Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The India–US migration corridor is one of the most prominent pathways for skilled migration in India. Every year thousands of skilled individuals emigrate to the US for work on H1B visa. There is a parallel migration of spouses of such visa holders on an H4 visa, a dependent visa which restricts several financial as well as non-financial freedom of an individual. The paper dwells on understanding why educated and independent women choose to migrate on a dependent visa and the choice baskets available to them. Given the choices available, how are the decisions concerning migration on dependent spouse visas undertaken?

Executive Summary

The India–US migration corridor is one of the most prominent pathways for skilled migration in India. Every year thousands of skilled individuals emigrate to the United States for work mostly on H1B visas. Along with these H1B visa holders, there is a parallel migration of spouses of such visa holders. These spouses migrate to the United States on an H4 visa, a dependent visa which restricts several financial as well as non-financial freedom of an individual. The spouses who migrate on an H4 visa are generally highly educated and skilled; however, they are not permitted to be a part of the labour force in the United States. Migration decision-making has mostly been studied in a gender-neutral way. Adding gender as a variable for understanding migration provides deeper insight into how societal structure and cultural norms play an important role in migration decision-making. This article dwells on understanding why educated and independent women choose to migrate on a dependent visa and what are the choice baskets available to them. Given the choices available, how are the decisions concerning migration on dependent spouse visas undertaken? The paper is based on the primary data, both qualitative and quantitative, collected from 90 Indian immigrant women on H4 visas in the United States. The research finds that the skewed allotment of H1B visas to men often places women on H4 visas, highlighting the complexities of their migration decisions. These women navigate multiple identities shaped by education, aspirations and cultural norms. Decision-making involves informal information channels like social media and household dynamics, varying by the spouse’s location at marriage. Households uphold patrilocal norms, subtly influencing women to migrate with their husbands. Choices made within these structures are rarely absolute; women rationalize them to appear independent, revealing a conflict between their imagined and real selves. This underscores how social frameworks shape agency in migration for women on H4 visas.

Keywords

Immigration Spouse migration Visa Dependency

According to the World Migration Report 2022, the India–US migration corridor is one of the most prominent pathways for skilled migration in India (McAuliffe & Triandafyllidou, 2021). Every year, thousands of skilled individuals emigrate to the United States for work. A large proportion of them migrate on H1B visas. The H1B visa is a skilled migration visa for the United States, which is allotted to individuals employed by the US employer in a speciality occupation. The visa is one of the most sought-after visas to migrate to the United States. There is an annual capping of 85,000 visas from India. However, every year, the demand for H1B visas is much more than the supply of the same. Hence, the H1B visas are finally allotted on a lottery basis.

There is a clear gendered pattern in the provisioning of the H1B visa. This emanated because every year, the percentage of male applicants is much more than that of females. Male files approximately 80% of the H1B visas from India, compared to about 20% by females (USCIS, 2019, 2020). Therefore, it is mostly males who are allotted the H1B visa to migrate to the United States as a part of the skilled workforce.

Along with these H1B visa holders, there is a parallel migration of their spouses on an H4 visa. The H4 visa is a dependent visa which restricts several financial as well as non-financial freedoms of an individual. The spouses who migrate, predominantly women, on an H4 visa are generally highly educated and skilled; however, they are not permitted to be a part of the labour force in the United States.

The article examines the process of decision-making for such migration where the expected future income of an individual will decrease along with an increase in uncertainty about future participation in the labour market. Migration decision-making has mostly been studied in a gender-neutral way. Adding ‘gender’ as a variable for understanding migration provides deeper insight into how societal structure and cultural norms play an important role in migration decision-making.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL UNDERPINNING

There have been different schools of thought which emphasize the role of decision-making in the migration of an individual. The basic question is who gets to make the decision to migrate? Is it the individuals themselves, the household, the community/society or the nation-state at the larger level? Different schools locate the locus of decision-making on a different group of people. To unpack this decision-making debate, two terms are frequently used—agency and structure—and hence need to be defined at the onset. According to the Dutch sociologist and migration studies scholar De Haas:

…agency reflects the limited—but real—ability of the individual to make independent choices and impose them on the world…. Structure can be defined as patterns of social relations, beliefs and behaviour …thus significantly constraining their freedom or agency as well as their ideas, knowledge and self-consciousness. (De Haas, 2021, p. 14)

The neo-classical school of thought has given primacy to the agency of an individual in making the decision for migration. According to theorists like Ravenstein, Lee, Stouffer and so on, it is the individual who makes the decision whether to migrate or not. The individual is considered to be a rational actor who bases their decisions based on the push and pull factor of the economy. Wage differentials, better standard of living, job security, etc., were considered to be some of the factors on which an individual would base their decision and choose the region they would like to migrate. This school of thought was criticized on the grounds that in the case of forced migration, people do not have their own agency. However, the contemporary debate also discusses the aspect of agency in the context of forced migration. Also, this school of thought placed a predominant emphasis on wage and employment.

