Greiner Und Sakdapolrak - Translocality - Submitted Version

AccepLed for publlcaLlon ln Ceography Compass
1

Translocality: Concepts, applications and emerging research perspectives 1
Clemens Greiner & Patrick Sakdapolrak 2
3
Abstract 4
The employment of translocality as a research perspective is currently gaining 3
momentum. A growing number of scholars from different research traditions 6
concerned with the dynamics of mobility, migration and socio-spatial 7
interconnectedness have developed conceptual approaches to the term. They 8
usually build on insights from transnationalism, while at the same time attempting to 9
overcome some of the limitations of this long-established research perspective. As 10
such, translocality is used to describe socio-spatial dynamics and processes of 11
simultaneity and identity formation that transcend boundaries including, but also 12
extending beyond, those of nation states. In this review we trace the emergence of 13
the idea of translocality and summarise the characteristics that different authors 14
associate with the term. We elucidate the underlying notions of mobility and place, 13
and sketch out fields of research where the concept has been employed. On the 16
basis of our findings, we conclude by proposing key areas where a translocal 17
approach has the potential to generate fruitful insights. 18
Key words: translocality, spatial theory, migration, transnationalism 19
20

2

Why write about translocality? 21
Translocality has come into vogue. As a catchword it appears in the writings of 22
scholars from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds, such as geography (Castree 23
2004, Conradson and McKay 2007, Steinbrink 2009, Brickell and Datta 2011b, 24
Featherstone 2011, Hedberg and do Carmo 2012a, Verne 2012), history and area 23
studies (Oakes and Schein 2006b, Freitag and von Oppen 2010b), cultural studies 26
(Ma 2002, Bennett and Peterson 2004), anthropology (Escobar 2001, Appadurai 27
2003, Peleikis 2003, Marion 2005, Argenti and Rschenthaler 2006, Nez-Madrazo 28
2007, Gottowik 2010, Greiner 2010) and development studies (Grillo and Riccio 29
2004, Zoomers and Westen 2011). Sometimes, translocality (or translocalism) is 30
merely used as a synonym for transnationalism. In most cases, however, it is used to 31
build upon and extend insights from this long-established research tradition. As such, 32
the term usually describes phenomena involving mobility, migration, circulation, and 33
spatial interconnectedness not necessarily limited to national boundaries. But what 34
can the idea of translocality offer beyond these obvious similarities? How is it defined 33
by those authors who employ it? Is it merely an extension of transnationalism, or 36
should it be understood as a theoretical concept in its own right? 37
In this review, we critically engage with these questions. We start by tracing the 38
conceptual relation between transnationalism and translocality and explore how the 39
latter serves to overcome some of the conceptual weaknesses of the former. We 40
then turn to the current literature in order to determine the similarities and differences 41
between the various current definitions of translocalism and to explore two central 42
dimensions of the concept: mobility and place. We briefly review research areas 43
where the concept has been applied so far, and by extension postulate that the 44
concept should be considered a research perspective in its own right (rather than 43

3

merely an extension of transnationalism). We conclude by pointing out some of the 46
concept's potentialities. 47
48
Expanding the concept of transnationalism 49
When theories of transnationalism emerged out of the necessity to conceptualise 30
social fields that increasingly transcended national borders and to challenge existing 31
concepts of nationhood and citizenship (Basch, Glick Schiller and Szanton Blanc 32
1995), they were primarily concerned with processes of de-territorialisation and 33
notions of spatially unbounded communities (Hannerz 1996, Castells 2000, 34
Appadurai 2003). While the concept of rootedness, understood as a firm 33
relationship between identity and territory, has been questioned in Social 36
Anthropology and related disciplines (Malkki 1992; Gupta and Ferguson 1992), 37
empirical studies point to a global (re-)emergence of territorialised notions of 38
belonging and of ethno-nationalist movements (Geschiere 2009), which have led to 39
an academic rediscovery of the importance of the local (Kokot 2007). Since the mid- 60
1990s scholars of transnationalism have engaged with more localised phenomena of 61
international migration (Ley 2004). This shift has been reflected in growing concerns 62
over local-to-local relations (Guarnizo and Smith 1998), transnational urbanism 63
(Smith 2001) and cultural sites (Olwig 1997), which contributed to more 64
territorialised notions of transnationalism, and highlighted the articulation of global 63
and local dynamics in specific localities such as cities, neighbourhoods, homes and 66
families. While transnationalism is clearly an attempt to overcome the limitations of 67
methodological nationalism (Wimmer and Glick Schiller 2002), the primary concern 68
still rests on the transgression of and exchange beyond national borders. The 69
concept furthermore remains deeply anchored in the notion of the world as formed 70

4

and ordered by a static framework of clearly distinguishable scales (Amelina 2010; 71
Verne 2012). 72
Authors applying the concept of translocality commonly base their writings on the 73
insights of transnational approaches. Following the shift toward a more grounded 74
transnationalism (Brickell and Datta 2011a, p. 3), they are concerned with local 73
contexts and the situatedness of mobile actors. At the same time, they expand their 76
analytical focus beyond the limits of the nation-state (Oakes and Schein 2006b) by 77
focusing on various other dimensions of border transgressions and on socio-spatial 78
configurations beyond those induced by human migration (Uimonen 2009, Gottowik 79
2010). This move has been long overdue for various reasons. 80
Firstly, from a historical standpoint, in much of the Global South nation-building is a 81
recent phenomenon, while interregional exchange dates back much further (for 82
example throughout the Arab world or within the Indian Ocean region; Freitag and 83
von Oppen 2010a, Verne 2012). Secondly, international boundaries in many former 84
colonies were drawn arbitrarily and enforced only poorly, as a consequence of which 83
the distinction between domestic and international migration is almost rendered 86
obsolete. In much of Africa, for example, international migration sometimes involves 87
relatively shorter distances and less social heterogeneity () and fewer barriers than 88
internal migration (Adepoju 2006, p. 28). Thirdly, the focus on transnational 89
movements has led to the neglect of internal migration, which makes up the bigger 90
share of global migration dynamics (Trager 2005). According to recent estimates of 91
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) there are currently about 740 92
million internal migrants worldwide, while the number of international migrants is 93
comparatively small; only 214 million (UNDP 2009, p. 21). Fourthly, socio-economic 94
disparities and spatially uneven development, which are often considered major 93

