Transnational is not diasporic: A Bourdieusian approach to the study of modern diaspora

Abstract

Given the apparent similarities to transnational activities, diasporic activities, processes and actors are often the first victims of the conceptual curse of transnationalism, resulting in the glossing over of particularities in the diaspora field which, if studied separately, would have important analytical consequences for migration studies. Failure to introduce viable options for differentiating between two (very) different sets of activities that comprise transnational and diaspora activities, means we are unable to identify specificities that have important consequences for the analysis of the diaspora field. By introducing the concept of ‘field’, and arguing that the diaspora field should be separate from the transnational field, we demonstrate that the actions of diaspora groups towards their homeland, with particular emphasis on the case of the Lebanese diaspora, are best studied independently. The ‘field’ framework highlights the power relations that determine the impact of diaspora remittances and brings forward the centrality of the state in diaspora–homeland relationships.