The extension of this model was the New Economics of Labour Migration, which acclaims that the decisions to migrate are made not just by an individual but by their families. This decision-making is influenced by race, gender, caste, class and other such social indices. The understanding predominantly has shifted from locating the centre of decision-making away from the individual towards the household. Boyd and Grieco (2003) divulge that the decision to migrate depends on the hierarchies within the family. Women often do not have much role in decision-making concerning migration. Even in a scenario where she migrates alone, her migration is contingent upon the family strategies of expected benefit through remittances. The social conditioning of women based on their experience is rooted in societal norms and culture and often influences one’s motivation and aspiration to migrate. Therefore, migration decision is predominantly located in the household or the family. The family bases their decisions on the cost and benefit which will arise because of the migration. The cost is perceived in terms of the cost associated with movement and settlement in another country, while the benefit is seen in terms of remittances. Here the central idea is to minimize the risk via migration. This theory was further criticized for its micro perspective and a complete discard of the macro perspective of viewing migration.

Later, the structural theory of migration postulated that migration decisions took place under the situations or conditions which are created by the existing structure such as economic structure, that is, where the labour demand from the developed countries induces migration or the political structure of visa and immigration laws, the social structure of gender and class. All the forces work to bring about migration. One such structure describing migration is the world system theory (Wallerstein, 1974) and the dependency theory (Frank, 1966), which take into consideration the larger geopolitical and economic changes at the macro level. According to these theories, the world is seen in the binaries of the centre and periphery. This binary is created due to the unequal distribution of power contingent upon history, geographical location, economy and other such factors. Here, both the centre and the periphery are dependent on each other, and any change in the centre will lead to changes in the periphery. The centre represents the developed nations, and the peripheries are the developing nations which are also the migrant-sending countries. Therefore, the decision-making aspect of migration was considered to be the one guided by the geopolitical and economic situation.

With globalization and the changing nature of migration, there have been several new forms of migration patterns emerging which could not be answered through the traditional understanding of migration. For example, Cohen and Sirkeci (2011) moved beyond the individual or household as the decision-maker to bring forth the complexity of the situation. This complexity emerged as the migrant interacts with multiple factors in different domains, which collectively guide the decision to migrate. However, over time, such a type of migration also turns out to be the culture of migration, one that explains why people from certain geographical regions are more mobile than others.

Therefore, understanding the locus of decision-making is rather complex and is formed at the amalgamation of various factors right from individual agency, the societal structure, the cultural norms, the household decisions, the social capital and the larger geopolitical structure operating at the macro level.

It has often been seen that the migration of women is placed in the categorical terms of ‘forced’ or ‘voluntary’. Here forced migration implies no agency while voluntary migration implies complete agency towards undertaking the migration decisions. However, much of the migrations concerning women are located somewhere between the two. There is a trade-off between the forces, as well as the voluntary component. Such debate on forced versus voluntary surfaces in cases such as a daughter from a Philippian family being sent to another country to work as a maid and to send back remittance. A woman migrating to escape the caste and gender barriers in their home. A woman from Kerala migrating to Gulf nations to work as domestic help to finance the education of their children at home. Young girls migrating from rural Tamil Nadu to collect money for their dowry and so on (Jolly & Reeves, 2005; Remesh, 2020). Constable (2005) while discussing the mail-order-bride locates such delusionary space of agency where she mentions that the agency of women is somewhere placed between her choices and the constraining structures and circumstances. For example, the decision to migrate by a young Philippine woman for the purpose of marriage, though located within the domain of her personal choice and for economic betterment, is also motivated by the need to meet familial obligations.

While discussing the agency of women through such channels of migration, women have often been portrayed as victims, docile and powerless. It is believed that they do not have any agency in decision-making regarding such marriages. Feminist philosopher Maria Lugones, in the context of mail-order-bride, acclaims that these women who travel to another country for the purpose of marriage are subjects, lively beings, resistors and constructors of vision, rather than mere victims (Remon, 2018).