3

push-and-pull factors in international migration (Faist and Reisenauer 2009), not only 96
occur between nations but are also apparent within national borders. Lastly, research 97
on transnational migrant communities shows that migrants everyday social practices 98
are informed by their localised experiences. Significant articulations, therefore, have 99
to be understood as local-to-local interactions (Smith 2001, Nez-Madrazo 2007). 100
Against this background, some authors consider translocality as the more general 101
concept (Hedberg & Do Carmo, 2012), and Freitag and von Oppen (2010a, p. 12) 102
aptly remark that transnationalism appears to be merely a special case of 103
translocalism. 104
103
Defining Translocality 106
Scrutinizing the growing literature on translocality, one is confronted with a multitude 107
of terms, revolving around notions of mobility, connectedness, networks, place, 108
locality and locales, flows, travel, transfer and circulatory knowledge. Some authors 109
seek conceptual coherence by synthesising these terms with reference to different 110
bodies of social theory (e.g. Bourdieu, Giddens) (e.g. Steinbrink 2009; Brickell and 111
Datta 2011; Greiner and Sakdapolrak 2012), while others use translocality as an 112
umbrella term to describe mobilities and multiple forms of spatial connectedness 113
(e.g. Grillo and Riccio 2004; Ma 2002). 114
Along these lines, Tenhunen (2011: 416, n.1), for example, defines translocality as 113
relations that extend beyond the village community. For Mandaville (2002, p. 204), 116
translocality is a space in which new forms of (post)national identity are constituted. 117
Similarly, Freitag and von Oppen (2010a, p. 5) use translocality as a descriptive tool 118
that refers to the sum of phenomena which result from a multitude of circulations and 119

6

transfers. As such, they use this perspective to challenge the regional limitations 120
often implicit in area studies, and emphasise that the world is constituted through 121
processes that transgress boundaries on different scales, which results in the 122
production and reproduction of spatial differences. A translocal perspective enables 123
research into these processes in a more open and less linear way, and captures the 124
diverse and contradictory effects of interconnectedness between places, institutions 123
and actors. It overcomes the limitations of nationalist historiographies and facilitates 126
a non-Eurocentric understanding of global history as constituted by processes of 127
entanglement and interconnectedness (Freitag and von Oppen 2010a, p. 1). 128
Focusing on the multiple forms of mobility in contemporary China, Oakes and Schein 129
(2006b) deploy the term translocality to capture the implications of these dynamics. 130
Translocality is defined as being identified with more than one location (Oakes and 131
Schein 2006a, p. xiii). As such, the concept is used to simultaneously address 132
localities and mobilities within a holistic context. In a similar vein, authors such as 133
Brickell and Datta (2011a) use the concept to develop an agency-oriented approach 134
to these dynamics. They draw on Bourdieus concepts of habitus and social fields to 133
address the agents simultaneous situatedness across different locales (ibid, 4). 136
Through the notion of habitus, as Brickell and Datta (2011a, p. 13) highlight, the 137
translocal, where multi-scalar engagements of mobile and immobile actors are 138
formed by localized context and everyday practices, emerges at the same time as 139
the material, spatial and embodied. In translocal social fields, which are 140
characterised by uneven power relationships, mobile and immobile actors negotiate 141
and struggle over power and positions through the exchange of various capitals 142
which are valued differently across different scales (e.g. Kelly and Lusis 2006). This 143
view acknowledges what Massey (1991, p. 25) coined the power geometry of time- 144

7

space compression, which draws attention to questions such as who moves and 143
who does not, how power relations are differentiated in flows and movements, and 146
how power and powerlessness are experienced simultaneously in different locations. 147
Hedberg and do Carmo (2012a) employ translocality to facilitate an understanding of 148
the relational dimensions of space created through mobility. Such an approach 149
overcomes the notion of container spaces and the dichotomy between here and 130
there, between rural and urban (Steinbrink 2009, Greiner 2010). Translocality 131
thus refers to the emergence of multidirectional and overlapping networks that 132
facilitate the circulation of people, resources, practices and ideas. Steinbrink (2009) 133
draws on Giddens Structuration Theory (Giddens 1984) to point out that translocal 134
networks are both structured by the actions of the people involved and at the same 133
time provide a structure for these very actions (see also Greiner and Sakdapolrak 136
2012). 137
With regard to scale, Verne (2012, p. 17) emphasises that translocality does not only 138
mean the addition of a translocal scale between the global and the local. This, she 139
argues, would merely reify the notion of hierarchical and clearly distinguishable 160
scales implicit in studies on transnationalism. Instead, a translocal perspective draws 161
on insights gained from research on scales (e.g. Smith 1995, Agnew 1997, Delaney 162
and Leitner 1997, Swyngedouw, 1997), which has shown, as Brown and Purcell 163
(2005, p. 609) summarizes, that socio-spatial scales are a) not given a priori, but 164
rather socially produced, b) simultaneously fluid and fixed and c) fundamentally 163
relational. In acknowledging these insights, the translocal perspective acknowledges 166
intermediary arrangements, fluidity and intermingling processes (Verne 2012, p. 17- 167
18) crucial for the understanding of the dynamic quality and effects of various socio- 168
spatialities (Amelina 2010). 169

8

To sum up, authors use translocality to capture complex social-spatial interactions in 170
a holistic, actor-oriented and multi-dimensional understanding. The central idea of 171
translocality is aptly synthesised by Brickell and Datta (2011a, p. 3) as situatedness 172
during mobility. Authors engaging in the development of a translocal perspective 173
seek to integrate notions of fluidity and discontinuity associated with mobilities, 174
movements and flows on the one hand with notions of fixity, groundedness and 173
situatedness in particular settings on the other. Beyond this, however, what kind of 176
mobilities and movements are authors referring to when writing about translocality? 177
And how are the notions of situatedness and groundedness conceived? In the 178
following sections, we address these questions. 179
(Im)mobilities, movements and flows 180
Central to the notion of translocality is a holistic perspective on mobilities, movements 181
and flows, and the way in which these dynamics produce connectedness between 182
different scales. The majority of studies are primarily concerned with movements of 183
people. This concern is not restricted to transnational migration but also includes 184
various forms of internal migration as well as commuting and everyday movements 183
both within cities and between rural and urban areas (Hedberg and do Carmo 186
2012b). Many authors, however, are not concerned with mobile actors alone. They 187
also pay attention to those segments of the population that are considered immobile, 188
as they form a crucial dimension of connectedness (Brickell and Datta 2011a, Rau 189
2012). For Sun (2006, p. 240), this includes paying attention to those who talk, 190
speculate, and fantasize about certain places and to those who remember 191
experiences of familiar places. Such perspectives remind us that translocal spaces 192
are constantly co-produced by mobile and immobile populations. The often arduous 193
negotiation of physical co-presence by multiply located actors regarding, for example 194

