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

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the direct and indirect effects of the Mexican government's programs on the social, economic and political integration of Mexican immigrants into the United States, and show 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.

Abstract: 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; DeSipio, 2006; Waldinger, 2008; Portes, Escobar and Arana, 2008; Smith and Backer, 2008). Moreover, connections to the home country attenuate over time and by the third generation immigrants are usually fully integrated into the receiving country. This is measured by their level of English proficiency, social and economic mobility and civic participation, among other variables. 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. Critics argue that programs developed by sending states to reach out to their diasporas seek to discourage their social and political integration because this could endanger remittance flows and migrant investments and prevent the return of migrants (especially considering the effects of brain drain). Moreover, continuing home state-migrant connections are assumed to create dual loyalties that prevent a full comittment to the host country. 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 United States also seek to protect their rights and improve their living conditions in the country. These programs do not attempt to hinder or substitute the host state’s role in facilitating the process of immigrant integration. However, 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 through the Institute of Mexicans Abroad (IME) contribute to or limit migrants’ process of integration into the United States. Such services include preventive health services and referrals (e.g. Ventanillas de Salud); adult education programs through community centers (e.g. Plazas Comunitarias) and text book donations; financial literacy services and access to banks by promoting the acceptance of consular ID’s (matriculas consulares) and allowing banks to reach out to immigrants in consulates; developing migrants’ skills and capacities through Information Seminars (Jornadas Informativas) that bring together Mexican, Mexican-American and other U.S.-based community leaders and experts to develop common agendas on issues that range from sports and community leadership to media and education; and promoting the establishment of a network of migrant leaders through the IME’s Advisory Council (CCIME). This paper examines the direct and indirect effects of the Mexican government’s programs on the social, economic and political integration of Mexican immigrants into the United States.