Geographers and related social scientists are using the perspective of the everyday to highlight the forms of violence threatening migrants as well as the creativity and complexity of migrant humanity. This report focuses on three key areas of the everyday: the everyday as a site of both digital and embodied violence towards migrants; the everyday as a site of both virtual and in-person connection for migrants; and the new methods needed to research migrants’ everyday geographies. To counter the widespread dehumanization and violence towards migrants, new ways of understanding migrant experiences will be necessary.
BarkleyL (2025) Feeling connected across borders: haptic experiences of food and drink preparation among Palestinian women in Britain. Ethnic and Racial Studies49(7): 1–17. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2025.2562653
2.
BenghellabKDaviesTIsakjeeA (2025) Four seasons of border violence: the co-option of the seasons into the management of migration. Geoforum160: 104207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2025.104207
3.
BlueSAHartsellA (2025) Producing “Illegality”: the racialization of Mexican and central American asylum seekers in the United States. Geographical Review115(3): 307–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167428.2023.2226174
4.
BoyceG (2024) Mass deportation and the intensity of policing in the United States’ 100‐mile border zone: complicating the “border”/“interior” enforcement binary. Law & Policy46(2): 90–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12232
5.
FloresLA (2025) “That machine does not want us”: CBP OneTM and migrant Im/mobility in the extended Mexico-US borderlands. Migration and Society8(1): 121–137. https://doi.org/10.3167/arms.2025.080109
6.
FluriJL (2023) Political geography III: international migration and geopolitics. Progress in Human Geography47(2): 365–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/03091325221150016
7.
GeorgiouMLeursK (2022) Smartphones as personal digital archives? Recentring migrant authority as curating and storytelling subjects. Journalism23(3): 668–689. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849211060629
8.
GodinMOzkulDHumphrisR (2025) Digital technologies and migration: behind, beyond and around the black box. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies51(14): 3571–3589. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2025.2513153
9.
GormanCS (2025) Geographies of ‘lawfare’ and the disappearing pathways to US asylum. The Geographical Journal191(4): e70016. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.70016
10.
HierofaniPY (2021) Productive and deferential bodies: the experiences of Indonesian domestic workers in Malaysia. Gender, Place & Culture28(12): 1738–1754. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2020.1855121
11.
Hin-yan ChanHLathamA (2022) Working and dwelling in a global city: going-out, public worlds, and the intimate lives of migrant domestic workers in Hong Kong. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies48(15): 3524–3543. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2021.2000854
12.
HoangLA (2025) Migration infrastructure, digital connectivity and porous borders: vietnamese migration to Australia. Population, Space and Place31(1): e2868. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2868
13.
HumphrisRHudsonGBazurliR (2025) Digital internal bordering: surveillance, data-sharing, and the fate of sanctuary cities. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies51(14): 3675–3694. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2025.2513166
14.
KallioKPHäkliJLounasmaaA (2025) Embodiment and dignity: asylum migrants’ experiences of (mis)recognised personhood in everyday encounters. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space44: 23996544251382864. https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544251382864
15.
KocherA (2023) Glitches in the digitization of asylum: how CBP one turns migrants’ smartphones into Mobile borders. Societies13(6): 149. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13060149
16.
LaakkonenV (2022) Deaths, disappearances, borders: migrant disappearability as a technology of deterrence. Political Geography99: 102767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102767
17.
LafazaniO (2021) The significance of the insignificant: borders, urban space, everyday life. Antipode53(4): 1143–1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12703
18.
LiYAlencarA (2023) A tale of two cities: digital place-making and elderly Houniao migration in China. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies49(4): 1032–1049. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2022.2115630
19.
Llavaneras BlancoM (2022) Intimate bordering: intimacy, anti-blackness and gender violence in the making of the Dominican border. Political Geography99: 102743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2022.102743
20.
Lopes HeimerRDV (2023) Bodies as territories of exception: the coloniality and gendered necropolitics of state and intimate border violence against migrant women in England. Ethnic and Racial Studies46(7): 1378–1406. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2022.2144750
21.
MorganH (2024) Everyday digital dis/connection: locating slow violence in (non)encounters with the UK asylum state. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers49(4): e12674. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12674
22.
MountzA (2020) The Death of Asylum. University of Minnesota Press.
23.
NedelcuMSoysürenI (2022) Precarious migrants, migration regimes and digital technologies: the empowerment-control nexus. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies48(8): 1821–1837. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1796263
Palma-GutiérrezM (2025) Migrant struggles in the Darién gap-Tapón: rethinking a more-than-human border. Political Geography123: 103426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2025.103426
26.
PalmbergerM (2022) Refugees enacting (digital) citizenship through placemaking and care practices near and far. Citizenship Studies26(6): 781–798. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2103971
27.
PonzanesiSLeursK (2022) Digital migration practices and the everyday. Communication, Culture and Critique15(2): 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcac016
28.
Schmid-ScottA (2025) Bureaucratic and benign? The violent continuum of home office reporting in the UK. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space43(1): 184–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/23996544241264964
29.
SchneiderC (2023) Making a home in the world: clothes as mnemonic devices through which refugees experience home in flight and resettlement. Journal of Material Culture28(2): 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591835221088512
30.
TazzioliM (2022) The technological obstructions of asylum: asylum seekers as forced techno-users and governing through disorientation. Security Dialogue53(3): 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106211026080
31.
TedeschiMGaddKJ (2021) On multiple spacetimes in the everyday lives of irregular migrants in Finland. The Geographical Journal187(2): 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12378
32.
TorresRMBlueSFariaC, et al. (2022) “Asylum is not for Mexicans”: unaccompanied youth and racio-governance at the US border. Geopolitics1–30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2022.2086459
WeidingerTKordelSKieslingerJ (2021) Unravelling the meaning of place and spatial mobility: analysing the everyday life-worlds of refugees in host societies by means of mobility mapping. Journal of Refugee Studies34(1): 374–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fez004
35.
WilsonBKBurnstanACalderonC, et al. (2023) “Letting die” by design: asylum seekers’ lived experience of postcolonial necropolitics. Social Science & Medicine320: 115714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.115714
36.
ZaniB (2020) WeChat, we sell, we feel: chinese women’s emotional petit capitalism. International Journal of Cultural Studies23(5): 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877920923360