METHODOLOGY

The article is based on the primary data, both qualitative and quantitative, collected from 90 Indian immigrant women on H4 visas in the United States. For the primary data, a non-probability sampling design was used, that is, convenience sampling, purposive sampling and snowball sampling. The data were collected using a questionnaire as well as telephonic interviews. Initially, it was planned to visit the United States to conduct the fieldwork. However, because of COVID, travel was suspended. Hence, as an alternative, telephonic interviews were conducted.

The respondents were contacted both through social media and personal contacts. Initially, an online survey tool with just ten preliminary questions, with all the details about the study along with research ethics of consent and anonymity being detailed, was prepared on SurveyMonkey. The link as well as the QR code for the questionnaire was generated and circulated to different individuals. The research participants could easily access the tool and could fill in the questionnaire with the preliminary information. This preliminary questionnaire helped to introduce my study to the respondents and also to gain consent from them for the telephonic interview. The interviews were conducted mostly according to the US time zone and would last for approximately 40–80 minutes. The entire process of data collection was carried out for 21 months, that is, from February 2020 to November 2021.

Seventy-seven per cent of respondents were between 30 and 40 years of age. There were no respondents below the age of 25 years, and only four respondents were above the age of 40 years. The respondents of the study were from the states of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh Telangana, Jharkhand, Delhi NCR and Gujarat. Fifty-two per cent of the respondents had completed their undergraduate degree, while 31% had their postgraduate degrees. Five respondents had advanced research degrees like MPhil and PhD. All these women were engaged in the labour market before migrating to the United States on a dependent visa. About 47% of the women had work experience ranging from two to five years, while 12% had worked for more than 5 years in India.

INFORMED CHOICE AND INFORMATION GENERATION

When talking about choices, as mentioned by Kabeer (1999) and Carter (2004), one mostly talks of informed choices which are based on ‘rational’ selection rather than ‘mere’ selection. To make such rational choices, the access and utilization of information are important. Without adequate information, there cannot be any rational choice because the lack of information can curtail the ability of an individual to make a decision. Therefore, it was important to understand the mechanism of information generation. Do women gather enough information from various sources in order to make a decision? What are the different sources utilized by them? What information did they have regarding their migration status as a dependent individual and how was that information processed by different individuals, including family members? It was found that in the cases where the principal visa holders, that is, the H1B visa holders were already in the United States, they become the prime source of information, and their information is considered to be valid and authentic. Even the family members consider the H1B holder as the one who can provide authentic information based on the experience of being located in the United States. However, there were a few women who had put in additional effort to navigate through the existing resources available on the internet and other social media sites.

Social media platforms such as Facebook and Telegram have several pages and groups which are exclusively meant for sharing information regarding visas and related concerns. These groups are often seen as an important source of information for Indians as the information seeker finds these places reliable to get authentic information from other Indians located in the United States. This way of navigating through information using social media ensures that the social and cultural context of the information seeker is taken into account, as these groups are predominantly created and managed by Indians, with a majority of Indian subscribers. Though only a few respondents were actively using these social media pages for gathering information, there is no denying that these pages often have high traffic with people actively looking for suggestions on their moving to the United States on a dependent visa, prospects of getting a work permit and other options available for the H4 visa holders or the H4 EAD visa holders.

However, the information circulated through these social media is not considered sacrosanct. When the expected experience of being on a dependent visa, based on information generated through these platforms, varies considerably from that of the actual experience, the reliability and authenticity of such information are often questioned. While acknowledging such differences, one also needs to be aware of the differential experiences of women and their positionality.

Shweta (Pseudonym), aged 30 years, on being asked about her opinion on the H4 visa based on the information gathered by her, mentions:

I read that it is a nightmare for h4 visa holder…they have a very miserable life…all negative feed about H4 on internet. But from my experience, it really worked out well. So I have no complaints. But I have read a couple of blogs, and articles where they have so many issues. And that might be true because before Obama’s decision that there was no room for h4 visa holders can work. And I can see their life would be miserable…I definitely agree that, back then, it would be really hard…just sitting at home and doing nothing because they cannot work.

The social network of friends and families located in the United States is also used as an important source of information as they are well aware of the nuances associated with a dependent visa and their lived experience. These informal interactions also pave the way for discussing possibilities of future engagements. Therefore, the decision is a decision not just on whether one has to migrate to the United States on a dependent visa or not but also on what one must be prepared for.