9

participation and non-participation in important social occasions, is a central aspect in 193
what Conradson and McKay (2007) describe as translocal subjectivities. 196
Although movement of people is of prime concern in many studies, this is but one 197
aspect of translocality. The concept also refers to material flows, such as those of 198
remittances (Long 2008) and goods (Verne 2012), and symbolic flows such as 199
movements of styles, ideas, images and symbols (Ma 2002, Lange and Bttner 2010, 200
Reetz 2010). One aspect of this latter dimension of translocality is the visualisation 201
and imagining of linkages between places, what Brickell and Datta (2011a, p. 18) 202
refer to as translocal imagination. 203
For an understanding of these connections, networks are of particular concern, as 204
they facilitate repeated flows of knowledge and communication, and of political, 203
cultural and economic activities between places (Hedberg and do Carmo 2012a). 206
Migrants and non-migrants are embedded in these networks, which are as much an 207
outcome of as a precondition for translocal practices (Steinbrink 2009). The position 208
of actors within these networks, in turn, influences the access those actors have to 209
various resources (Zoomers and Westen 2011). Research on migration, both 210
international (e.g. Singer and Massey (1998) for the case of undocumented border 211
crossing of Mexican migrants) and internal (e.g. Peth (2012) for the case of rural-rural 212
labour migration in Bangladesh) has vividly pointed out the role of networks in 213
overcoming mobility barriers and facilitating border transgression. At the same time 214
these studies also show the exclusionary power of networks for those actors who 213
have insufficient resources, be they financial, cultural or symbolic, to be able to 216
access them (e.g. Kothari 2002). Dissatisfied with conventional approaches to 217
networks, McFarlane (2009, p. 566) suggests a notion of translocal assemblages as 218
an alternative way to conceive of spatial connectedness as mediated by processes of 219

10

disassemblage and reassemblage of history, labour, materiality and performance. 220
In a similar vein, Verne (2010, p. 23-31) departs from the shortcoming of a 221
conventional understanding of networks and proposes the metaphor of rhizome 222
(Deluze and Guattari 1976) as a means by which to grasp the complexity, dynamics 223
and relationality of translocal connectedness. 224
223
Places and locales 226
Common to most writings about translocality is an analytical focus on place as the 227
setting of grounded movements. This emphasis, however, appears to be driven by 228
diverse motives. While some authors (Freitag and von Oppen 2010) use translocality 229
to challenge notions of spatial boundedness implicit in area studies, others use it to 230
bring the local context back into deterritorialised conceptions of movement and flow 231
(Smith 2011). Translocality appears, then, as a concept serving both ends. It implies 232
a transgressing of locally bounded, fixed understandings of place and at the same 233
time emphasises the importance of places as nodes where flows that transcend 234
spatial scales converge. Referring to Doreen Masseys work on Power Geometries, 233
Brickell and Datta (2011) imagine translocal places as articulated moments in 236
networks of social relations (Massey 1999: 22). A translocal perspective focuses at 237
the same time on both what flows through places and what is in them (Verne 238
2010: 19). The relational nature of place as dynamic (i.e. not static) and constituted 239
through linkages to the outside (i.e. not bounded) (Massey 1991, p. 29) thus 240
appears to be commonly accepted in approaches to translocality, whereas 241
perspectives on the processes of the social and cultural production of place differ in 242
both scope and theoretical approach. 243

11

For some authors a translocal perspective provides a vehicle to engage with 244
subjective and phenomenological dimensions of place-making. Situatedness during 243
mobility, according to Brickell and Datta (2011a), is embodied and experienced in 246
places. Places, as Oakes and Schein (2006b, p. 18) put it, are defined by subjective 247
meaning, history, and practices that transcend various spatial scales. While these 248
hermeneutically inspired approaches to translocality revolve around questions of 249
identities, narratives, imaginaries and symbolic representations (Freitag and von 230
Oppen 2010a, Hall and Datta 2010, Lambek 2011, Verne 2012), others expand their 231
conceptual scope to include the material and physical dimensions of place (McKay 232
2003). 233
Hedberg and do Carmo (2012a, p. 3), for example, state that a translocal approach 234
facilitates understanding of the role of mobility in connecting and transforming 233
places. In a similar vein, Greiner and Sakdapolrak (2012) stress the need to focus 236
on how scale-transcending practices materialise and become inscribed into the 237
physical environment, for example in land-use patterns, agricultural practices or built 238
environments. Building on concepts from Structuration Theory, they refer to locales 239
as the settings for social interaction. Processes of time-space distanciation 260
(Giddens 1984, p. 171), through mobility and movements, stretch these locales 261
beyond places, whereby they eventually become trans-locales through the 262
establishment of routine activities. These trans-locales provide the context and 263
setting for action that is extended and increasingly influenced by remote interaction. 264
The production of trans-locales implies a strong temporal dynamic, as they are 263
constructed and dismantled along what Giddens (1984, p. 132) terms time-space 266
trajectories. 267

12

To sum up, whatever the specific theoretical conceptions of place or locales may be, 268
they are always conceived of as important arenas of scale-transcending interaction. 269
Translocal approaches, therefore, usually acknowledge a primacy of place (Casey 270
1996) while at the same time they break with essentialising notions of spatially 271
bounded territorial units. 272
273
Empirical application of translocality 274
Translocal approaches are applied to enhance the understanding of various 273
phenomena related to the production and re-production of social spatial 276
configurations, covering such issues as international and internal migration, identity 277
formation, media-use and knowledge transfer as well as local development 278
processes. This list is far from being comprehensive, but it provides an overview of 279
translocalitys range of potential applications. 280
A great majority of studies focus on the multifaceted dimensions of international 281
migration (Peleikis 2003, Velayutham and Wise 2005, Sinatti 2006, Nez-Madrazo 282
2007, Chacko 2011, Leung 2011). Increasingly, however, studies also focus on the 283
highly dynamic rural-urban interactions that constitute translocal fields within national 284
boundaries. In southern Africa, where many internal migration patterns are a product 283
of the political system of Apartheid, these patterns have largely persisted into the 286
post-1990s era. Steinbrink (2009) uses a translocal approach to describe how such 287
patterns of rural-urban interaction impact on the ability of households to cope with 288
and adapt to livelihood risks, and how those patterns are sustained. Greiner (2011) 289
reports from Namibia, a country equally affected by apartheid, about how 290
remittances, part-time pastoralism and other migration-related patterns of 291

