International migration literature has shown that infrastructures consisting of people and institutions sustain migration and help migrants cope in new environments. However, analytic focus on these infrastructures is often limited to the migration process and its impact on migrants. This article extends the growing literature on migration infrastructure by analyzing its socially reproductive capacities in the context of economic development in Thailand. Drawing on ethnographic and interview data from the Tak border zone, I show how the social and humanitarian dimensions of migration infrastructure that grew from war displacement, labor migration, and migrant survival efforts became essential to economic development aims of the Thai state. Through this case, I illustrate a process of infrastructural co-optation by which the state harnesses grassroots and humanitarian actors’ capacities for childcare, education, and healthcare to advance such aims. Authorities spatially contain migrant workers with limited rights and social protections while loosely engaging with parts of the border's infrastructure, which keeps noncitizen workers alive and available for low-wage jobs. The findings show that aspects of migration infrastructure are co-optable, with impact beyond the migration process and for non-migrants.
ArnoldD.HewisonK.. 2005. “Exploitation in Global Supply Chains: Burmese Workers in Mae Sot.” Journal of Contemporary Asia35(3): 319–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472330580000191
Board of Investment (BOI). 2015. “A Guide to Investment in the Special Economic Development Zones.
5.
The Border Consortium (TBC). 2004. Twenty Years on the Border. Mae Sot, Thailand: The Border Consortium (formerly Burmese Border Consortium).
6.
BurawoyM.1976. “The Functions and Reproduction of Migrant Labor: Comparative Material from South Africa and the United States.” American Journal of Sociology81(5): 1050–87. https://doi.org/10.1086/226185
CampbellS.2018. Border Capitalism, Disrupted: Precarity and Struggle at a Southeast Asian Industrial Zone. Ithaca: ILR Press, an imprint of Cornell University Press.
9.
ChangA. S.2018. “Producing the Self-Regulating Subject: Liberal Protection in Indonesia’s Migration Infrastructure.” Pacific Affairs91(4): 695–716. https://doi.org/10.5509/2018914695
10.
ChuangJ.2016. “Factory Girls After the Factory: Female Return Migrations in Rural China.” Gender & Society30 (3): 467–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243215621718
11.
EhrenreichB.HochschildA., eds. 2004. Global Woman: Nannies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy. 1st Owl Books ed. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
12.
FergusonS.McNallyD.. 2015. “Precarious Migrants: Gender, Race and the Social Reproduction of a Global Working Class.” Socialist Register51: 1–23.
13.
Fiddian-QasmiyehE.2018. “Southern-Led Responses to Displacement.” In Routledge Handbook of South-South Relations, edited by DaleyP.Fiddian-QasmiyehE., 239–55. Oxfordshire: Routledge.
14.
FraserN.2016. “Contradictions of Capital and Care.” New Left Review100 (100): 99–117.
15.
Gammeltoft-HansenT.SørensenN. N., eds. 2013. The Migration Industry and the Commercialization of International Migration. London; New York: Routledge.
16.
HallS. M.2020. “Social Reproduction as Social Infrastructure.” Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture76(1): 82–94. https://doi.org/10.3898/SOUN.76.06.2020
17.
Hernández-LeónR.2008. Metropolitan Migrants: The Migration of Urban Mexicans to the United States/Rubén Hernández-León. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18.
HerreraG.2008. “States, Work and Social Reproduction Through the Lens of Migrant Experience: Ecuadorian Domestic Workers in Madrid.” In Beyond States and Markets: The Challenges of Social Reproduction, edited by BakkerI.SilveyR., 93–107. New York: Routledge.
KlinenbergE.2018. Palaces for the People: How Social Infrastructure Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization, and the Decline of Civic Life. First edition. New York: Crown.
21.
LathamA.LaytonJ.. 2019. “Social Infrastructure and the Public Life of Cities: Studying Urban Sociality and Public Spaces.” Geography Compass13(7): e12444. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12444
22.
LeeC. K.2007. Against the Law: Labor Protests in China’s Rustbelt and Sunbelt. Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press.
23.
LinW.LindquistJ.XiangB.YeohB. S. A.. 2017. “Migration Infrastructures and the Production of Migrant Mobilities.” Mobilities12(2): 167–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1292770
24.
LindquistJ.2017. “Brokers, Channels, Infrastructure: Moving Migrant Labor in the Indonesian-Malaysian Oil Palm Complex.” Mobilities12(2): 213–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1292778
25.
