to be demonstrated, while in this case the main pull factor explaining return could be economic growth and social improvements in the country of origin (Cavalcanti, 2015). Two cases of Ecuadorean families show the diverse situations in which this strategy was adopted. One is the story of Ana Lucía, a 36-year old woman contacted in Quito in 2015. She met her husband, Salvador, in Ecuador, where he was spending some time after several years living in Spain. Salvador asked Ana Lucía, a single mother of two, to marry and migrate with him. She accepted and after three years waiting for the documentation for family reunification she moved to Madrid in 2007 with her son and daughter (aged five and three) to join her husband. Both Ana Lucía and Salvador found good jobs and another child was born in Madrid. Nevertheless, the onset of the crisis led to the return of the family. Salvador became unemployed and although Ana Lucía was working and did not want to leave, she felt swept along by his decision; he took her to Spain and now she is “not going to let him return alone”. In this case emotional and relational factors are also at play, with Ana Lucía’s return with her family being the consequence of her husbands’ work situation and decision. This will contribute, among other factors (disenchantment with government return programmes, difficulties finding work), to her dissatisfaction once in Ecuador and her desire to ‘migrate again’ if things improve in Spain, a desire that would be facilitated by their Spanish nationality. Finally, return can also lead to family reunification, whether as a result of a failed or completed migration project. This is the case of Luis Fernando, aged 42, an Ecuadorean interviewed in Quito in 2015. His wife migrated first, to Madrid in 1998, where she worked as a live-in carer looking after an elderly lady. Soon after, he joined her, leaving Page 8 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 15 Ahrens, J. (2013). Suspended in eurocrisis: new immobilities and semi-legal migrations amongst Nigerians living in Spain. Journal of Mediterranean Studies, 22(1), 115-140. Retrieved from https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/362813 Aysa-Lastra, M., & Cachón, L. (Ed.) (2015). Immigrant Vulnerability and Resilience. Comparative Perspectives on Latin American Immigrants during the Great Recession. Basel: Springer. Baldassar, L., & Merla L. (2014). Transnational Families, Migration and the Circulation of Care. Understanding Mobility and Absence in Family Life. New York, Abingdon: Routledge. Bastia, T. (2011). Should I stay or should I go? Return migration in times of crises. Journal of International Development, 23(4), 583-595. doi: 10.1002/jid.1794 Bermudez, A. (2014). El vínculo de los Estados con sus ciudadanos en el exterior: el caso de los migrantes colombianos en Europa. Naveg@mérica. Revista electrónica editada por la Asociación Española de Americanistas, 13. Retrieved from http://revistas.um.es/navegamerica Bermudez, A. (2016). International Migration, Transnational Politics and Conflict. The Gendered Experiences of Colombian Migrants in Europe. London: Palgrave Mcmillan. doi: 10.1057/978-1-137-53197-1 Bermudez, A. (2018). Agency, structure and transnationalism in Colombian migration to the UK: the emergence of a migration system?. In Margheritis, A. (Ed.) Shaping Migration between Europe and Latin America. New Approaches and Challenges. London: ILAS. Boccagni, P., & Lagomarsino, F. (2011). Migration and the global crisis: New prospects for return? The case of Ecuadorians in Europe. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 30(3), 282-297. doi: 10.2307/41238220 Carling, J., & Bevand Erdal, M. (Ed.). (2014). Connections between return migration and transnationalism [Special issue]. International Migration, 52(6), 2-112. Cassarino, J. P. (2004). Theorising return migration: the conceptual approach to return migrants revisited. International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 6(2), 253-279. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001385/138592E.pdf#page=60 Cavalcanti, L. (2015). Inmigrantes retornados de España. Un acercamiento a los programas de retorno en Brasil. In Lozano Ascensio, F., & J. Martínez Pizarro (Ed.), Retorno en los procesos migratorios de América Latina. Conceptos, debates, evidencias (pp. 143-162). Río de Janeiro: ALAP. Retrieved from http://ced.uab.es/wpcontent/uploads/2016/02/ALAP_Serie-Investigaciones_16_2015_J.Reca%C3%B1o.pdf Page 15 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 16 Cavalcanti, L., & Parella, S. (2013). El retorno desde una perspectiva transnacional. REMHU– Revista Interdisciplinar da Mobilidade Humana, XXI(41), 9-20. doi: 10.1590/S1980-85852013000200002 Constant, A. F., & Zimmerman, K. F. (2011). Circular and repeat migration: Counts of exits and years away from the host