13

translocality induce processes of socio-economic stratification. In a similar vein, Long 292
(2008), Steel, Winters and Sosa (2011) and McKay (2003) use a translocal approach 293
to elucidate the social impact of rural-urban migration and remittances in Peru, 294
Nicaragua and the Philippines respectively. 293
The analysis of translocal rural spaces, however, is not limited to areas of the Global 296
South. The contributions in a recently published volume on Translocal Ruralism by 297
Hedberg and do Carmo (2012a) are concerned with translocal phenomena in 298
Europe. The editors direct attention to various forms of migration (internal and 299
international) and mobility (e.g. daily commuting) in order to demonstrate that 300
geographically peripheral regions of Europe are engaged in a constant process of 301
functional reconfiguration. Here, translocal approaches are applied to challenge 302
notions of stagnation and isolation often associated with rural spaces (Do Carmo and 303
Santos 2012, Guran-Nica and Sofer 2012, Papadopoulos 2012, Rau 2012). 304
Translocal social spaces are, however, not only produced by refugees (Stenbacka 303
2012) and (labour) migrants (Papadopoulos 2012), but also by musicians (Ma 2002), 306
communities of ballroom dancers (Marion 2005) and amateur football players 307
(Steinbrink 2010), amongst others. 308
The volume Translocal Geographies. Spaces, Places and Connections edited by 309
Brickell and Datta (2011a) uses scale as the main structuring dimension to illustrate 310
the multiplicity of translocal affiliations. The contributions present experiences of 311
multi-scalar and multi-sited translocal geographies at the scale of home and family 312
(Brickell 2011, Tan and Yeoh 2011, Hatfield 2011) and neighbourhoods (Centner 313
2011, Datta 2011, Wise 2011) as well as that of the city (Chako 2011, Christou 2011, 314
Page 2011). As Brickell and Datta (2001a, p. 19-20) summarise, the volume 313
highlights how the local and local-to-local connections exist across a variety of scales 316

14

and points to the importance of considering the material and embodied practices of 317
migrants for gaining an understanding of translocality. 318
Another area of focus of translocal research is that of identity in the context of 319
intensifying mobility (de Lima 2012, Stenbacka 2012). Using Cameroon and 320
Tanzania as examples, Page (2011) shows how globally operating home-town 321
associations become differentially enmeshed with localised identity politics in the 322
migrant sending areas. The volume Translocal China, edited by Oakes and Schein 323
(2006b), explicitly addresses such multifaceted questions of identity against the 324
background of contemporary China. They point out that people and institutions have 323
become translocal in the recent era of reform and rapid socio-economic 326
transformation. While the subject of the movement of people is often taken up in 327
addressing questions of identity (Chongyi and Changzhi 2006, Schein 2006, Sun 328
2006, Greiner 2010), some authors apply a translocal approach to expand the focus 329
beyond the topic of migration. 330
As such, translocality is also applied to study the use of media and the circulation of 331
knowledge and ideas in globally operating networks. Focusing on the spatial 332
organisation of high-tech innovation in Germany, Lange and Bttner (2010), use a 333
translocal approach to map out the possibilities for and restrictions on translocal 334
knowledge-transfers which result in differential spatial knowledge formations. The 333
flow of information, ideas and opinions through the internet, and its influence on 336
identity formation, is taken up by Gan (2006), who shows how young mothers in 337
China use online parenting forums to construct and negotiate their new identities as 338
mothers alongside their identities as career women. The role of the internet in 339
producing translocal relations and imageries is also reflected by Uimonens (2009) 340
study on art college students in Tanzania. The changing patterns of translocal 341

13

communication facilitated by mobile phones, and their impact on political practices 342
(protests and riots), is illustrated in a case study by Tenhunen (2011) from West 343
Bengal. Analysing poems as a symbolic and material expression of translocality, 344
Suns (2010) study on migrant workers in Chinas industrial south reveals how 343
movements by this group are marked by a sense of alienation, displacement and 346
disenchantment. The exchange of symbol and images among transnationally 347
operating South Asian Muslim groups is described by Reetz (2010). He employs a 348
translocal perspective to illustrate the production of alternate globalities that position 349
themselves against Western-dominated and economy-centred activities. 330
Another area of investigation explores the implications of translocality for 331
development (Helvoirt 2011, Noorloos 2011). In the article Translocal Development, 332
Development Corridors and Development Chains by Zoomers and Westen (2011), in 333
a special issue of the International Development Planning Review, translocality is 334
applied to redefine notions of locally bounded development. The contributions in the 333
Review highlight how local-to-local connectedness produces both opportunities for 336
and constraints upon people in their struggle for better livelihoods. The possibilites 337
available for and difficulties encountered by development cooperation below the level 338
of the state, such as formalised municipal partnerships (Bontenbal and Lindert 2011) 339
or development projects of migrants associations (Grillo and Riccio 2004, Page and 360
Mercer 2012), are addressed by several authors from a translocal perspective. 361
Kaags (2011) case study from Chad, for example, examines the work of Islamic 362
NGOs from the Arab world in Africa. While rather limited in financial volume and 363
economic impact, the study highlights the nevertheless important political and moral 364
implications that result from the NGOs work in connecting the umma (Islamic 363
community). Pointing to the fact that development is often related to practices of 366

16

accumulation through extraction, expulsion and marginalisation of local populations, 367
authors such as Banerjee (2011) and McFarlane (2009) highlight the emancipatory 368
potential of translocality. The exchange of ideas, knowledge, practices, materials and 369
resources across places, they argue, is a resource that enables local social 370
movements to resist or challenge development paths or change them in their favour. 371
Similarly, using a case study from inhabitants of a squatter settlement in Lisbon, 372
Portugal Horta (2002) illustrates how translocal forms of migrants grassroots 373
organizations have become crucial in their practices of collective mobilization to 374
negotiate their interests. 373
376
Conclusion: Translocalism an approach in its own right 377
Translocality has been applied as a way to comprehend the tension between mobility 378
and locality and to enhance understanding of this relationship, which characterises 379
an increasing number of socio-spatial dynamics. The approach builds on insights 380
from the longer-established research tradition of transnationalism, but seeks to 381
overcome the latters limited focus on the nation state. This analytical expansion, we 382
have argued, was both necessary and overdue. Writings on translocality direct 383
attention to various forms of mobility beyond the movement of people. Building on a 384
relational notion of place, these writings place a strong emphasis on the micro level 383
and local-to-local dynamics to explain socio-spatial phenomena. 386
Translocal approaches exhibit several commonalities with research on grounded 387
transnationalism. Although many authors do not differentiate tranlocalism from 388
transnationalism, let alone designate it as an analytical concept in its own right, we 389
nevertheless consider that the approach warrants consideration as an emerging 390

