22-23 June 1996
Oxford, Great Britain
Workshop 3

European Chinese and Chinese Domestic Migrants:

Common Themes in International and Internal Migration

The movement of population within and from China has assumed an unprecedented scale since the onset of the reforms in 1978. After decades of effective migration controls, the Chinese have gained the freedom to move to destinations in China itself and abroad that offer the prospect of a better life for themselves and their families. Currently, China experiencing a migration transition in the context of economic and social development similar to the experiences of other developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America (Skeldon 1990). Yet Chinese migration is, and will continue to be, unique in certain respects. First, the sheer number of people who are involved adds up to tens of millions, posing extraordinary challenges to authorities of the receiving areas and countries. Second, the strict controls on internal and international migration of the Maoist period (that have many historical precedents such as the Qing dynasty ban on international migration and Han Chinese migration to Manchuria) have not and probably will not be lifted completely. The hukou system especially will continue to be a powerful policy instrument to direct and to restrict population transfers. Third, cultural traits, such as ancestor worship, the importance of the in-group, and the stress on descent and common origin lend a specifically Chinese character to the migration of Chinese.

Scientific objectives
The workshop we propose here will contribute to the understanding of these crucial changes of Chinese society. More specifically, it endeavours to bridge the artificial gap separating two important fields in contemporary China Studies, namely internal migration in China and emigration from China, specifically to Europe. These massive population transfers are an important topic of scholarly research in modern China; understanding their demographic, economic, social, cultural, and political repercussions is vital to policy-makers and the business community in Europe who want to keep abreast of the development of contemporary China and its interaction with societies in Europe.
Over the past fifteen years, much research has been done on both Chinese internal migration and Chinese emigration. Surprisingly, however, students of Chinese internal and international migration have hardly interacted so far. The workshop will help discover the similarities (and dissimilarities) of many of the central issues in both fields, such as the social organization of migration, the structure and culture of migrant communities and the role of voluntary associations, the impact of migration on the home communities, entrepreneurship and employment, and the formation of regional and ethnic identities.
Internal and international Chines migration are two fragmented fields of academic inquiry. Chinese migration is thus studied in many different settings (China itself, Southeast Asia, North America, Australia, Europe) by researchers from many different countries and many different disciplinary backgrounds. Bringing scholars together in one workshop will contribute much to the maturation of Chinese internal and international migration studies and further their integration with and contribution to modern China Studies and general migration studies.

During the workshop, 15 researchers in Chinese internal and international migration will meet three specialists in general migration studies. The workshop will be conducted in English as the participants will be from Europe, China, Australia, and the U.S. Their papers and discussion will be aimed to achieve the following objectives:
1 To discover the communalities between Chinese internal migration and international migration, specifically to Europe;
2 To integrate the approaches to Chinese migration in disciplines such as sinology, anthropology, history, demography, sociology, social geography, political science;
3 To integrate Chinese migration studies in the larger fields of general migration studies and Chinese Studies;
4 To develop projects for collaborative research by scholars from different European countries and China.

Below, we will pinpoint the main themes of the workshop, followed by a discussion of the relevant organizational matters, an itemized budget, and a selected bibliography. In addition, two appendices are attached to this proposal. The first appendix is a list of scholars who will be invited to submit a paper proposal for the workshop. Resumes of the initiators are attached as the second appendix.