Though the information on H4 visas is actively sought by the women, the process of decision-making is more nuanced as it is undertaken within a broader social structure consisting of individuals, the household, society, societal norms and culture.

INDIVIDUAL VS HOUSEHOLD DECISION-MAKING

Different scholars have conceptualized the varied meanings of a household and how they differ as per different scenarios and circumstances (Conway, 2000; Fan, 2007; Massey, 1990; Netting et al., 1984; Semyonov & Gorodzeisky, 2008). A household is beyond the mortar structure of bricks and cement where the family members dwell. In fact, the household is by, around and in reference to the people who live in it. Living at a distant location also does not restrict an individual from qualifying as being part of a household. Household does give a physical definition to a group of people living together, but it also transcends places to include people who live in far-off places (Cohen & Sirkeci, 2011). The linking factor is their common purpose or role, rather than their structure, which is both symbolic and ideological. The social role, gender role, social rules, etc., are framed within the household and are disseminated through generations. It not only produces and establishes common cultural beliefs and norms but also develops as the site where the common beliefs are contested, recreated and changed.

Agarwal (1997) expresses the gendered aspect of household relations within the family where these are not just limited to the distribution of resources and division of labour but also encompass a range of ideas and representations ascribing different traits, desires, attitudes, etc., among men and women. Gender relations are constituted by these ideologies, which further interact to reinforce or challenge pre-existing ideologies.

Within such a setting where the household interacts with the individual in a differentiated manner with respect to gender, the symbolic and ideological meaning of the same also differs. As per the social and cultural norms in India or the Indians situated around the world, the marriage of female members leads to them shifting their residence to their husbands’ place. Such patrilocal residence is a situated norm in society and in the household, which is internalized without contestation and bargaining. Any aspect of choice or decision-making, either by an individual or the household, is based on this practice of patrilocality.

Riddhima (pseudonym), aged 38 years, mentions:

So I knew what are the implications, but yes, I had to come. I never wanted him to get the H1B visa [laughing] but his name got selected, so I had no choice. No choice in the sense that nobody ever forced me, but of course, there’s an inherent pressure that you have to be with your husband.

The decision to move to the United States, though based on an individual decision, is primarily guided by the expectations of the household. These household decisions are framed within the broader structure of social and cultural norms, and women are expected to comply with such norms. Therefore, women do have a choice, but the choice operates in a model which has a certain structure, commonly accepted by society as well as the household, and the choice is made in conformity with that structure. There might be some contestation, reconfirmation and reformation of the existing ideas, but the choices are never made independent of the existence of one’s being within the social structure.

The idea of a household can vary from case to case. In cases where the H1B visa holder was already located in the United States before the marriage was arranged, the decision to move to the United States on a dependent visa is taken by the household, consisting of both the bride and groom’s parents. However, in cases where the principal visa holder received his H1B visa after the marriage was arranged, the household predominantly comprises the groom’s family.

RATIONALIZING CHOICES

The women, in the process of making choices for themselves, are under constant pressure to justify the choice made by them, to their peer groups. Reiterating that these are the women who were well educated, financially independent and had access to information and other resources which are required to make a rational decision. However, in a scenario where the decision to migrate on a dependent visa is made by them, it is considered as one that is deeply ingrained in the regressive social expectations, societal norms and culture.

Their identity is considered to be moulded by the expectation of the society to which they belong. Marrying and migrating along with a husband is a strongly rooted societal norm and is mostly non-negotiable. Following such norms is considered sacrosanct, and any diversion from the same might lead to conflict. Therefore, the decision made by these women may sometimes stand in conflict with the idea of a rational being whose choice is motivated by self-interest or with empowered women who is an independent decision-maker.

The decision to migrate as a dependent wife and choose to be out of the labour market is beyond an economist’s theorization of a rational being working towards maximizing their utility. By assuming that an individual works towards the maximization of their utility, one assumes that individual decisions are not based on or influenced by other factors such as societal and cultural norms. This phenomenon becomes even more prominent when the woman and her decision to migrate is studied in the context where women are often endowed with the responsibility of carrying the social and cultural norms.

Despite these women being the ones who are highly skilled and educated and accord high values to freedom and independent decision-making, the choice basket available to them often lies within the socially constructed norms. While discussing the conflicting choices made by them, they were often seen to be establishing themselves as rational individuals rather than one who blindly follows the norms laid down by society. There was often a conflict between the real and imagined self which was visible from the concerted effort to rationalize the choice. There would often be different ways and means of rationalizing such choices, where the most common one was the need to take a break from work. In the process, they fail to acknowledge their own state of existence, being framed by their experience of being a part of the structure, thereby impinging upon the decisions that they make.