17

research concept. Based on our review of existing concepts and empirical 391
applications, we argue that translocality has the potential to address important issues 392
in socio-spatial research. We conclude this review by outlining some of these areas. 393
Firstly, translocality can serve as a fruitful starting point from which to challenge 394
dichotomous geographical conceptions (Agnew 2005), such as space and place, 393
rural and urban, core and periphery. 396
Secondly, the actor-oriented focus on the social production of translocality enhances 397
a more explicit discussion of the temporal dynamics, path dependencies and time- 398
space interconnections of socio-spatial dynamics. The concept thereby offers a more 399
nuanced perspective on how these processes are socially differentiated, and is 400
sensitive to the role of power in relation to flows and movements (Massey 1991, p. 401
25f). 402
Thirdly, the shift away from a primary concern with the nation state directs attention 403
to alternative historiographies of globalization. 404
Fourthly, translocality emphasises significant spatial scales beyond the national 403
entities and their specific non-hierarchic interactions and configurations. In particular, 406
it highlights the importance of networked places, which are, in Doreen Masseys 407
words (1991: 28), constructed on a far larger scale than what we happen to define 408
for that moment as place. 409
Fifthly, translocality facilitates research on mobilities beyond human migration. By 410
addressing flows and circulations of ideas, symbols, knowledge, etc., it offers a 411
stimulating perspective from which to engage with subjects such as the impact of a 412
globalising world on non-migrants, and the co-production of connectedness by 413
mobile and immobile populations. 414

18

Finally, by placing an explicit emphasis on local conditions, translocality draws 413
attention to transformations of the physical and natural environment (e.g. farming 416
systems, urban areas, riparian zones). In so doing, translocal research can engage in 417
the discussion on global environmental change and strengthen the importance of the 418
mobility of people, concepts and resources within the debate. To conclude, this 419
review demonstrates that translocality is a dynamic and emerging field of research 420
which is both a suitable and a timely means by which to address socio-spatial 421
dynamics in an increasingly mobile world. 422

19

References 423
Adepo[u, A. (2006). lnLernal and lnLernaLlonal mlgraLlon wlLhln Afrlca. ln: kok, ., Celderblom, u., 424
Cucho, !. C. and van Zyl !., (eds), !"#$%&"'( "( *'+&, %(- *'+&,.$( /0$"1%. Cape 1own: PS8C 423
ress, pp. 26-43. 426
Agnew, !. (2003). Space:lace. ln: Cloke, . and !ohnsLon, 8., (eds), *2%1.3 '0 4.'#$%2,"1%5 6,'+#,&7 427
8.1'(3&$+1&"(# 9+:%( 4.'#$%2,".3 ;"(%$".3. London: Sage pp. 81-96. 428
Amellna, A. (2010). Scallng lnequallLles!? Some SLeps Lowards Lhe Soclal lnequallLy Analysls ln 429
MlgraLlon 8esearch beyond Lhe lramework of Lhe naLlon SLaLe. 8lelefeld. 430
Appadural, A. (2003). !'-.$("&< %& =%$#.> ?+5&+$%5 8":.(3"'(3 '0 45'@%5"A%&"'(. Mlnneapolls, London: 431
unlverslLy of MlnnesoLa ress. 432
ArgenLl, n., and 8schenLhaler, u. (2006). lnLroducLlon: 8eLween Cameroon and Cuba: ?ouLh, slave 433
Lrades and Lranslocal memoryscapes. *'1"%5 /(&,$'2'5'#< BC(01), pp. 33-47. 434
8aner[ee, S. 8. (2011). volces of Lhe Coverned: Lowards a Lheory of Lhe Lranslocal. D$#%("A%&"'( 433
BE(3), pp. 323-344. 436
8asch, L., Cllck Schlller, n., and SzanLon 8lanc C. (1993). F%&"'(3 G(@'+(-> 6$%(3(%&"'(%5 H$'I.1&3J 437
H'3&1'5'("%5 H$.-"1%:.(&3J %(- 8.&.$$"&'$"%5"A.- F%&"'(K*&%&.3. 8asel: Cordon and 8reach 438
ubllshers. 439
8enneLL, A., and eLerson, 8. A. (eds) (2004). !+3"1 31.(.37 5'1%5J &$%(35'1%5 L M"$&+%5. nashvllle: 440
vanderbllL unlverslLy ress. 441
8onLenbal, M., and LlnderL, . v. (2011). Munlclpal parLnershlps for local developmenL ln Lhe Clobal 442
SouLh? undersLandlng connecLlons and conLexL from a Lranslocal perspecLlve. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 443
8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 443-461. 444
8rlckell, k. (2011). 1ranslocal Ceographles of home" ln slem reap, Cambodla. ln: 8rlckell, k. and A. 443
uaLLa (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 23- 446
38. 447
8rlckell, k., and uaLLa, A. (2011a). lnLroducLlon: 1ranslocal Ceographles. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A., 448
(eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".3 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 3-20. 449
- (eds) (2011b). 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".3> *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe. 430
Casey, L. S. (1996). Pow Lo CeL from Space Lo lace ln a lalrly ShorL SLreLch of 1lme: 431
henomenologlcal rolegomena. ln: leld, S. and 8asso, k. P., (eds), *.(3.3 '0 H5%1.. SanLa le: 432
1he School of Amerlcan 8esearch, pp. 13-32. 433
CasLells, M. (2000). 6,. N(0'$:%&"'( /#.7 R1'(':<J *'1".&< %(- ?+5&+$.. Cxford: 8lackwell. 434
CasLree, n. (2004). ulfferenLlal geographles: place, lndlgenous rlghLs and 'local' resources. H'5"&"1%5 433
4.'#$%2,< SQ, pp. 133-167. 436