Themes
Roughly from 1958, China was characterized for a good two decades by strong anti- migration policies and relatively low levels of population mobility. Only after the onset of the reforms in the late 1970s, did population mobility started to increase and migration appeared on the political and research agendas. The relative newness of the phenomenon is the main reason for the paucity of migration data and studies. Investigations into population mobility in China can be divided into two types: first, large, nationwide, state- sponsored investigations like the 1990 census, the 1987 and 1995 intercensal surveys, and the 1986 survey by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences of migration in 74 cities and towns. The second type consists of local "floating population" surveys. These studies are usually prompted more by practical issues and perceived (but not necessarily substantiated) problems like urban planning complications, traffic congestion, transgression of family planning quotas, and increased crime, than by academic considerations. Publications tend to be oriented towards policy-making in a very general way, but in recent years there has been a trend in the direction of the use of empirical data and sophisticated techniques of demographic analysis. The main themes in the PRC migration literature are statistical issues (numbers of migrants, types of categories, problems of definition), characteristics of migrants, rural underemployment ("surplus labour"), and migration policy. Migration is often treated in terms of its "contributions" and "problems". The negative image of the migrant is perhaps best illustrated by the term mangliu (short for mangmu liudong) or blind mobility, which is commonly used in the media, daily speech, and even government publications, reinforcing the image of uncontrolled movement of a "vagrant population" subverting ordered social life. Here, the demographers often play a moderating role, by arguing for more a precise use of terms, and propagating the term liudong renkou, which is usually rendered as "floating population".
Chinese demographic research has yielded useful information but covers only a limited range of topics. Fortunately, Chinese anthropologists and sociologists have recently become interested in migration. Their research holds considerable promise as it addresses broader issues such as the organization of migration networks, the social structure of migrant communities, and the impact of migration on the migrants' home communities.

Studies by scholars outside the PRC have long been concerned with urbanization, rather than migration per se, and much has been written on the problems of estimating the migration to urban places, and its contribution of migration to urban growth and urbanization. Focusing more on migration as a phenomenon in itself, the work of Sidney Goldstein and Alice Goldstein (sometimes in cooperation with Chinese authors) consists of thorough demographic analyses, especially of the different characteristics of permanent and temporary migrants. Both types of work derive their data from Chinese official statistics and migration surveys. A few authors have undertaken their own fieldwork, and this usually takes place in rural areas rather than urban places.
A somewhat separate topic is the role of state policy and the relationship of the state to migrants. Migration policy in the Chinese case is embodied in the so-called household registration system, which for two decades formed a formidable obstacle to rural-urban migration, but is increasingly being undermined by the effects of institutional and economic reform. Given the strongly developed sense of regional belonging of many Chinese, it is surprising that almost no studies exist about local identity and ethnicity of migrants. Apart from the work of Emily Honig, the only other author who has taken an interest in these issues is Helen Siu.
Overseas Chinese migration and communities are an older and larger field of research than Chinese internal migration. Much of the work on overseas Chinese migration, migrant associations, ties to the home community, entrepreneurship and employment, and ethnic identity is directly or indirectly relevant to Chinese internal migration. But whereas the Chinese in Southeast Asia and North America are well-researched, much less is known about the Chinese in Europe. Up to now, research on the overseas Chinese in Europe has focused on France, Great-Britain, the Netherlands, and more recently Italy. Much less information is as yet available on the large Chinese communities in Germany, Spain, and Portugal, Belgium, the Scandinavian countries, and Eastern Europe. However, even more problematic is the fact that, with only a few exceptions almost all research is limited to a Chinese community in one single European country, neglecting the fact that the Chinese population in Europe is made up of several discrete transnational communities with a shared history and extensive networks often spanning the entire continent. We strongly feel that a correction of this image is long overdue by specifically concentrating research on the Chinese as a pan-European ethnic group.
The surge of immigration to Europe is one of the most hotly debated issues in Europe. Unfortunately, the debate is cast almost exclusively in terms of problems (unemployment, crime, racism) and financial cost (social security, social work, housing). The parallel with the discussion in China on the "floating population" is obvious. The Netherlands is a case in point. In view of the heated debate about the introduction of compulsory ID cards in this country as a means of controlling illegal immigration, it is interesting to note that the Chinese authorities introduced a national ID card in the late 1980s in reaction to increased - and partly unwanted - migration in urban areas. A better understanding of the nature and long history of migration to Europe, the lives of migrants, and the integration of the second generation will do much to improve the image of the migrant that has been undeservedly tainted in such superficial and polarized debates. Migrants, moreover, are not just a drain on the exchequer. Their labour, entrepreneurship, skills, and capital contribute vitally to economic growth. Mobility of migrants between European countries, for instance, is much more than the flow of people to those countries where social security is best. It is also a way for immigrants to create and optimize business and employment opportunities throughout the continent. Research on Chinese immigration to Europe could help ameliorate this lopsided picture as the Chinese are among the most successful and entrepreneurially minded immigrants.
To arrive at a more balanced picture, we need much more information concerning the immigration, settlement, and employment of immigrant groups from a European rather than a national perspective. What does Europe look like through the eyes of immigrants and how do they negotiate its challenges and avail themselves of its opportunities? What are the patterns of international and interregional mobility of immigrant groups after their arrival in Europe and how can these patterns be explained? What are the resources they use and the opportunities they seek? Which organizations do immigrants establish or turn to for information or help? What role do local and pan-European networks of immigrants play to gather information, discover opportunities, and find support?
To discover the many similarities between internal and international Chinese migration we propose to start with questions of method by asking Who is a migrant? This seems a trivial point but a number of important themes emerge when this question is explored.
A migrant is a person away for his or her home. Migrants spend a considerable time in another social environment where they are outsiders in opposition to dominant groups of established residents. This opposition highlights a first cluster of themes: identity, stereotyping, discrimination, power differentials, and exploitation. When confronted with other people, migrants have to question and redefine identities previously taken for granted. Identities are a social and psychological resource for survival in an alien environment. A shared identity may, for instance, help to build mutual-aid networks that assist migrants to get housing, jobs, or loans. When internal and international migration are compared, migrant organizations rooted in mutual-aid networks are a topic of special interest.
A shared identity can also be the basis of stereotyping and discrimination by established residents who want to hold on to their dominant position and superior access to strategic resources. Here the role of the state is crucial. In China, the state often reinforces negative stereotypes of migrants through its manipulation of terms such as mangliu. In Europe, the state's representation of immigrants is ambiguous. On the one hand, economic immigrants (as opposed to political refugees) are often condemned as opportunistic fortune-seekers. On the other hand, the minorities policies of most European states have been designed to further the integration of established immigrant communities. Simultaneously, however, these policies unintentionally reinforce stereotypes held by the autochthonous population of immigrants as dependent free riders who have come to Europe to enjoy the social benefits paid for by local tax payers.
Migrants may be moving to far-away places but they usually remain members of the home community. This leads to a second cluster of themes: the impact of migration on the families and communities of origin. Migration is usually a strategic family decision of labour allocation and portfolio diversification, giving rise to geographically dispersed but functionally connected "expanded" families. Even sort-term circulation can have a profound impact on the (sexual) division of labour within families, and even on the decision whether or not women live with their husband's family after marriage.
Not only the migrant's family plays an important role in the migration process. Migration often involves both the home community (village) and the community of migrants at the destination. Indeed through migration these communities are organically linked, an aspect lost when migration is only viewed in spatial terms. Migration takes place in the context of dense networks that link communities of origin and destination. Local authorities, both at the place of origin and destination, are actively involved in facilitating, regulating, or restricting the flow of migrants. In other cases, enterprises employ scouts to recruit workers. More often, migrants find employment through informal contacts established by chain migration. A well-researched aspect of Chinese international migration, such migration mechanisms is totally unexplored in the study of Chinese internal migration.

Organization
The workshop will be held in Paris on 22 and 23 June 1996 in the context of the fourth meeting of the Göran Aijmer European China Anthropology Network. The advantages of this arrangement will be: 1 The workshop can be advertised through the network's newsletter;
2 In addition to the participants, a larger audience of modern China specialists will be present which will stimulate the general discussion and will help towards a better incorporation of migration research in China studies.
3 The anthropological and sociological orientation of the network's members will provide a disciplinary perspective that thus far has been lacking, especially in internal migration studies.

Initiators
Frank Pieke (University of Leiden / University of Oxford); Hein Mallee (University of Leiden); Flemming Christiansen (University of manchester); Mette Thunø (NIAS, Copenhagen)

Correspondence address
Frank Pieke
Sinological Institute
P.O. Box 9515
2300 RA Leiden
The Netherlands
Tel: +31-71-5272530
Fax: +31-71-5272625
E-mail: pieke@let.leidenuniv.nl



Homepage  IIAS Newsletter   IIASN-6  ESF News