Linking the study of race and migration

In 1995, I became one of two editors of the journal Ethnic and Racial Studies. At the time, there was a clear commitment by the journal to publish high quality research on race and ethnic relations and related fields of scholarship. These fields included research on migration, nationalism and ethnic conflict. At the time, this was a common starting point for scholars like me, since we tended to see ourselves as working on issues at the intersection of race, migration and ethnic relations. There was a kind of taken for granted assumption that studies of race relations and immigration were inextricably linked together. It is important to note the that as the sociology of race emerged as a field of research from the period of the 1970s and 1980s the study of what came to be called race relations in countries such as the UK grew out of research on immigration and the political and social responses to the arrival and settlement of racial and ethnic minorities. Thus John Rex's early attempt to define the study of race relations highlights the positioning of migrant labour as an underclass, unusually experiencing harsh class exploitation, strict legal intergroup distinctions and occupational segregation, differential access to power and prestige, and cultural diversity and limited group interaction (Rex, 1970: 5–6).

In the past decades that I have worked on the journal, however, it has become evident that there has been a divergence between studies of race, ethnicity and racism and the work of scholars who see themselves as working on migration. This is evident in the growing role of specialised journals on migration and refugee studies, the work of professional bodies such as IMISCOE, and the growing number of books and edited collections focused on migration (Pisarevskaya et al., 2020). In some ways, this growing separation between these fields of scholarship can be seen as inevitable, given the pressures in the academy to specialise and to carve out a specific niche for the purposes of career development and promotion. But, it is also the product of efforts to conceptualise migration in non-racial terms, particularly at a time when questions about race remain deeply contested in many parts of the world.

Perhaps, one way to begin addressing this separation is to seek to understand the focus of studies of race and racism as compared to studies of migration. The study of race and racism has a historical focus as well as a contemporary research agenda. In particular, it developed out of efforts to understand the social significance attached to social groups that differ in terms of physical attributes that are defined through a language of race (Collins & Solomos, 2010; Solomos, 2023). Thus, we have seen a range of studies for over a century now about the social significance of race in the U.S.A. both during the period of slavery and in the century and a half since its abolition. In this context, racism as a concept is much more closely tied to the concept of race and is a reminder that where members of society make distinctions between different racial groups, at least some members of that society are likely to behave in ways which give rise to racism as a behavioural and ideational consequence of making racial distinctions in the first place.

The study of migration has its roots in efforts to comprehend the role of the wider context of the changing patterns of migration and refugee movement that has done much to reshape the global order that has emerged from the late twentieth century onwards. Although the study of migration has longer-term historical roots, particularly in the United States from the 1920s and 1930s onwards, it has become a more established and globalised field of research in more recent years, and it has become more significant in the period since the 2000s. Both the theoretical and empirical focus of migration research is thus different from the influences that have helped to shape the study of race relations. Although some accounts of migration emphasise the complex social and political debates that result from processes of migration and minority formation, major strands of migration research have tended to focus on the experiences of particular migrant communities or sections of those communities. From this perspective, the broad phenomenon of migration and mobility, particularly in all its varied global and geopolitical forms, as a field of scholarship and research is one that can be seen as differentiated from the study of race and racism in both conceptual and empirical terms.

The development of both scholarly and policy agendas in the period since the 2000s and 2010s has tended to accentuate a trend towards a differentiation between studies of race and racism and those concerned with global migration. At the same time, it is encouraging to see more efforts over the past decade to explore the linkages between the study of race and racism and migration. These efforts are premised on the notion that both race and racism and migration are shaped by and, in turn, shape the changing patterns of globalisation and neoliberal economic and social policy agendas that have become evident over the past two decades. Indeed, as scholars such as Miri Song, have reminded us the ‘spectre of race’ remains an important issue that is part of broader societal discussions about migration, refuge, religious and cultural diversity, and everyday questions about national identity (Song, 2018).

It can be argued in this context that we need more engaged dialogue by scholars working on race and on migration in order to better comprehend the changing role of race and racism as well as complex patterns of migration and diversity in our societies. Scholars working in both fields can learn from each other by exploring issues such as global economic transformation, political mobilisation, multiculture and urban life and racist movements and ideologies. Such an exploration needs to move beyond a national frame and situate the importance of comparative analysis. In investigating such issues, it will also be possible to address the question of the relevance of the conceptual frames that can be used to address both sets of phenomena. In the contemporary conjuncture questions about race and migration are at the heart of both political and policy debates. This is evident in various geopolitical environments, including Europe, North America and increasingly other parts of the globe. In this messy environment, we need more conversations between scholars working on race and racism and those working on migration. It is important to make clear that I am not trying to argue that there is no need for developing research agendas that are focused on race or migration as specific fields of research. Rather, my concerns in this short contribution has been to argue that there is a need for an exploration of the linkages and commonalities between these fields of scholarship.

There is much to be gained from linking scholarly, research and policy agendas about race and immigration. This means developing conversations between diverse scholarly and research communities to develop at least some commonalities in theoretical and research agendas. While both fields of scholarship are firmly established in several social science disciplines, it is important that we do not lose sight of the important linkages between them if we are to make sense of the challenges that we face in the current conjuncture and are likely to face in the future. There is a need for conversations about how best to bring the fields of research focused on race and migration more closely together to allow us to provide a better analysis of the contemporary conjuncture. The terms of such conversations are yet to be discussed in detail, although we have the basis for thinking about some of the issues that we need to bring into the scholarly agendas if we look at the ways in which questions about race and migration are often interlinked and mesh together in the world around us. Bearing this key point in mind, it should be possible to develop the basis for a more collaborative and nuanced effort to bring these fields of scholarship into a closer dialogue that will help us to have a bigger impact on both societal and policy debates.

The opinions expressed in this Commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors, Editorial Board, International Organization for Migration nor John Wiley & Sons.