country. Population Research Policy Review, 30, 495-514. doi: 10.1007/s11113-010-9198-6 Cortés, A., & Oso, L. (2017). Avecillas y pájaros en vuelo transnacional: retorno, género y estrategias de movilidad e inmovilidad entre Ecuador y España. Revista Española de Sociología, 26(3), 359-372. doi: 10.22325/fes/res.2017.28 Domingo, A., Sabater, A., & Ortega, E. (2014). ¿Migración neohispánica? El impacto de la crisis económica en la emigración española. Empiria, 29(1), 39-66. doi: 10.5944/empiria Echeverri Buriticá, M. (2014). A los dos lados del Atlántico. Reconfiguraciones de los proyectos migratorios y la vida familiar transnacional de la población colombiana en España. Papeles del CEIC, 2(109), 1-28. doi: 10.1387/pceic.12988 Fenicia, T., Kaiser, M., & Schönhuth, M. (2016). Stay or return? Gendered family negotiations and transnational projects in the process of remigration of (late) resettlers to Russia. Transnational Social Review, 6(1-2), 60-77. doi: 10.1080/21931674.2016.1182313 Garrido, J., Miyar, M., & Muñoz Comet, J. (2010). La dinámica laboral de los inmigrantes en el cambio de fase del ciclo económico. Presupuesto y Gasto Público, 61, 201-221. Gil-Alonso, F., & Vidal-Coso, E. (2015). Inmigrantes extranjeros en el mercado de trabajo español: ¿más resilientes o más vulnerables al impacto de la crisis? Migraciones, 37, 97-123. doi: mig.i37.y2015.005 Glick-Schiller, N., & Salazar, N.B. (2013). Regimes of mobility across the globe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(2), 183-200. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2013.723253 Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L., & Blanc-Szanton, C. (1992). Towards a Transnational Perspective on Migration: Race, Class, Ethnicity and Nationalism Reconsidered. New York: Academy of Sciences. Gmelch, G. (1980). Return migration. Annual Review of Anthropology, 9, 135-159. Godinho, P. (2017). Lo que nos enseñan quienes plantan castaños: experiencias, expectativas y futuros posibles. In Vicente, T., M. Albert, P. Espeso & M.J. Pastor (Ed.), Antropologías en transformación: sentidos, compromisos y utopías (pp. 105- 134). Valencia: Institució Alfons el Magnànim. Page 16 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 17 Levitt, P, & Sørensen, N. (2004). The transnational turn in migration studies. Global Migration Perspectives, 6, 2-13. Retrieved from http://www.refworld.org/docid/42ce48754.html López de Lera, D., & Pérez-Carames, A. (2015). La decisión de retornar en tiempos de crisis. Una perspectiva comparada de los migrantes ecuatorianos y rumanos en España. Migraciones, 37, 171-194. doi: mig.i37.y2015.008 López-Sala, A., & Oso, L. (2015). Inmigración en tiempos de crisis: dinámicas de movilidad emergentes y nuevos impactos sociales. Migraciones, 0(37), 9-27. doi: 10.14422/mig.i37.y2015.001 McIlwaine, C. (2012). Constructing transnational social spaces among Latin American migrants in Europe: Perspectives from the UK. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 5(2), 289-304. doi: 10.1093/cjres/rsr041 McIlwaine, C., & Bunge, D. (2016). Towards visibility: the Latin American community in London. Queen Mary, University of London. Oliver Alonso, J. (2013). La inmigración y la doble recesión del mercado de trabajo en España, 2011-12. In E. Aja, J. Arango & J. Oliver (Ed.), Inmigración y Crisis: Entre la Continuidad y el Cambio (pp. 28-59). Barcelona: CIDOB. Oso, L., & Catarino, C. (2013). From sex to gender: The feminisation of migration and labour-market insertion in Spain and Portugal. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(4), 625-647. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2013.745242 Oso, L., Sáiz-López, A. & Cortés, A. (2017). “Movilidades cruzadas” en un contexto de crisis: Una propuesta teórica para el estudio de la movilidad geográfica y social, con un enfoque de género, transnacional e intergeneracional. Revista Española de Sociología, 26(3), 293-306. doi: 10.22325/fes/res.2017.24 OPAM (2013). España, ¿país de emigración? La imagen de éxodo, a prueba de evidencia estadística. Tema OPAM, 8 (junio). Sanz Abad, J. (2015). Crisis y estrategias migratorias de reproducción social. Un análisis a partir del estudio de la migración ecuatoriana. Migraciones, 37, 195-216. doi: mig.i37.y2015.009 Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207-226. doi: 10.1068%2Fa37268 Torres Pérez, F. (2014). Crisis y estrategias de los inmigrantes en España: el acento latino. Revista d´Afers internacionals, 106-107, 215-236. Retrieved from https://www.cidob.org/es/articulos/revista_cidob_d_afers_internacionals/106_107/crisis _y_estrategias_de_los_inmigrantes_en_espana_el_acento_latino Page 17 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 18 Wimmer, A., & Glick Schiller, N. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: nation-state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks, 2(4), 301- 334. Doi: 10.1111/1471-0374.00043 Tables Table 1: Percentage of women within the stock of migrants born abroad according to country of birth, 1998-2018. Brazil Colombia Ecuador 1998 59.4 64.0 58.7 1999 60.5 64.9 58.3 2000 61.4 64.7 56.1 2001 62.7 60.0 50.9 2002 63.2 57.8 50.8 2003 63.0 57.3 51.3 2004 62.7 57.3 51.7 2005 61.7 57.0 51.6 2006 60.5 57.1 51.6 2007 59.2 57.0 51.7 2008 58.6 56.5 51.4 2009 59.3 56.5 51.4 2010 60.9 56.8 51.6 2011 62.3 57.2 52.0 2012 63.2 57.5 52.3 2013 63.9 57.9 52.6 2014 64.6 58.2 52.8 2015 64.9 58.5 53.1 2016 64.8 58.7 53.3 2017 64.3 58.9 53.5 2018 63.8 58.8 53.6 Source: Data from Padrón Municipal de Habitantes, INE. Provisional data for 2018 Page 18 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review 19 Figure legends Figure 1: Spain. Stock of migrants born abroad according to country of birth, 1998- 2018. Source: Elaborated by the authors. Data from Padrón Municipal de Habitantes, INE. Provisional data for 2018 Figure 2: Spain. Emigration rates (emigration ouflows/stock of population born abroad, %) according to country of birth and gender, 2008-2017. Source: Elaborated by the authors. Data from Padrón Municipal de Habitantes and Estadística de Migraciones, INE. Figure 3: Factors explaining the (im)mobility strategies of Latin American transnational migrant families in Spain. Source: author’s qualitative data. Page 19 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review Figure 1: Spain. Stock of migrants born abroad according to country of birth, 1998-2018. Source: Elaborated by the authors. Data from Padrón Municipal de Habitantes, INE. Provisional data for 2018 Figure 2: Spain. Emigration rates (emigration ouflows/stock of population born abroad, %) according to country of birth and gender, 2008-2017. Source: Elaborated by the authors. Data from Padrón Municipal de Habitantes and Estadística de Migraciones, INE. 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Brazil Colombia Ecuador 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Brazil Men Brazil Women Colombia Men Colombia Women Ecuador Men Ecuador Women Page 20 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 For Peer Review Figure 3: Factors explaining the (im)mobility strategies of Latin American transnational migrant families in Spain. Structural determinants -Return policies and other measures encouraging return (especially active in the Ecuadorean case) -Visa policies (e.g. Brazilians do not need a tourist visa to visit Spain, which facilitates mobility between the two countries) -Access to naturalisation (Latin American migrants enjoy special conditions to apply for Spanish nationality) or to a residence permit (having a regular migrant status also facilitates mobility) -Impact of economic crisis on Spanish labour market (especially on the construction sector, affecting mostly male employment) -Mortgage crisis (it can motivate return or remigration as a way to escape accrued debts, but it can also lead to immobility) - Welfare policies (access to social benefits might facilitate remigration within the EU) Migration project & transnational relations -Initial migration project (if the aim is to save and return and all investments have been made in the country of origin, this might facilitate return) -Project to settle in Spain (e.g. the desire to settle in the host country, family reunification, investing in housing or opening up a business in Spain can generate the need to ‘resist’ and maintain at least an anchor in the host country) -Access to transnational relations in the home country or new destinations (family or others who can support migrants during return or remigration) Emotional factors -Emotional crises (e.g. as a result of couple separations, not been able to bring the children over, working too hard, not having a social life…; these can lead both to new mobilities or immobility) -Emotional attachment to the home or host country (motivating one or another strategy) Gender roles & relations -Women’s role in the migration process (as pioneer or ‘follower’) -Crisis in gender relations (e.g. men losing their role as breadwinners as a motivation to return or remigrate) (Cortés & Oso, 2017) Intergenerational relations -Having children and their ages (smaller children require more care and can limit the parents’ ability to work, they can be send to the home country to reduce immediate responsibilities). The need to care after older relatives in the home country is also a motivation for return -Social mobility strategies (e.g. remain in Spain or another European country because the parents think these contexts offer greater educational and future employment opportunities for their children) Source: author’s qualitative data. Page 21 of 21 http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/popsp Population, Space and Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60