Here, the expected duration of stay also played an important role in rationalizing one’s choices. There were majorly two categories of respondents: (a) those who were certain that they had to return to India after a certain period of time and (b) those who were certain that they were willing to settle down in the United States. It was seen that out of those who were certain that they had to return back to India after a specified period of time were mostly the ones who established their choice as taking a break from work. Since there was a high probability of returning to India, these women were certain that they could return to their jobs after a break of a certain number of years.

Vibha (pseudonym), aged 34 years, says:

I have been working for 8 years in XYZ company. It’s been quite some time since I have been working so hard. I have been thinking for a long time to take a break from work which didn’t happen. So this [referring to H4 visa] was a good opportunity for me to take the break.

Thus, moving to the United States as a dependent was considered to be a temporary act of dependency which could be traded off by exploring places, hobbies and other such activities. In such a scenario, being in the United States was considered to be a pure opportunity where one can enjoy the lifestyle offered by a developed country. Such an idea ensures that their identity of ‘self’ is not effectively compromised.

However, on being asked if they would have preferred to leave their job had they been married in India, most of these women mentioned that they would have strongly preferred to continue to work. Hence, the rationalization of choice as ‘taking a break’or ‘having a much-needed holiday’ is actually a trade-off between the expected benefit of being in a developed country as a dependent individual and the challenges of being in a developing country, here India.

This was more nuanced when it came to those who mentioned their plans to get settled in the United States. They had to engage in the decision by weighing across different aspects—the expected benefits of being in the United States, the familial and societal expectations associated with the identity of being a married woman and the individual identity one wishes to carry for themselves. In such cases, one often wishes to display their identity as modern independent women with an agency of their own, despite their choice of staying as a dependent.

Women often placed higher education as one of the reasons which rationalize their choice. Many women were either preparing for exams, such as GMAT, TOFEL, ILETS, etc., or were currently pursuing higher education in the United States. However, interestingly, many of these women had no plans or interest to pursue higher education when they were in India. Showcasing higher education as one of the reasons to rationalize the choice of moving to the United States on a dependent visa preserves the identity of the self as being ambitious and independent. It retains the image of being modern and independent women and also puts them in a position where they can still put their career ahead of their social reproductive role, thereby implying that they are giving preference to the ‘self’ as against ‘others’.

There were a small number of respondents who acknowledged their choice and cherished their decisions. Their choice was seen as a means that helped them to explore their own self and learn a completely new way of life. For these women, the anticipated life in the United States was expected to be better than the life they anticipated on being in India. Their understanding of freedom did not necessarily entail financial freedom but the freedom to explore and discover oneself and have a voice. So, for them, this newly achieved sense of freedom was valued above the loss of financial independence.

CONCLUSION

The skewed pattern of allotment of H1B visas to males results in H4 visas being provided to females. The discourse on international migration, with respect to choices and decision-making, brings out heterogeneity with the inclusion of women as the subject of study. The women referred to in the paper carry multiple identities with respect to their education and aspiration, and also the cultural significance associated with being a married Indian woman.

To make any choice concerning migration, most of the women engage in seeking out information on their visa. The process of information generation concerning H4 visa is primarily informal, with the engagement of friends, colleagues, social media platforms and blogs. The role of the household also plays a very important role in decision-making. Here the decision-making for migrating is being discussed in the context of women on H4 visa, not for any other family members.

The idea of a household being engaged in decision-making differs as per the spatial location of the spouse at the time of marriage. In case the spouse was already based in the United States before marriage, the household constituted both the bride’s and the groom’s family. In such cases, a collective decision was relied upon. However, in a scenario where the spouse gets his H1B visa to migrate to the United States after the marriage, the household consists of only the groom’s family.

What remains unambiguous in both these scenarios is that the household plays a very important role in maintaining the social structure and cultural norms of the patrilocal marriage system. Even though there might not be outright pressure to maintain the social order, its covert presence is mostly felt by the women who are expected to migrate along with their husband. In such a scenario, the choices which are made are never absolute in the real sense, but they operate within the boundaries of the social structure which one inhabits. Whatever the choice one makes, the women were often engaged in rationalizing their choices so as to demonstrate that the choices made are, thereby, independent and not influenced by external pressure or other societal norms. The conflict between the imagined self and the real self was evident from such rationalization.