20

CenLner, 8. (2011). Ways ouL of crlsls ln 8uenos Alres: 1ranslocal landscapes and Lhe acLlvaLlon of 437
Moblle resources. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J 438
?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 109-124. 439
Chacko, L. (2011). 1ranslocallLy ln WashlngLon, u.C. and Addls Ababa: Spaces and Llnkages of Lhe 460
LLhloplan ulaspora ln 1wo CaplLal ClLles. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 461
4.'#$%2,".3 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 163-178. 462
ChrlsLou, A. (2011). 1ranslocal spaLlal Ceographles. MulLl-slLed LncounLers of Creek MlgranLs ln 463
ALhens, 8erlln, and new york. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A. (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 464
*2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 143-162 463
Chongyl, l., and Changzhl, Z. (2006). Cpenness, change, and LranslocallLy. new mlgranLs' 466
ldenLlflcaLlon wlLh Palnan. ln: Cakes, 1. and Scheln, L., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(%> ="(T%#.3J 467
N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.> new ?ork: 8ouLledge, pp. 74-92. 468
Conradson, u., and Mckay, u. (2007). 1ranslocal Sub[ecLlvlLles: MoblllLy, ConnecLlon, LmoLlon. 469
!'@"5"&".3 S(2), pp. 167-174. 470
uaLLa, A. (2011). 1ranslocal Ceographles of larnham. 8elonglng and oLherness" among ollsh 471
MlgranLs afLer 2004. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A. (eds.), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J 472
H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. Lodon: AshgaLe, pp. 73-92. 473
ue Llma, . (2012). 8oundary crosslng. MlgraLlon, belonglng/'unbelonglng' ln rural ScoLland. ln: 474
Pedberg C. and uo Carmo M. 8., (eds) ), 6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( 473
R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: Sprlnger, pp. 203-218. 476
uelaney, u. and LelLner, P. (1997): 1he pollLlcal consLrucLlon of scale. H'5"&"1%5 4.'#$%2,< BU (2), pp. 477
93-97. 478
uLLLuZL, C. and CuA11A8l, l. (1976). 8hlzome. MlnulL: arls. 479
uo Carmo, M. 8., and SanLos, S. (2012). 8eLween marglnallsaLlon and urbanlsaLlon. moblllLles and 480
soclal change ln SouLhern orLugal. ln: Pedberg C. and uo Carmo M. 8., (eds) ), 6$%(35'1%5 481
O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: Sprlnger, pp. 13-34. 482
Lscobar, A. (2001). CulLure slLs ln places: reflecLlons on globallsm and subalLern sLraLegles of 483
locallzaLlon. H'5"&"1%5 4.'#$%2,< SV, pp. 139-174. 484
lalsL, 1., and 8elsenauer, L. (2009). lnLroducLlon: MlgraLlon(s) and uevelopmenL(s): 1ransformaLlon 483
of aradlgms, CrganlsaLlons and Cender Crders. *'1"'5'#+3 WX(1), pp. 1-16. 486
leaLhersLone, u. (2011). Cn assemblage and arLlculaLlon. /$.% CQ(2), pp. 139-142. 487
lrelLag, u., and von Cppen, A. (2010a). lnLroducLlon. "1ranslocallLy": An Approach Lo ConnecLlon and 488
1ransfer ln Area SLudles. ln: lrelLag, u. and von Cppen, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5"&<7 6,. *&+-< '0 489
45'@%5"3"(# H$'1.33.3 0$': % *'+&,.$( H.$32.1&"M.. Lelden: 8rlll, pp. 490
- (eds) (2010b). 6$%(35'1%5"&<7 6,. *&+-< '0 45'@%5"3"(# H$'1.33.3 0$': % *'+&,.$( H.$32.1&"M.. 491
Lelden: 8rlll. 492

21

Can, W. (2006). "neL-moms" - a new place and a new ldenLlLy. ln: Cakes, 1. and Scheln, L., (eds), 493
6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(% ="(T%#.3J N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.. new ?ork: 8ouLledge, pp. 494
133-163. 493
Ceschlere 2009 1he erlls of 8elonglng. AuLochLhony, ClLlzenshlp, and Lxcluslon ln Afrlca & Lurope 496
Chlcago, unlverslLy of Chlcago ress. 497
Clddens, A. (1984). 6,. ?'(3&"&+&"'( '0 *'1".&<> D+&5"(. '0 &,. 6,.'$< '0 *&$+1&+$%&"'(. Cambrldge: 498
ollLy ress. 499
CoLLowlk, v. (2010). 1ransnaLlonal, 1ranslocal, 1ransculLural: Some 8emarks on Lhe 8elaLlons 300
beLween Plndu-8allnese and LLhnlc Chlnese ln 8all. *'I'+$(7 Y'+$(%5 '0 *'1"%5 N33+.3 "( 301
*'+&,.%3& /3"% SW(2), pp. 178-212. 302
CupLa A., and lerguson !. (1992). 8eyond "CulLure": Space, ldenLlLy, and Lhe ollLlcs of ulfference. 303
?+5&+$%5 /(&,$'2'5'#< 7(1), pp. 6-23. 304
Crelner, C. (2010). aLLerns of 1ranslocallLy: MlgraLlon, Llvellhoods and ldenLlLy ln norLhwesL 303
namlbla. *'1"'5'#+3 UVZS[, pp. 131-161. 306
- (2011). 1ranslocal neLworks and SLraLlflcaLlon ln namlbla. /0$"1%7 Y'+$(%5 '0 &,. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 307
/0$"1%( N(3&"&+&. EBZC[, pp. 606-627. 308
Crelner C., and Sakdapolrak . (2012) 8ural-urban mlgraLlon, agrarlan change, and Lhe envlronmenL 309
ln kenya: a crlLlcal revlew of Lhe llLeraLure. H'2+5%&"'( L R(M"$'(:.(&J pp. 1-30 (onllne flrsL) 310
Crlllo, 8., and 8lcclo, 8. (2004). 1ranslocal developmenL: lLaly-Senegal. H'2+5%&"'(J *2%1. %(- H5%1. 311
BV(2), pp. 99-111. 312
Cuarnlzo, L. L., and SmlLh, M. . (1998). 1he LocaLlons of 1ransnaLlonallsm. ln: SmlLh M. . and 313
Cuarnlzo L. L., (eds), 6$%(3(%&"'(%5"3: 0$': ;.5'P. new 8runswlck, London: 1ransacLlon 314
ubllshers, pp. 3-34. 313
Curan-nlca, L., and Sofer, M. (2012). MlgraLlon dynamlcs ln 8omanla and Leh counLer-urbanlsaLlon 316
process. A case sLudy of 8ucharesL's rural urban frlnge. ln: Pedberg C. and uo Carmo M. 8., 317
(eds) ), 6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: 318
Sprlnger, pp. 87-102. 319
Pall, S., and uaLLa, A. (2010). 1he Lranslocal sLreeL: Shop slgns and local mulLl-culLure along Lhe 320
WalworLh 8oad, souLh London. ?"&<J ?+5&+$. %(- *'1".&< B(2), pp. 69-77. 321
Pannerz u. (1996). 6$%(3(%&"'(%5 ?'((.1&"'(37 ?+5&+$.J H.'25.J H5%1.3. London: 8ouLledge. 322
PaLfleld, M. L. (2011). 8rlLlsh lamllles Movlng Pome: 1ranslocal Ceographles of 8eLurn MlgraLlon 323
from Slngapore. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A. (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J 324
?'((.1&"'(3. Lodon: AshgaLe, pp. 33-70. 323
Pedberg, C., and do Carmo, 8. M. (2012a). 1ranslocal 8urallsm: MoblllLy and ConnecLlvlLy ln 326
Luropean 8ural Spaces. ln: Pedberg, C. and do Carmo, 8. M., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3: 327
!'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. uordrechL: Sprlnger, pp. 1-9. 328

