What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Why do governments form institutions devoted to emigrants and their descendants in the diaspora? Such institutions have become a regular feature of political life in many parts of the world: Over half all United Nations Member States now have one. Diaspora institutions merit research because they connect new developments in the global governance of migration with new patterns of national and transnational sovereignty and citizenship, and new ways of constructing individual identity in relation to new collectivities. But these institutions are generally overlooked. Migration policy is still understood as immigration policy, and research on diaspora institutions has been fragmented, case-study dominated, and largely descriptive. In this article, I review and extend the relevant theoretical literature and highlight empirical research priorities. I argue that existing studies focus too exclusively on national-level interests and ideas to explain how individual states tap diaspora resources and embrace these groups within the nation-state. However, these approaches cannot explain the global spread of diaspora institutions. This, I argue, requires a comparative approach and greater attention to the role of efforts to create a coherent but decentralized system of global governance in the area of international migration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diaspora Institutions and Diaspora Governance

https://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/102448/3/hdl_102448.pdf

Comparing and theorizing state-diaspora relations

Why do states establish and empower diaspora engagement institutions? Origin-state institutions dedicated to emigrants and their descendants have been largely overlooked in mainstream political studies, perhaps because they fall in the grey area between domestic politics and international relations. Now, diaspora institutions are found in over half of all United Nations member states, yet we have little theory and broad-sample statistical evidence to guide our understanding about when they are more likely to emerge and increase in importance. In response, we identify and then investigate empirical support for three theoretically-grounded perspectives on diaspora institution emergence and importance: instrumentally rational states tapping resources of emigrants and their descendants; value-rational states embracing lost members of the nation-state; institutionally-converging states governing diasporas consistent with global norms. We document support for these alternative perspectives in regression and related analyses modelling diaspora institution emergence and importance in 144 states observed from 1990-2010. Tapping perspective estimations exhibit better overall model fit compared to estimations based on other perspectives. Estimations combining perspectives exhibit the best model fit. Individual terms exhibiting signs contrary to prediction suggest new directions for theoretical and empirical research from different perspectives. We advance international relations research by identifying, distinguishing and testing alternative perspectives explaining diaspora institution emergence and importance. We also advance international relations practice and policy with evidence-guided insight on near-term trends in institution emergence and importance.

/pdf/explaining-the-rise-of-diaspora-institutions-4co65ver0z.pdf

Explaining the Rise of Diaspora Institutions

This review focuses on the enactment of borders beyond the physical demarcation of the nation, to encompass the entire migratory process, with particular attention to practices in the United States and the European Union. It addresses the twin processes of the externalization (outsourcing) and internalization (insourcing) of border controls, both of which rest on the securitization of migration management. Outsourcing involves a series of extraterritorial activities in sending and in transit countries at the request of the more powerful receiving state. Insourcing includes the policing of immigrants and enforcement controls within the interior, such as the detection, detention, and deportation of immigrants. This multipronged strategy that extends beyond the edges of a territory highlights the spaciality of enforcement and the buttressing of power imbalances between sending countries, on one hand, and transit and receiving countries, on the other, as well as inequalities within national territories with r...

Immigration Law Beyond Borders: Externalizing and Internalizing Border Controls in an Era of Securitization

The diffusion of diaspora engagement policies: A Latin American agenda

In the past two decades, changes in the Mexican government's policies toward the 30 million Mexican migrants living in the US highlight the importance of the Mexican diaspora in both countries given its size, its economic power and its growing political participation across borders. This work examines how the Mexican government's assessment of the possibilities and consequences of implementing certain emigration policies from 1848 to 2010 has been tied to changes in the bilateral relationship, which remains a key factor in Mexico's current development of strategies and policies in relation to migrants in the United States. Understanding this dynamic gives an insight into the stated and unstated objectives of Mexico's recent activism in defending migrants' rights and engaging the diaspora, the continuing linkage between Mexican migration policies and shifts in the US-Mexico relationship, and the limits and possibilities for expanding shared mechanisms for the management of migration within the NAFTA framework.

/pdf/mexico-and-its-diaspora-in-the-united-states-policies-of-4af2k1k5ky.pdf

Mexico and its Diaspora in the United States: Policies of Emigration since 1848

Recent work on transnationalism provides evidence to support the argument that transnational ties to the home country and integration into the host state are not mutually exclusive processes (Levitt and Glick-Schiller, 2004). Moreover, connections to the home country attenuate over time and by the third generation immigrants are usually fully integrated into the receiving country. Given that some of the existing transnational ties are encouraged and facilitated by the home country, critics of sending states' diaspora engagement activities argue that their promotion of ongoing transborder connections limits immigrants' integration into the host state. The case of Mexico shows that there are stated and unstated objectives in the state's diaspora engagement policies, including the promotion of the government's political and economic interests, the need to maintain its legitimacy at home and abroad, and the interest in facilitating and securing remittance flows. But since the 1990s the programs developed by the Mexican government directed to migrants in the U.S. also seek to improve their living conditions in the host country. An issue that requires further exploration and is addressed in this paper is whether and how the services that Mexico provides to emigrants through its 50 consulates and the Institute of Mexicans Abroad (IME) contribute to or limit migrants' process of integration in the United States. Such services include, among others, preventive health care and medical referrals, adult education programs, and leadership development. This paper examines the effects of the Mexican government's programs on the integration of Mexican immigrants based on interviews in various U.S. cities. It also examines the response in the U.S. to the Mexican government's active role in this regard.

Immigrant Integration vs. Transnational Ties?: The Role of the Sending State

This article examines the processes of investigation and gathering evidence about victims of the September 11 attacks to better understand the inability of state and nonstate institutions to effect...

Alexandra Délano

Papers

Comparing and theorizing state-diaspora relations

The diffusion of diaspora engagement policies: A Latin American agenda

Mexico and its Diaspora in the United States: Policies of Emigration since 1848

Immigrant Integration vs. Transnational Ties?: The Role of the Sending State

Invisible Victims: Undocumented Migrants and the Aftermath of September 11*