AUTHOR’S NOTE

*This paper is being published posthumously. The author passed away after the final acceptance of the paper.

Footnotes

DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

FUNDING

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Tasha Agarwal was awarded her PhD degree in development studies. Her PhD thesis was based on the Marriage Migration of Dependent Spouses from India to the United States. Her research interests included the areas of gender and international migration, refugee studies and education.

e-mail: agarwaltasha22@gmail.com

References

Agarwal

(1997). ‘Bargaining’ and gender relations: Within and beyond the household. Feminist Economics , 3(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/135457097338799

Boyd

, & Grieco

(2003). Women and migration: Incorporating gender into international migration theory. http://dspace.stellamariscollege.edu.in:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/4292/migration.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Carter

(2004). Choice, freedom, and freedom of choice. Social Choice and Welfare , 22(1), 61–81. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00355-003-0277-z

Cohen

J. H.

, & Sirkeci

(2011). Cultures of migration: The global nature of contemporary mobility . University of Texas Press.

Constable

(2005). Introduction: Cross-border marriages, gendered mobility, and global hypergamy. In Constable

(Ed.), Cross-border marriages (pp. 1–16). University of Pennsylvania Press.

Conway

(2000). Notions unbound: A critical (re)reading of transnationalism suggests that U.S.-Caribbean circuits tell the story better. In Agozino

(Ed.), Theoretical and methodological issues in migration research: interdisciplinary, intergenerational and international perspectives . Ashgate Pub Limited.

De Haas

(2021). A theory of migration: The aspirations-capabilities framework. Comparative Migration Studies , 9(1), 1–35. https://comparativemigrationstudies.springeropen.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s40878-020-00210-4.pdf

Fan

C. C.

(2007). China on the move: Migration, the state, and the household . Routledge Publication.

Frank

A. G.

(1966). Functionalism, dialectics and synthetics. Science & Society , 30(2) 136–148. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40401196?casa_token=gUONl7ZiVXYAAAAA%3AD9XBWwc8B3YgrCWlaRTsG7aIBXj14aoDyb0p3uTmZ9eIxfl1cuguD3Q7n2zJaa04qYyDsbb6asqW62xj8I_BCzkGQvJ05frV-En6mV-N4-39TeBp2PUew#metadata_info_tab_contents

10.

Jolly

, & Reeves

(2005). Gender and migration: Overview report. BRIDGE Institute of Development Studies . https://www.ssatp.org/sites/ssatp/files/publications/HTML/Gender-RG/Source%20%20documents/Technical%20Reports/Gender%20Research/TEGEN7%20BRIDGE%20Gender%20and%20Migration%20Overview.pdf

11.

Kabeer

(1999). The conditions and consequences of choice: reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment, UNRISD Discussion Paper No. 108 , UNRISD.

12.

Massey

D. S.

(1990). Social structure, household strategies, and the cumulative causation of migration. Population Index , 56(1), 3–26.

13.

McAuliffe

, & Triandafyllidou

(Eds.). (2021). World Migration Report 2022 . International Organization for Migration (IOM). https://publications.iom.int/books/world-migration-report-2022

14.

Netting

R. M.

, Wilk

R. R.

, & Arnould

E. J.

(Eds.). (1984). Households: Comparative and historical studies of the domestic group (Vol. 324). University of California Press.

15.

Remesh

B. P.

(2020). Migration in South Asia: Poverty and vulnerability. SAAPE Poverty and Vulnerability Report. South Asia Alliance for Poverty Eradication. https://saape.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Migration-in-South-Asia-Report-2020.pdf

16.

Remon

I. C.

(2018). Migrant bride in the matchmaking industry: Blurring the binaries . United Nations University. https://unu.edu/publications/articles/migrant-brides-in-the-matchmaking-industry-blurring-the-binaries.html

17.

Semyonov

, & Gorodzeisky

(2008). Labor migration, remittances and economic well-being of households in the Philippines. Population Research and Policy Review , 27(5), 619–637. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11113-008-9084-7

18.

USCIS. (2019). H1B petition by gender and country of birth: fiscal year 2019 . US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

19.

USCIS. (2020). H1B petition by gender and country of birth: fiscal year 2020 . US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

20.

Wallerstein

(1974). Dependence in an interdependent world: the limited possibilities of transformation within the capitalist world economy. African Studies Review , 17(1), 1–26.