22

- (eds) (2012b). 6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3:7 !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. uordrechL: 329
Sprlnger. 330
PelvolrL, 8. v. (2011). CloballsaLlon and reglonal developmenL chalns: Lhe lmpacL of MeLro Cebu on 331
reglonal developmenL ln Lhe CenLral vlsayas, hlllpplnes. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# 332
O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 389-407. 333
PorLa, A. . 8. (2002). 6$%(3(%&"'(%5 F.&P'$T3 %(- &,. 5'1%5 2'5"&"13 '0 :"#$%(&3 #$%33$''&3 334
'$#%("A%&"'( "( 2'3&K1'5'("%5 H'$&+#%5. 1ransnaLlonal CommunlLles rogramme Worklng 333
aper Serles no. W1C 02-03. Cxford. 336
kaag, M. (2011). ConnecLlng Lo Lhe +::% Lhrough lslamlc rellef: LransnaLlonal lslamlc nCCs ln Chad. 337
N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 463-474. 338
kelly, . & 1. Lusls (2006): MlgraLlon and Lhe LransnaLlonal hablLus: evldence from Canada and Lhe 339
hlllpplnes. R(M"$'(:.(& %(- H5%(("(# / 38, pp. 831-847. 340
kokoL, W. (2007). CulLure and Space - anLhropologlcal approaches. LLhnoscrlpLs 9, pp. 10-23. 341
hLLp://www.eLhnologle.unl-hamburg.de/de/pdfs/LLhnoscrlpLs_pdf/es_9_1_arLlkel1.pdf (lasL 342
accessed 20 uecember 2012). 343
koLharl, u. (2002). MlgraLlon and Chronlc overLy. ManchesLer: lnsLlLuLe for uevelopmenL ollcy and 344
ManagemenL, unlverslLy of ManchesLer. 343
Lambek M. (2011). O.05.1&"'(3 '( ,.$:.(.+&"13 %(- &$%(35'1%5"&<. ZMC Worklng apers no. 4. : 346
8erlln: ZenLrum Moderner CrlenL. 347
Lange, 8., and 8uLLner k. (2010). SpaLlallzaLlon aLLerns of 1ranslocal knowledge neLworks: 348
ConcepLual undersLandlngs and Lmplrlcal Lvldences of Lrlangen and lrankfurL/Cder. 349
R+$'2.%( H5%(("(# *&+-".3 BE(6), pp. 989-1018. 330
Leung, M. (2011). Cf corrldors and chalns: Lranslocal developmenLal lmpacLs of academlc moblllLy 331
beLween Chlna and Cermany. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 473- 332
489. 333
Ley, u. (2004). 1ransnaLlonal spaces and everyday llves. 6$%(3%1&"'(3 '0 &,. N(3&"&+&. '0 ;$"&"3, 334
4.'#$%2,.$3 SX, pp. 131-164. 333
Long, n. (2008). 1ranslocal Llvellhoods, neLworks of lamlly and CommunlLy, and 8emlLLances ln 336
CenLral eru. ln: lom and Ssrc, (eds). Ceneva, new ?ork: lnLernaLlonal CrganlzaLlon for 337
MlgraLlon and Soclal Sclence 8esearch Councll, pp. 37-68. 338
Ma, L. k.-w. (2002). 1ranslocal spaLlallLy. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 Y'+$(%5 '0 ?+5&+$%5 *&+-".3 W, pp. 131-132. 339
Mandavllle, . (2002). 8eadlng Lhe sLaLe from elsewhere: Lowards an anLhropology of Lhe 360
posLnaLlonal. O.M".P '0 N(&.$(%&"'(%5 *&+-".3 SE(01), pp. 199-207. 361
Marlon, !. S. (2003). "Where" ls "1here"?: 1owards a 1ranslocal AnLhropology. /(&,$'2'5'#< F.P3 362
CU(3), pp. 18-18. 363
Mclarlane, C. (2009). 1ranslocal assemblages: Space, power and soclal movemenLs. 4.'0'$+: CV(4), 364
pp. 361-367. 363

23

Mckay, u. (2003). CulLlvaLlng new Local luLures: 8emlLLance Lconomles and Land-use aLLerns ln 366
lfugao, hlllpplnes. !ournal of SouLheasL Aslan SLudles 34(2), pp. 283-306. 367
Massey u. (1991). A Clobal Sense of lace. Marxlsm 1oday, pp. 24-29. 368
- (1999). ower-CeomeLrles and Lhe ollLlcs of Space and 1lme. PeLLner LecLure 1998, ueparLmenL 369
of Ceography, unlverslLy of Peldelberg. 370
noorloos, l. v. (2011). A LransnaLlonal neLworked space: Lraclng resldenLlal Lourlsm and lLs mulLl- 371
local lmpllcaLlons ln CosLa 8lca. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 429- 372
444. 373
nunez-Madrazo, C. (2007). Llvlng 'Pere and 1here': new MlgraLlon of 1ranslocal Workers from 374
veracruz Lo Lhe SouLheasLern unlLed SLaLes. /(&,$'2'5'#< '0 \'$T O.M".P SE(3), pp. 1-6. 373
Cakes, 1., and Scheln, L. (2006a). reface. ln: Cakes, 1. and Scheln, L., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(% 376
="(T%#.3J N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.. London: 8ouLledge, pp. xll-xlll. 377
- (eds) (2006b). 6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(%> ="(T%#.3J N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.. London: 378
8ouLledge. 379
Clwlg, k. l. (1997). CulLural slLes. SusLalnlng a home ln a deLerrlLorlallzed world. ln: Clwlg, k. l. and 380
PasLrup, k., (eds), *"&"(# ?+5&+$. 6,. 3,"0&"(# %(&,$'2'5'#"1%5 '@I.1&. London: 8ouLledge, pp. 381
17-38. 382
age, 8. (2011). lear of Small ulsLances: Pome AssoclaLlons ln uouala, uar es Salaam and London. ln: 383
8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".3 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. 384
larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 127-144. 383
age, 8., and Mercer, C. (2012). Why do people do sLuff? 8econcepLuallzlng remlLLance behavlour ln 386
dlaspora-developmenL research and pollcy. H$'#$.33 "( 8.M.5'2:.(& *&+-".3 BS, pp. 1-18. 387
apadopoulos, A. C. (2012). 1ransnaLlonal lmmlgraLlon ln rural Creece. Analyslng Lhe dlfferenL 388
moblllLles of Albanlan lmmlgranLs. ln: Pedberg, C. and uo Carmo, M. 8., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 389
O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: Sprlnger, pp. 163- 390
184. 391
elelkls, A. (2003). =.@%(.3. "( !'&"'(> 4.(-.$ %(- &,. !%T"(# '0 % 6$%(35'1%5 ]"55%#.. 8lelefeld: 392
Lranscrlp. 393
eLh, S. A. (2012). MlgraLlonspfade und ArbelLsraume ln 8angladesch - 1ranslokale Lebensslcherung 394
ln elner slch wandelnden (um)WelL. ueparLmenL of Ceography: 8helnlsche lrledrlch- 393
Wllhelms-unlverslLaL 8onn. unpubllshed MasLer 1hesls. 396
8au, P. (2012). 1he Lles LhaL blnd? SpaLlal (lmmoblllLles) and Lhe LransformaLlon of 8ural-urban 397
ConnecLlons. ln: Pedberg, C. and uo Carmo, M. 8., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- 398
?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: Sprlnger, pp. 33-33. 399
8eeLz, u. (2010). 'AlLernaLe' CloballLles? Cn Lhe CulLures and lormaLs of 1ransnaLlonal Musllm 600
neLworks from SouLh Asla. ln: lrelLag, u. and von Cppen, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5"&<7 6,. *&+-< 601
'0 45'@%5"3"(# H$'1.33.3 0$': % *'+&,.$( H.$32.1&"M.. Lelden: 8rlll, pp. 293-334. 602