LindquistJ.XiangB.YeohB. S. A.. 2012. “Introduction: Opening the Black Box of Migration: Brokers, the Organization of Transnational Mobility and the Changing Political Economy in Asia.” Pacific Affairs85(1): 7–19. https://doi.org/10.5509/20128517
26.
MartinN.2010. “The Crisis of Social Reproduction among Migrant Workers: Interrogating the Role of Migrant Civil Society.” Antipode42(1): 127–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00734.x
27.
MarxKarl. 1992 [1867]. A Critique of Political Economy. Vol. 1. London: Penguin Classics.
28.
MasseyD.ArangoJoaquínHugoGraemeKouaouciAli PellegrinoAdelaTaylorJ Edward1998. Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millenium. Oxford, U.K.: New York: Clarendon Press; Oxford University Press.
29.
Mekong Migration Network (MMN). 2013. Migration in the Greater Mekong Subregion Resource Book, In-Depth Study: Border Economic Zones and Migration. Chiang Mai: Mekong Migration Network (MMN) and Asian Migrant Centre (AMC).
30.
Mekong Migration Network (MMN). 2019. Jobs in SEZs: Migrant Garment Factory Workers in the Mekong Region. Chiang Mai: Asian Institute of Technology and Mekong Migration Network.
31.
MiraftabF.2011. “Faraway Intimate Development: Global Restructuring of Social Reproduction.” Journal of Planning Education and Research31: 392–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X11420573
32.
MitchellK.MarstonS.KatzC., eds. 2004. Life’s Work: Geographies of Social Reproduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
33.
National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). 2015. Thailand’s Special Economic Zones.
34.
National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). 2018. Border SEZ Development Policy.
35.
NyeinNyein. 2019. Thirty Years On, Mae Tao Clinic Continues to Provide Life Saving Services.” The Irrawaddy.
36.
ParrenasR.2000. “Migrant Filipina Domestic Workers and the International Division of Reproductive Labor.” Gender and Society14(4): 560–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912430001400400
37.
ParrenasR., ed. 2001. Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration and Domestic Work. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
38.
PearsonR.KusakabeK.. 2012a. Thailand’s Hidden Workforce: Burmese Migrant Women Factory Workers. London: New York: New York: Zed Books. distributed in the USA exclusively by Palgrave Macmillan.
39.
PearsonR.KusakabeK.. 2012b. “Who Cares? Gender, Reproduction, and Care Chains of Burmese Migrant Workers in Thailand.” Feminist Economics18(2): 149–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2012.691206
40.
PongsawatP.2007. “Border Partial Citizenship, Border Towns, and Thai-Myanmar Cross-Border Development: Case Studies at the Thai Border Towns.” PhD dissertation. University of California, Berkeley.
41.
PortesA.RumbautR. G.. 2014. Immigrant America: A Portrait. 4th ed. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
42.
SeigerFiona-Katharina. 2021. “Migration infrastructure, moral economy, and intergenerational injustice in mother-and-child migration from the Philippines to Japan.” Mobilities16 (5): 707–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2021.1967093
43.
ShresthaT.YeohB. S. A.. 2018. “Introduction: Practices of Brokerage and the Making of Migration Infrastructures in Asia.” Pacific Affairs91(4): 663–72. https://doi.org/10.5509/2018914663
44.
SimoneA. M.2004. “People as Infrastructure: Intersecting Fragments in Johannesburg.” Public Culture16 (3): 407–29.
45.
SmallM. L.2009. “`How Many Cases Do I Need?’ On Science and the Logic of Case Selection in Field-Based Research.” Ethnography10(1): 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138108099586
46.
SouthA.2011. Burma’s Longest War: Anatomy of the Karen Conflict. Amsterdam: Transnational Institute.
SurakK.2018. “Migration Industries and the State: Guestwork Programs in East Asia.” International Migration Review52. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.1230
49.
VogelL.1983. Marxism and the Oppression of Women: Toward a Unitary Theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
50.
WaldingerR.LichterM.. 2003. How the Other Half Works: Immigration and the Social Organization of Labor. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
XiangBiaoLindquistJohan. 2018. Postscript: Infrastructuralization: Evolving Sociopolitical Dynamics in Labor Migration from Asia91. https://doi.org/10.5509/20189147593
53.
YeatesN.2012. “Global Care Chains: A State-of-the-Art Review and Future Directions in Care Transnationalization Research.” Global Networks12(2): 135–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0374.2012.00344.x
54.
ZhouM.2004. “Revisiting Ethnic Entrepreneurship: Convergencies, Controversies, and Conceptual Advancements.” International Migration Review38(3): 1040–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00228.x