24

Scheln, (2006). negoLlaLlng scale. Mlao women aL a dlsLance. ln: Cakes, 1. and Scheln, L., (eds), 603
6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(% ="(T%#.3J N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.. new ?ork: 8ouLledge, pp. 604
213-237. 603
SlnaLLl, C. (2006). ulasporlc CosmopollLanlsm and ConservaLlve 1ranslocallsm: narraLlves of naLlon 606
Among Senegalese MlgranLs ln lLaly. *&+-".3 "( R&,("1"&< %(- F%&"'(%5"3: U(3), pp. 30-30. 607
Slnger, A. and Massey, u. S. (1998). 1he Soclal rocess of undocumenLed 8order Crosslng among 608
Mexlcan. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 !"#$%&"'( O.M".P QS (3), 361-392. 609
SmlLh, M. . (2001). 6$%(3(%&"'(%5 G$@%("3:> ='1%&"(# 45'@%5"A%&"'(. Malden, MassachuseLLs 610
- (2011). 1ranslocallLy: A CrlLlcal 8eflecLlon. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A., (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 611
4.'#$%2,".3 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J ?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 181-198. 612
SLeel, C., WlnLers, n., and Sosa, C. (2011). MoblllLy, Lranslocal developmenL and Lhe shaplng of 613
developmenL corrldors ln (seml-)rural nlcaragua. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P 614
QQ(4), pp. 409-428. 613
SLelnbrlnk, M. (2009). =.@.( AP"31,.( *&%-& +(- =%(-> !"#$%&"'(J 6$%(35'T%5"&^& +(- ].$P+(-@%$T."& 616
"( *_-%0$"T%. Wlesbaden: vS verlag fur SozlalwlssenschafLen. 617
- (2010). 1he 8ole of AmaLeur looLball ln Clrcular MlgraLlon SysLems ln SouLh Afrlca. /0$"1% 618
*2.1&$+: CW(2), pp. 33-60. 619
SLenbacka, S. (2012). "1he rural" lnLervenlng ln Lhe llves of lnLernal and lnLernaLlonal mlgranLs. 620
MlgranLs, blographles and Lranslocal pracLlces. ln: Pedberg, C. and uo Carmo, M. 8., (eds), 621
6$%(35'1%5 O+$%5"3: !'@"5"&< %(- ?'((.1&"M"&< "( R+$'2.%( O+$%5 *2%1.3. Peldelberg: 622
Sprlnger, pp. 33-72. 623
Sun, W. (2006). 1he leavlng of Anhul. 1he souLhward [ourney Loward Lhe knowledge class. ln: Cakes, 624
1. and Scheln, L., (eds) , 6$%(35'1%5 ?,"(% ="(T%#.3J N-.(&"&".3J %(- &,. $.":%#"(# '0 32%1.. 623
new ?ork: 8ouLledge, pp. 238-262. 626
- (2010). narraLlng 1ranslocallLy: uagong oeLry and Lhe SubalLern lmaglnaLlon. MoblllLles 3(3), pp. 627
291-309. 628
Swyngedouw, L., 1997b. nelLher global nor local: glocallzaLlon and Lhe pollLlcs of scale. ln: Cox, k. 629
(Ld.), Spaces of CloballzaLlon. Cullford ress, new ?ork, pp. 137-166. 630
1an, 8. A. L., and ?eoh, 8. S. A. (2011). 1ranslocal lamlly 8elaLlons amongsL Lhe Lahu ln norLhern 631
1halland. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A. (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J 632
?'((.1&"'(3. larnham: AshgaLe, pp. 39-34. 633
1enhunen, S. (2011). CulLure, ConfllcL, and 1ranslocal CommunlcaLlon: Moblle 1echnology and 634
ollLlcs ln 8ural WesL 8engal, lndla. R&,('3 76(3), pp. 398-420 633
1rager, L. (2003). lnLroducLlon: 1he uynamlcs of MlgraLlon. ln: 1rager L., (ed) !"#$%&"'( %(- R1'(':< 636
45'@%5 %(- ='1%5 8<(%:"13. WalnuL Creek: AlLa Mlra ress, pp. 1-43. 637
ulmonen, . (2009). lnLerneL, arLs and LranslocallLy ln 1anzanla. *'1"%5 /(&,$'2'5'#< B`(3), pp. 276- 638
290. 639

23

unu (2009). Puman uevelopmenL 8eporL 2009. Cvercomlng barrlers: Puman moblllLy and 640
developmenL. unlLed naLlons uevelopmenL rogramme, new ?ork 641
velayuLham, S., and Wlse, A. (2003). Moral economles of a Lranslocal vlllage: obllgaLlon and shame 642
among SouLh lndlan LransnaLlonal mlgranLs. 45'@%5 F.&P'$T3 W(1), pp. 27-47. 643
verne, !. (2012). ="M"(# 6$%(35'1%5"&<> *2%1.J ?+5&+$. %(- R1'(':< "( ?'(&.:2'$%$< *P%,"5" 6$%-.. 644
SLuLLgarL: lranz SLelner verlag. 643
Wlse, A. (2011). ?ou wouldn'L know whaL's ln Lhere would you?' Pomellness and 'lorelgn' Slgns ln 646
Ashfleld, Sydney. ln: 8rlckell, k. and uaLLa, A. (eds), 6$%(35'1%5 4.'#$%2,".37 *2%1.3J H5%1.3J 647
?'((.1&"'(3. Lodon: AshgaLe, pp. 93-108. 648
Wlmmer, A., and Cllck Schlller, n. (2002). MeLhodologlcal naLlonallsm and beyond: naLlon-sLaLe 649
bulldlng, mlgraLlon and Lhe soclal sclences. Clobal neLworks 2(4), pp. 301-334. 630
Zoomers, A., and WesLen, C. v. (2011). lnLroducLlon: Lranslocal developmenL, developmenL corrldors 631
and developmenL chalns. N(&.$(%&"'(%5 8.M.5'2:.(& H5%(("(# O.M".P QQ(4), pp. 377-388. 632

Greiner Und Sakdapolrak - Translocality - Submitted Version

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Greiner Und Sakdapolrak - Translocality - Submitted Version

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AccepLed for publlcaLlon ln Ceography Compass

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi