carling - 2014 - scripting remittances making sense of money trans

Scripting Remittances: Making Senseof Money Transfers in TransnationalRelationships1

Jrgen CarlingPeace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO)

This article proposes a conceptual framework for studying remittancesas social transactions that can take a number of different forms. Forthe past three decades, the dominant framework for understandingremittance relationships has been the continuum of senders motivesfrom altruism to self-interest. This approach has its roots in econom-ics and has shaped much of the quantitative research on remittances.In parallel, a growing body of ethnographic research has examinedtransnational money transfers with perspectives and data that differfrom those of economists. The insights from these ethnographic stud-ies are valuable, but remain fragmented and marginal in research onremittances. Two key points emerge from the ethnographic literature:Remittances are at the core of composite transactions with material,emotional, and relational elements, and there is great variation in thenature and logic of these transactions. The framework proposed hereis designed to engage with both complexity and variation. It systemat-ically draws upon a large body of ethnographic literature and intro-duces remittance scripts as an analytical tool.

INTRODUCTION

Migrant remittances reflect individuals commitments, priorities, and diffi-cult decisions. They are often sent across divides of global inequality, at

1I am very grateful to the following people for providing comments and criticism thathave helped me write and revise this article: Lisa Akesson, Marta Bivand Erdal, Heidistb Haugen, Mara Hernandez-Carretero, David Khoudour-Casteras, Ellen Percy Kraly,Jennifer Lee, Stephen Lubkemann, Valentina Mazzucato, Ceri Oeppen, Pia Orrenius, andNicholas Van Hear. The research on which this article is based is funded by Research

Council of Norway grant 191369, Theorizing Risk, Money, and Moralities in Migration.

2014 by the Center for Migration Studies of New York. All rights reserved.DOI: 10.1111/imre.12143

S218 IMR Volume 48 Number S1 (Fall 2014):S218S262

ilkaHighlight

the same time as they are part of intimate social relationships. Remittancescan transform receiving communities, and they weigh heavily in theassessment of the benefits and vulnerabilities that migration brings.Unsurprisingly, remittances have attracted the attention of many scholars.

But we are now at a moment of notable shifts in research on remit-tances. A decade after the surge in interest and enthusiasm, there is an ele-ment of remittance fatigue in research and policy circles. Economists,who have dominated research on remittances, are increasingly turningtheir attention elsewhere. While the number of publications on the eco-nomics of migration keeps growing, the number of economics papers onremittances has plateaued.2 In other social sciences, however, there aretendencies in the opposite direction. In particular, researchers who useethnographic methods are increasingly making remittances an object ofstudy. Using extensive face-to-face interaction with remittance senders andrecipients, they gain an in-depth understanding of issues that escape thestandardized optic of surveys.

Ethnographic insights on remittances have so far not had theimpact they merit. In this article, I draw upon a large body of ethno-graphic research with the aim of influencing the changing landscape ofremittance research. I do so not by summarizing empirical findings, butby deducing a way of thinking about remittances. The resulting frame-work reflects two key observations. First, remittance transfers need to beseen as compound transactions with material, emotional, and relationalelements. In order to understand remittances, we need to understandthe transaction as a whole. Second, there is great variation in the natureand logic of these transactions; there is variation between remittances indifferent contexts as well as diversity of remittance transactions within asingle setting.

As I will show in a later section, neither economics nor ethnographyhas engaged fully with the combination of complexity and variation inremittance transactions. In order to overcome this impasse, this articleintroduces an analytical tool that has hitherto been missing.

2This trend is evident from statistics on articles with remittances (or a derivative thereof)in the title, included in the Social Sciences Citation Index and classified as economics.

The number of such articles grew rapidly from the early 2000s to a peak in 2011 andslightly lower levels in the period thereafter. The pattern of a peak and subsequent declineis even more pronounced when articles on remittances are related to the total number of

economics articles that deal with migration.

SCRIPTING REMITTANCES S219

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

Introducing Remittance Scripts

The ethnographic literature shows that remittances tend to embody spe-cific expectations, meanings, and functions. For instance, remittances arein some cases conceived as help that the sender extends to the recipient.In other cases, this interpretation would be entirely inappropriate. Thedifference is not simply about the senders motivations; when remittancesare understood as help, it concerns perceptions of needs and worthiness,defines the relationship between the sender and recipient, elicits particularfeelings surrounding the transaction, carries implications for appropriateuses of the money, and embodies expectations for behaviour, such as theexpression of gratitude. An accurate way to describe such specific, com-posite transactions, I believe, is as scripts.

Scripts are structures of expectations for specific types of situations,which facilitate social interaction. This analytical concept has been used inanthropology, psychology, sociology, and other disciplines since the1970s, but it is nearly absent from research on migration, transnational-ism, and development economics.3 . Within the social sciences, analysesof scripts have been particularly prominent in the study of sexuality andfamily (e.g. Atwood, 1996; Stephens and Phillips, 2005; Fivush, 2006).Research in these fields grapples with interactions between the material(or biological) and the symbolic, and between the individual and the rela-tional, all of which plays out in the context of powerful social norms.These are intricacies that also apply to remittance transactions, and sup-port the analytical value of scripts.

The existence of scripts as cognitive structures has been illustratedwith the example of a restaurant script. Deborah Tannen (1993:18),drawing upon the work of Roger Schank and Robert Abelson, used thefollowing simple story: John went into the restaurant. He ordered a ham-burger and a coke. He asked the waitress for the check and left. Theexistence of a restaurant script is illustrated by the fact that readers readilyabsorb the references to the waitress and the check, without any priorintroduction; they are both integral to our shared script and thereforeneed no explanation. Although the word script in other contexts refers to

3Exceptions include Chan (2006) and Lerner, Rapoport, and Lomsky-Feder (2007) whorefer to scripts in relation to ethnicity and immigration, and Lubkemann (2005) whowrites about the moralities of transnationalism with respect to an idealized emigrant

script.

S220 INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

things that are written and exact, scripts in the social-psychological senserepresent approximate and implicit knowledge.

I propose the following definition of remittance scripts:

Remittance scripts make up a repertoire of generalized representa-tions of remittance transactions that are recognized by a social group, butmight not be explicitly expressed. Each script specifies, at a variable levelof detail, the transactions constituent roles, actions, and statuses, and therelations between these elements. People engage scripts in flexible ways tomake sense of and direct specific and recurring remittance transactions.

The idea that we relate to repertoires of scripts can be illustrated byextending the example of the restaurant script. Staying within the sphereof North American popular culture, we can imagine a series of specificscripts centred on meals: a second date at a fancy restaurant, an introduc-tion dinner with a girlfriends parents, thanksgiving with the family, or anevening pizza delivery to office colleagues working to meet a deadline. Allare generalized event representations that encompass practicalities, emo-tions, and relations, as well as the food that is consumed.

We can see certain parallels between the diversity of social settingsfor eating together and the diversity of circumstances for remittance trans-actions. People who send and receive remittances engage in, and makesense of, the transaction by means of scripts. In some cases, a single scriptmight aptly reflect the transaction. More often, perhaps, several scripts areapplicable. This is not only because the contours of each one are blurred,but also because transactions can combine dissimilar scripts. In a later sec-tion, I address how such mixing takes place.

The proposed definition states that remittance scripts are recognizedby a social group. This formulation reflects the context-specific culturalfoundations of remittance behaviour. The reference frame is deliberatelyflexible, since the relevant social groups will vary. Remittance scripts may,for instance, reflect widely shared norms within a transnational socialfield, or they could be specific to narrower segments of the field. As I willshow in a later section, migrants can also have a different repertoire ofremittance scripts than remittance recipients in the community of origin.

The notion of scripts implies that many aspects of behaviour areroutinized. But this observation does not preclude improvization, negotia-tion, and contestation; scripts are not reducible to programming. Contem-porary analyses of scripts in the social sciences have emphasizedmalleability and agency to a greater extent than the early proponents of


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

the concept (Tilly, 1998; Marcus, 2002; Fujii, 2009). With respect toremittance scripts, there are a number of reasons why transactors shouldbe seen to act with scripts, rather than to follow them. First, eliciting ascript in a given situation is a cognitive and social act, open to many pos-sibilities. Second, when a script is identified, agency is exercised as peopleconform to, or deviate from, its standard form. Third, remittance transac-tions often involve combinations of several scripts. Finally, two transactorscould assign different scripts to their mutual transaction, lending yetanother element of dynamism to the role of scripts.

The process of scripting remittances, used in the title takes placeat two levels. First, it refers to the way in which remittance senders andrecipients direct and make sense of their transactions by eliciting scripts.Second, it describes how scripts can be used as a tool by researchers tointerpret data on remittances.

Methods and Objectives

The fragmented insights on remittances in ethnographic literature representa great but underutilized potential. I have therefore concentrated on system-atically examining this part of the literature. After developing elements of aconceptual framework, I used NVivo software for qualitative analysis toreconnect with the original studies and substantiate and adjust the frame-work (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). Individual publicationsare cited in the text when it is appropriate; an extended bibliography is pre-sented in Appendix S1. This article concentrates on proposing scripts as acornerstone of ethnographically based theorizing about remittances. In theconclusion, I describe some of the themes that emerge from the literature aspromising foci for future studies.

The article aims to achieve three objectives: (1) facilitating greater syner-gies between ethnographic studies; (2) inspiring research that spans methodo-logical and disciplinary divides; and (3) making relevant ethnographic insightsmore accessible to economists and other quantitatively oriented researchers.

In the next section, I compare and contrast economics-oriented andethnographic approaches to the study of remittances. This serves to justifythe need for a new concept, and it provides an overview of the ethno-graphic research that I draw upon. I subsequently outline a transactionalperspective on remittances, which places the concept of scripts in abroader conceptual frame. This is followed by a presentation of twelve


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

specific scripts, a section on how scripts can be systematically compared,and a discussion of how they are combined in practice.

Studying Remittances

The two dominant approaches to the study of remittances can bedescribed as economics oriented and ethnographic, respectively. Theselabels deliberately combine disciplinary and methodological elements.Economics-oriented research is not solely conducted within thediscipline of economics, but draws upon economic theory and termi-nology and employs econometric methodology. Ethnographic research,by contrast, involves extended interaction with research subjects, thegathering of qualitative data, and interpretive analysis. Scholars withinthis approach include anthropologists and qualitatively orientedsociologists and geographers. There are common epistemological ele-ments to all ethnographic research, but there is no shared substantivetheory.

There are two striking contrasts between the approaches: First,most publications within the economics-oriented literature are aboutremittances, whereas in the ethnographic literature, this is rarely thecase. In other words, when ethnographers address remittances, theyseldom make it the primary object of study.4 Across disciplines, veryfew articles and books most of them very recent are based onethnographic data and explicitly place remittances centre stage in theanalysis.5 When we look beyond titles, keywords, and abstracts, however,there is a wealth of ethnographic research on remittances embedded instudies with other headings. In particular, the ethnographic literature onmigrant transnationalism is replete with references to remittances.

The second contrast concerns theoretical and conceptual founda-tions. These are coherent in the economics literature and, in comparison,fragmented in the ethnographic literature. Micro-economic research on

4Some bibliometrics can illustrate from 1985 to 2010, the Social Sciences Citation Index(SSCI) recorded almost 200 articles in economics or demography with the word remit-tances (or a derivative of it) in the title. During the same period, only nine such articles

were registered in anthropology.5Exceptions include Abrego (2009), Akesson (2009, 2011), Burman (2002, 2006), Cligg-ett (2003, 2005), Eckstein (2006, 2010), Erdal (2012), Horst (2008b), Kankonde Bukasa(2010), Lindley (2010), McKay (2007), McKenzie and Menjvar (2011), Thai (2006,2014), Vullnetari and King (2011).


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

remittances has, since the 1980s, focused on the role of information andsocial interactions in explaining transfer behaviour (Rapoport and Docqu-ier, 2006). The frame of analysis has typically been the dyad consisting ofthe migrant and the household of origin. In short, the point of departurein this research has been to distinguish theoretically between different rea-sons why migrants would remit. In the most cited article ever publishedon remittances, Lucas and Stark (1985) laid these motives out as a contin-uum from altruism to self-interest. In the middle of the spectrum aremutually beneficial, implicit contractual arrangements between themigrant and the remittance-receiving household. The subsequent step inthe research process has been to deduce how remittance sending underdifferent motives would respond to variation in observable variables suchas the migrants income and the households wealth. Finally, empiricaldata, usually from surveys, are used to determine the relative importanceof different motives. This endeavour is, however, extremely difficult tocarry out successfully, primarily because the effects of key variables can beinterpreted in several ways with respect to remittance motives. (Rapoportand Docquier, 2006; Carling, 2008a). Despite these frustrations, thenotion of remittance motives and the associated analytical approachremain influential.

There is no corresponding theoretical framework within the ethno-graphic literature on remittances. The different prevailing epistemologicalapproaches of economics and ethnography provide part of the explana-tion. Economists often focus on empirical testing of competing theories,which is more conducive to developing a shared theoretical framework.Ethnographically based theorizing on remittances has also been limitedbecause remittances have, as noted above, largely been a subsidiary topic.The detailed insights that are scattered through the literature neverthelesshave potential to inform theory. In fact, the somewhat peripheral role ofremittances in ethnographic research is partly the flipside of a strength:Money transfers are contextualized in a holistic way, bringing out rele-vant connections and processes that could easily be lost on researcherswho set out to study remittances per se.

Where ethnographers have sought to theorize about remittances,they have made use of established concepts within economic anthropologyand sociology. A number of scholars have combined the study of remit-tances with theories of gift exchange, drawing upon the work of MarcelMauss, Marshall Sahlins, and others (Cliggett, 2003, 2005; Monsutti,2004; Akesson, 2011; Erdal, 2014). Theories of the gift can serve to eluci-


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

date the nature and degree of reciprocity in remittance transactions. A keytheme in philosophical and anthropological gift exchange theory has beenthe claim that the pure gift is theoretically impossible, because even therecognition of gifting constitutes requital for the giver. At the same time,a gift is no longer a true gift if it is explicitly and immediately recipro-cated. Like economists who study remittances, scholars of the gift havebeen most interested in the middle ground of long-term, implicit reci-procity. Theories of the gift also inform analysis of how exchange andrelationships are linked. In her analysis of remittances as gifts, Cliggett(2005:38) notes that from across diverse theories of the gift, the crucialfeature emerging is that the actual gift itself matters very little, while theprocess of gifting is at the core. The implication for remittances is thatthe transfer of money creates, represents, and reinforces social relation-ships.

Ethnographers who study remittances have also drawn upon Vivi-ana Zelizers work on the social meanings of money (e.g. Zelizer, 1997).In particular, Zelizers critique of conventional assumptions aboutmoneys fungibility and commensurability has been used to examinehow remittances may be valued differently from other money (Burman,2006; Kurien, 2008; Fresnoza-Flot, 2009; Singh, Cabraal, and Robert-son, 2010; Akesson, 2011; Singh, Robertson, and Cabraal, 2012; Thai,2014).

Social capital is mentioned frequently in the ethnographic litera-ture but rarely used extensively to theorize about remittances. The pri-mary exception is the work of Susan Eckstein (2006, 2010) whorelates remittances to the creation of transnational family-based socialcapital.

Ethnographers have also used gender relations as a perspective onremittances practices and their social impacts (e.g. Gailey, 1992; Abr-ego, 2006; Pribilsky, 2007; Pinnawala, 2008; Vullnetari and King,2011; Buggenhagen, 2012). While this does not represent a theoreticalapproach in its own right, focusing on gender has producedtheoretically informed analyses of remittances, relationships, and socialchange.

Studying the social aspects of remittances invites questions aboutsocial remittances, the term coined by Levitt (1998) to describe migra-tion-driven diffusion of norms and values, and which has been adoptedeagerly by ethnographers. Unfortunately, this influential concept has come


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

to imply a separation of the social from the financial. Phrases such as notonly financial remittances, but also social remittances have become com-monplace. However, remittances in the original sense of monetary trans-fers are inherently social transactions.6

At a high level of abstraction, there is considerable overlap betweenapproaches to remittances in the ethnographic and economics-oriented lit-eratures, even though vocabularies differ. Both address relationshipsbetween senders and recipients, how senders might be rewarded for theirremittances, and how the two sides perceptions of each other affect theremittance transfers. And both approaches describe specific instances ofremitting in generic analytical terms such as generalized reciprocity ortempered altruism.

The concept of remittance scripts, as proposed in this article, hasobvious similarities with remittance motives as they figure in the eco-nomics-oriented literature. Both reflect a diverse set of possible circum-stances for sending remittances. However, they also differ in fundamentalways. Remittance scripts emerge from the transactors perceptions; analysesof transfers with respect to scripts are not claims to objective explanationsof behaviour. Peoples own understandings of their transactions have exter-nal effects, but these understandings can be both unstable and contradic-tory. Remittance scripts also differ from remittance motives by attemptingto capture the entire bundle of material, emotional, and relational dimen-sions. The economics literature incorporates all these elements in certaincontexts as in identifying purchase of gratitude and investment insocial assets as remittance motives but does not emphasize the simulta-neous material, emotional, and relational impacts of remittance transac-tions. The multifaceted nature of scripts implies that they cannot bearranged in a linear fashion, such as from altruism to self-interest. Finally,remittance scripts differ from remittance motives by not a priori privilegingthe senders agency over that of the recipient.

When ethnographers have engaged explicitly with the economics-oriented literature on remittances, one area of contention has been theinstrumental conception of senders actions (Akesson, 2011; Page andMercer, 2012). As Page and Mercer (2012:4) conclude, remitting is asocial practice not just an individuals choice. A key aspect of social

6The social aspects of remittances are clearly recognized by Levitt in her own research. Theproblem is the metaphorical use of remittances to describe something very different , which

has gained popularity to the extent that it is crowding out the words original meaning.


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlightexpect to be

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

practice here is that explanatory factors lie as much in the collectiveprocesses of socialization as in the personal realm of decision-making.Moreover, individual action is shaped by the identities of the transac-tors as moral persons (Akesson, 2011:329), not simply by the stimuliand opportunities to which they are exposed. Indeed, ethnographic stud-ies have highlighted the power of moralities in shaping peoples experi-ence and perceptions of transnational relationships (Gowricharn, 2004;Carling, 2008b) and, relatedly, the prominent and often under-theorizedrole of emotions in remittance transactions (Burman, 2002; McKay,2007).

A different line of criticism from ethnographers relates to facts onthe ground. In particular, the framework of the migrant and his house-hold is the exception rather than the norm in many parts of the world(Erdal, 2012). Ethnographic accounts have described a range of other con-stellations, such as remittances to siblings, in-laws, distant relatives, andpeople who are not related (e.g. Akuei, 2005; Aguilar, 2013). The natureof remittance transactions can be strongly influenced by the type ofunderlying relationship.

Neither the economics-oriented nor the ethnographic literature hasengaged extensively in comparative research, examining the differencesand similarities between remitting practices across several groups or set-tings.7 However, the economics-oriented theory has an explicit focus onvariability, represented by the idea of different possible remittancemotives. While motives do not sit well with ethnographic approaches asthe key differentiating concept, the ethnographic literature amply docu-ments the diversity of remittance transactions.

REMITTANCE TRANSACTIONS

The notion of remittances scripts is based on the idea that transnationalmoney transfers are multifaceted transactions. They are truly two-sidedtransactions, in which both parties play an active role. These propositionsare foundations for an ethnographically informed transactional perspectiveon remittances.

7The literature overall is large, so there are several exceptions to this general observation(Funkhouser, 1995; Itzigsohn, 1995; Menjvar et al., 1998; Van Hear, 2002; Landolt andDa, 2005; Sana and Massey, 2005; Duany, 2010; Eversole and Shaw, 2010; Carling, Er-

dal, and Horst, 2012; King, Mata-Codesal, and Vullnetari, 2013).


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

Remittances Are the Core of Composite Transactions

The money that is transferred by migrants is merely the most visible andquantifiable element in a multifaceted transaction. This claim invites ashift in research question from why do migrants remit? to what is thenature of the transaction? In general terms, remittance transactions com-prise exchanges, impacts on the transactors, and impacts on the relation-ships between transactors all of which could be stretched out in time.These impacts can be confirmations, challenges, or alterations. Forinstance, remittance transactions can confirm the migrants continuedsocial membership, challenge hierarchical relations between the transac-tors, or alter the social status of both the sender and the recipient. Theycan induce feelings of gratification or humiliation and generate socialdebt. Remittance transactions always have other intended or unintendedeffects than the transfer of purchasing power.

Seeing remittance sending as composite transactions has affinitieswith Page and Mercers (2012) notion of remitting as a practice. Theact of remitting, they contend, is a routinized form of behaviour thatcombines an array of interconnected elements including bodily and men-tal activities, the use of things, states of emotion, and motivational knowl-edge. Page and Mercer (2012:4) draw upon theories of practice tounderstand why migrants remit and use the notion of diasporas as com-munities of practice to argue that remitting is a social practice not justan individuals choice. By focusing on the dichotomy between individualsand communities, however, they give less attention to the mesolevel aspectof remittances as a mediator of relationships between individuals. Theserelationships, by contrast, are the foci of Akessons (2011) theoreticallyoriented ethnographic study of remittances in Cape Verdean transnationalfamilies. She introduces transactors as a common term for the senders andrecipients of remittances and refers to her object of study as remittancetransactions.

Remittance Transactions Reflect and Encompass Two-Sided Agency

Both senders and recipients play active roles in making remittance trans-fers take place. Conventional explanations of remittance flows havefocused on the senders motivations and decisions. The economics-ori-ented literature acknowledges certain active roles for the recipients, for


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

instance as service providers and inheritance managers. The ethnographicliterature suggests a refinement and expansion of such roles.

The most direct action by recipients, widely documented in the eth-nographic literature, is requesting remittances. Many transfers are reactive,responding to requests that often are linked to specific needs. Herein liesa key link between remittances and technology: The more easily andcheaply recipients can contact senders, the greater their role in elicitingtransfers (Horst, 2006). Even when communication is costly, prospectiverecipients invest their scarce resources or borrow money in order to reachout to migrants and realize the potential gains from their networks (Cligg-ett, 2003; Skuse and Cousins, 2007). Already before any transfers takeplace, prospective remittance recipients may actively invest in relationshipsthat will support future requests for remittances.

In addition to making requests, recipients exercise agency throughall the ways in which remittances are reciprocated. This can be a subtleyet consequential form of agency. For instance, whether and how grati-tude is expressed affects the longer-term hierarchical relationship andsocial obligations between the transactors (Richman, 2005; Akesson,2011). Even though the recipients actions seem to follow from those ofthe senders as reactions to receiving remittances the typical pattern ofmultiple transfers over time implies that the recipients agency is not caus-ally inferior. Reacting to one transfer also means anticipating the next.

The nature and importance of remittance recipients actions is anempirical question bound to vary across contexts. What matters here isthat theoretical frameworks should allow for these actions to be signifi-cant, and empirical investigations should recognize them even if they aremore subtle than the actions of senders.8

Remittance Transactions Have Dual Foundations

Many transfers that we observe as remittances would have taken placeeven if the sender and recipient were living in the same country.Economic assistance to elderly parents, for instance, is commonplace

8In some contexts, reverse remittances, being sent to the migrant, are significant (Mazzu-cato, 2011). For family, members at the origin can send money in times of crisis orentrapment en route toward the intended destination. A comprehensive discussion ofreverse remittances falls outside the scope of this article, but the phenomenon illustrates

the mutability of the senderrecipient relationship.


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

throughout the developing world. Seeing such transfers first and foremostas remittances, simply because the supporting child has migrated toanother country, could be misleading. At the same time, the transnation-alization of the relationship is not without consequence. Remittance trans-actions can thus be thought of as having dual foundations: They mergegeneric and migration-induced aspects of transactions. But since migrationtakes disparate forms, what claims can be made about migration-inducedaspects? I would argue that there are three primary ways in which thecontext of migration can be expected to shape the transactions.

First, migration introduces new aspects of asymmetry between thetransactors. Transnational relationships are inherently unequal, at the psy-chological level, when one party has left while the other has remained(Carling, 2008b). The particular migration context introduces additionalinequalities. In some cases, the disparities in wealth, opportunities, orsecurity that incited migration in the first place typically translate into aprivileged situation for migrants relative to those who remain at the ori-gin. In other cases, migrants become the vulnerable party, additionallyburdened by expectations from the communities they left behind. Trans-national relationships can have a strong element of reciprocity, but theyare rarely symmetrical in the sense that the two sides have similar thingsto offer. The experience of transactions is consequently affected. Receivinga gift, for instance, carries different meaning when it is inconceivable toreciprocate with a similar gift.9

Second, migration creates distance between the transactors and con-comitant limitations on possibilities to communicate, observe, and physi-cally interact with each other. Again, the meanings and dynamics oftransactions are affected (Mahler, 2001; Mazzucato, 2009). For instance,handing over money with authorization to use it for a specific purpose isdifferent when the actual use cannot be observed. And when a mothergives money to a child, it carries different meaning in a context where shecannot simultaneously provide physical affection. Within the limitationsof physical separation, technological developments have fundamentallychanged the nature of communication in many transnational relationships.

9Transnational relationships often reflect more complex migration trajectories, but themigrantnon-migrant dichotomy serves to illustrate the theoretical point. A common,more complex constellation that is pertinent to the study of remittances is the one inwhich migrants in the distant diaspora (typically high-income countries) support migrantsin the proximate diaspora, for instance refugees who remain in the region of origin (Van

Hear, 1998; Horst, 2008a).


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

Consequently, differential access to technology has become a powerfulmediating factor, affecting how the context of migration shapes remittancetransactions.

Third, migration gives the transactions particular temporal dimen-sions. Reciprocity in transnational relationships is typically marked by apattern of long periods of separation punctuated by shorter visits by themigrant to the homeland. Migrants transactions with people at the originare also shaped by temporal aspects of their own migration trajectory: thetime that has elapsed since the initially migration, the prospects of afuture return, or plans for family reunification abroad. In addition, thetemporal dimensions of the transnational social field as a whole have abearing on remittance transactions. Dominant practices and norms in acommunity of recent migrants are likely to differ from those of a long-standing diaspora population.

TWELVE REMITTANCE SCRIPTS

If remittances are the core of multifaceted compound transactions, thepossibilities for variation are endless. Scripts create structure by concen-trating the variation to a set of culturally defined prototypes. In this sec-tion, I describe twelve remittance scripts that emerge from theethnographic literature. I examine them here in isolation, before address-ing later on how they are combined.

Since scripts are culturally defined conventions, they vary betweencontexts. Consequently, the list I present here is not exhaustive. This spe-cific selection of scripts is developed through a combined deductive andinductive process. On the one hand, literature on monetary transactionsand social ties more generally suggested possible scripts, which could thenbe modified and refined with reference to the ethnographic literature onremittances (e.g. Zelizer, 1996; Eyben, 2006; Shipton, 2010). On theother hand, the analysis of ethnographic literature in NVivo allowed foradditional scripts to be identified, either through conceptual discussions ordescriptive accounts. In the selection of twelve scripts, I have prioritizedscripts that appear to be relevant in a diversity of settings. Particularremittance scripts related to marriages are an example of what has beenleft out. Not only do they vary in importance, but they take a diversity ofhighly context-specific forms.

The labels that describe the scripts are a combination of emic andetic terms. In most cases, even if there is a coherent logic to a script, there


ilkaHighlight

is not a specific vocabulary that transactors use to describe it. Analyticalabstractions such as compensation and allowance then serve to sum-marize. In other cases, remittance senders and recipients use words thatlabel a script, for instance sacrifice and help. While the origin of thelabels varies, all the scripts exist in the same field of tension betweentransactors own understandings and analysts interpretations (Barnard,2012).

Compensation

When remittance recipients provide services for migrants, the money thatis sent can represent compensation, or payment, for the service rendered.Typical examples recognized in the economics-oriented and ethno-graphic literatures alike are overseeing the construction of a house, tend-ing property, or providing care for migrants children or elderly parents.The legal vulnerability of many migrants creates additional needs for ser-vices from people in the country of origin, including the provision of gen-uine or counterfeit documents (Pajo, 2008; Mazzucato, 2009). In theory,compensatory remittances represent a balanced exchange. The moneyremitted is coupled with specific requitals, things that recipients do forthe senders benefit. Since the terms of the exchange are often not madeexplicit, and reciprocity is stretched out in time, compensation blends intoinsurance. That is, remittances might not compensate for a specific andimmediate service, but create a credit of favours to be accessed in times ofneed. Conversely, people in the community of origin could provide ser-vices in order to strengthen migrants obligations to reciprocate in thefuture.

When remittance transactions take the form of compensation forservices, it is pertinent to examine the exchange with reference to theoryabout work. As Landolt and Da (2005) observe, transnational familiesdepend on the caregiving work performed by non-migrant members inthe country of origin. The prevalent uncertainty about the timely arrivalof remittances in sufficient amounts, they argue, reflects a situation ofprecarious work. In addition to the short-term precariousness linked towaiting for remittances, the work is characterized by structural instabil-ity because demand could suddenly dissipate. When children arereunited with parents abroad, or elderly parents pass away, the founda-tion for compensatory remittances to caregivers disappears (Dreby,2010).


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

Repayment

Remittances as repayment of debts feature centrally in both the econom-ics-oriented and ethnographic literatures. In some cases, such loanarrangements are explicit and quantified, as when migrants incur debts tohuman smugglers or borrow money from relatives at home to cover thecost of migration. More significantly, remittances can constitute repay-ment of loans through implicit contracts. The implicit nature means thatthere is no clear point at which the debt is settled; repayment could beimportant as a process, rather than by virtue of an accumulated amountrepaid. The repayment script is illustrated not only by the history of pasttransactions, but also by the expressed sense of indebtedness on the partof migrants (Olwig, 2007; Lindley, 2010).

When current expectations are shaped by past transactions, retro-spective perceptions are decisive and could differ between the parties. Inhis study of Ghanaian transnationalism, Boris Nieswand (2011:109)asserts that relatives in Ghana stressed the role of the collective in makingmigration possible and criticized what they considered the irresponsibleand egotistic behaviour of the migrants. The claim to having mademigration possible provides a strong moral case for repayment, yetremains elusive and vulnerable to divergent perceptions of agency.

The economics-oriented and ethnographic literatures both discussremittances from children to parents in terms of repayment, but with sub-stantial differences. The economics-oriented literature emphasizes parentsinvestment in education and in financing migration and considers thedecision-making of the actors (Poirine, 1997; Cox, Eserb, and Jimenez,1998; Rapoport and Docquier, 2006). In the ethnographic literature, thedominant picture is rather one of an unquestionable obligation to repayparents for the gift of life and care in childhood, regardless of the subse-quent migration (James, 1997; Knodel et al., 2001; Lo, 2008).

Economists have a preference for determining motivations fromobserved behaviour. As Poirine (1997:590) writes in his influential articleabout remittances as family loan arrangements, the theoretical self-inter-est model predicts well what people are doing, even though the reasonswhy they are doing it according to the theory are not the ones given whenanswering surveys. Ethnographers, too, do not take peoples rationaliza-tion of their own actions at face value. The ethnographic literature never-theless shows that the emotional aspects of perceived indebtedness,


obligation, and entitlement are central to the role of remittances in impli-cit loan arrangements.

Authorization

Remittances are often sent to a recipient who is not given the money, butcharged with spending it according to the senders directions. Such autho-rization is an important script not only because it is widespread, butbecause it is a theoretically distinct reference point the pure non-giftas opposed to the pure gift. The recipient does not benefit financially.Authorization can be for expenditures on the migrants behalf, forinstance in connection with construction of a house, or for onward distri-bution of remittances to secondary recipients.

Since the recipients do not benefit directly in financial terms, it ispertinent to ask what motivates them to take part in the transaction.Recipients can benefit through combinations of the authorization scriptwith other scripts a point we will return to in the next section. Alter-natively, the recipient is doing the sender a favour by managing themoney, possibly as part of a longer-term relationship of reciprocal sup-port. Or, the recipient could be motivated by indirect, non-financialbenefits. The publically visible association with migration and its benefitscould be a significant social asset in settings where transnational connec-tions are revered (cf. Newell, 2012). Someone who is authorized tospend money on a migrants behalf could have considerable freedom indeciding, for instance, which builders to hire or which poor people togive alms to choices that affect the persons social relationships andstatus.

The authorization script is particularly dependent on trust. Sincesenders do not relinquish ownership of the money but leave it to be man-aged by another person far away, the potential for loss is considerable.

While most other remittance scripts are driven by senders relation-ships with specific recipients, the authorization script implies that a recipi-ent is chosen. This choice is affected by the question of recipientsmotivation and by the reliance on trust. The ethnographic literature sug-gests that when migrants need someone to manage money on their behalf,their selection can follow two lines of reasoning (Pinnawala, 2008; Smithand Mazzucato, 2009; Coe, 2013). First, they can choose a proxy man-ager among close relatives, who are presumed to have the migrants bestinterest at heart and are unlikely to abuse the trust. However, this strategy


ilkaHighlight

entails a risk because relatives could feel entitled to a share of the money that is, they could elicit another script for the transaction. A close kinshiptie also limits the migrants possibilities for terminating the relationshipand selecting another proxy manager if necessary. The other line of rea-soning, therefore, is that it could be preferable to work with a trustedfriend, with greater clarity about what each person is gaining from thetransaction, and greater sway in setting the terms and ending the arrange-ment if necessary.

Pooling

The relationship between individual and collective ownership of money isat the heart of understanding remittance transactions. The standardassumption in the economics-oriented literature is that money is ownedindividually by the migrant and collectively by the receiving household.However, there are households in which all economically members areexpected to pool (part of) their income, and such households can continueto operate in the same way if migration makes them transnational. Remit-tance behaviour could then easily be overtheorized. As a Samoan factoryworker in New Zealand expressed it to Macpherson (1994:89), Mybrothers go to the plantation to collect coconuts for copra. I go to collectmoney in the factory. Its the same thing: another way to serve the fam-ily. In other words, seeking to explain the contribution from one of thebrothers as remittances would be unhelpful; he just happened to be work-ing abroad while the others did not.

The nature of income pooling depends on the cultural context. It iscentral to the modern nuclear family, focused on an emotional and mate-rial conjugal partnership. Income pooling is equally central to many tradi-tional forms of the extended family household, for instance in WestAfrica and the Pacific. Here, it takes another, multigenerational, form inwhich junior members submit income to household heads. By contrast,there are other contexts where household economies are gender segregated,or where households are looser structures that combine individual andcollective finances. These differences in the economic organization of fam-ilies affect the importance and nature of income pooling as a remittancescript.

Expectations and patterns of pooling not only shape remittanceflows; they can be transformed by migration and remitting. For instance,Pinnawala (2008) shows that female migrants actively controlled and


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

monitored remittance use, whereas they had not considered their pre-migration income their own in the sense that they could decide howthe household should put it to use.

Gift

As noted in the introduction, ethnographers who study remittances havebeen drawn to theories of gift exchange. These theories are relevant toremittance transactions more generally, concerning the nature of reciproc-ity and the interaction between exchanges and relationships across therange of scripts. But does the gift also represent a specific script for remit-tances? As Akesson (2011) observes, Lucas and Starks notion of purealtruism resembles Maliowskis idea of the pure gift. In both cases,these concepts serve primarily as theoretical reference points for the analy-sis of real-world situations with lesser purity. However, there are alsoinstances in which remittances conform to a gifting script that sets themapart from other transfers.

What typically characterizes gift remittances is that they are irregular,non-obligatory, and, in principle, dissociated from the recipients needs.Their social value overshadows the financial contribution they make. Inother words, gift remittances are partly defined in opposition to regularsupport driven by responsibility and ad hoc contribution in the face ofurgencies (cf. Smith, 2009). In the form of gift remittances, even smallamounts can serve the purpose of recognition and consequent inter-lockingof the giver and recipient in a social framework imbued with a range ofobligations and meanings (Cliggett, 2003:543). As vehicles of recognitionin transnational relationships, gift remittances have similarities with phonecalls: The actual transfer of money or information could be insignificant,but the difference between remitting or calling, and not doing it, is enor-mous (cf. Cliggett, 2005; Carling, 2008b).

Gift remittances can be occasioned by celebrations of life events,such as wedding anniversaries, marriages, baptisms, funerals, and schoolgraduations. The social meaning of the money depends on the event(Fresnoza-Flot, 2009). With all such special-occasion remittances, the ges-ture of recognition is a core element, and sometimes an obligatory one. Insome contexts, however, also the amount given is of great importance,both socially and financially. A case in point is lavish Ghanaian funeralsthat are financed by transnational donations that are publicized to theguests (Mazzucato, Kabki, and Smith, 2006).


Allowance

An allowance reflects the givers responsibility to provide for the recipient,implies regularity, and typically suggests a bounded freedom for recipientsto make spending decisions. The logic of an allowance is that a lump sumis allocated to a defined area of spending in the case of remittances, typ-ically to household maintenance. The sender decides the appropriateamount, possibly in negotiation with the recipients, but does not micro-manage spending. Indicative of this logic, McKay (2012) writes that theFilipina domestic workers she interviewed in Hong Kong calculatedmonthly allowances to their households in terms of Philippine peso needsrather than in terms of Hong Kong dollar affordability. The allowanceswere intended to cover regular expenses for family maintenance, such ascosts for rice, electricity, transportation, clothing, health care, and schoolfees, within a lump sum deemed reasonable by the senders.

Allowance remittances imply a superior position for the sender, butalso autonomy, within bounds, for the recipient. The logic of allowancesthus resembles the breadwinner model of household organization, inwhich, traditionally, a male household head works outside the home andgenerated income that underpins his authority and simultaneously dis-tances him from the nitty-gritty of everyday expenditure, covered insteadby a housekeeping allowance managed by his wife. The capacity of migra-tion to transform gender relations lies partly in the gender reversal of thebreadwinner model through allowance remittances from female migrants.

Obligation and Entitlement

Remittances can reflect a sense of obligation by the sender and a corre-sponding sense of entitlement by the recipient. When such perceived obli-gations are structural givens, rather than elements in a variable exchangerelationship, they represent a specific script (cf. Gowricharn, 2004).

Obligation remittances are a prime example of how transactions haveboth intrinsic and migration-induced elements. In many parts of theworld, adult children are seen to have a duty to provide for their ageingparents. If the children migrate, their financial contributions becometransnationalized and turn into remittances, but the motivation for thetransaction is essentially the same as if they were living in the samehousehold or village. Migration could have been a means to fulfil the


obligation, and it could affect the balance between different forms of care,but would not change the obligation itself. This form of remittances as anobligation to parents overlaps with the repayment script.

However, migration can also introduce new obligations and claims.The ethnographic literature shows how the structural parameters of migra-tion some people leaving and others being left can create a sense ofdebt on the part of migrants and a sense of entitlement on the part ofnon-migrants (Hage, 2002; Gowricharn, 2004; Shandy, 2007; Carling,2008b). The corresponding remittances are not related to recipients spe-cific needs, but to what Gowricharn (2004) refers to as their moral capitalby virtue of being non-migrant relatives of people who have gone abroad.

One of my own interviewees in Cape Verde illustrated this perceivedentitlement to remittances from relatives abroad (Carling, 2008b:1462).In my first interview with him, a young casual labourer, I asked him if hehad family abroad. I have a Grandmother in Gabon he said. I haveaunts in Holland, I have cousins in America; I have a lot of relatives inPortugal. Not only there, in a lot of places. But none of them help, man!They never sent anything. His disappointment was not based on any pastexchange or a particularly close relationship, but on the mere fact thatthey were his relatives abroad. One of Thais (2014:176) interviewees, awoman in Vietnam, expressed similar frustrations: Its hard for me tosay, but you can say that even though I have overseas family, a brotherand a sister, its like I dont have anybody over there. [. . .] I am still driv-ing the same motorbike [my sister] bought for me 8 years ago. I feel likeI am a local with no one abroad.

Sacrifice

The ethnographic literature on remittances contains many references tosacrifice often in migrants and relatives own words (e.g. Schiller andFouron, 2001; Schmalzbauer, 2004; Sanchez-Carretero, 2005; Stodolskaand Santos, 2006; Thai, 2006; Rodriguez, 2010; McKenzie and Menjvar,2011; Singh, 2013; Yeoh et al., 2013). The notion of sacrifice is generallynot linked to giving up the remitted money and foregoing alternative uses.Rather, it refers to everything that migrants endure in order to earn themoney in the first place. This form of sacrifice is, for instance, central toZrhs (2012:1760) account of the traditional norm of Turkish migrationto Europe: Those who are able to do so should sacrifice a certain periodof their lives for the sake of their families. Remittances, along with


ilkaHighlighthum not really convincing categories

does not account for the role of money in sustaining relationships

ilkaHighlight

savings, are the product of this sacrifice. This conception of sacrifice as asocial rather than ritual act resonates with recent anthropological theoriz-ing on sacrifice (Mayblin and Course, 2013).

The logic of sacrificial remittances has a common element with thenew economics of labour migration: Both reflect a vision of the migrationdecision, subsequent remittances, and ultimate family well-being as threeinextricably linked elements. Sacrificial remittances, however, are tied toan ethos of selfless devotion to family, of placing the needs of othersabove ones own. It is a gendered ethos, in the sense that the image of theself-sacrificing migrant takes gender-specific forms, but the ethnographicliterature describes both women and men in such roles.

A particular feature of the sacrifice script is that it has a dual impli-cation for the relative positioning of senders and recipients. On the onehand, sacrifice involves subordination relative to the beneficiary; the sen-der places his or her own needs below those of the recipient. On the otherhand, the sacrificial remittance morally elevates the sender.

The role of the sacrifice script is particularly closely tied to migrantstransnational communication of their experiences. In some settings, migra-tion is widely assumed to involve hardships, and the understanding of sac-rifice is easily shared between migrants and their non-migrant relatives. Inother cases, migrants strive to convey a more positive impression, either toappear successful or to keep their families from worrying. Remittancesmight then be understood as sacrificial by the sender but not by therecipients.

Blackmail

In general terms, blackmail is a payment extorted by intimidation. Remit-tance transfers could be said to constitute blackmail payments when theyare motivated by fear of negative repercussions. In the economics-orientedliterature, using the prospect of inheritance to attract remittances has beenlikened to blackmailing (Hagen-Zanker and Siegel, 2007). The ethno-graphic literature is replete with descriptions of other sanctions that areprobably more widespread. Cristina Sanchez-Carretero (2005) is perhapsalone in using the term blackmail, but it aptly describes this script. Theessence of the blackmail script is that prospective recipients hold powerover migrants through the possibility of triggering reprisals for not remit-ting. Such power, the ethnographic literature shows, can be substantial. Itis primarily based on the moralities of transnationalism. That is, migrant


ilkaHighlightyup -> complexity of negoiations

behaviour vis-a-vis relatives left behind is cast as a moral issue (Gowri-charn, 2004; Carling, 2008b; Akesson, 2011). When prospective recipi-ents think that remittances fall short of migrants moral obligations,migrants risk being judged in moral terms, as selfish, ungrateful, or aloof.Since remittances are often sent within transnational social fields, suchjudgement matters to migrants regardless of plans for return migration.The fear of reprisals is even stronger in settings where witchcraft is a socialfact. Failing to meet ones social duties as a migrant is then feared to haveconsequences more severe than a tarnished reputation (Callan, 2007;Kankonde Bukasa, 2009).

Help

When remittances constitute help, they are motivated by recipients havingworthy needs that senders are in a position to alleviate. Such remittancesare typically perceived as a moral imperative, but social obligations play amediating role in determining whom to help.

The help script can play a significant role in remittance determina-tion. The transfer is typically initiated by a request from the prospectiverecipient, who presents the need to the sender. Such appeals for help,often in the form of phone calls, can be key drivers of remittances, asreflected in the title of Anna Lindleys (2010) book about remittances toSomalia, The early morning phone call. For migrants from countries inconflict, remittances in response to distinct, pressing needs can add up tosubstantial and sustained flows (Akuei, 2005; Carling, Erdal, and Horst,2012).

The logic of remittances as help underpins the moral virtue of bothsenders and recipients. Senders do a good deed, and recipients are not toblame for their misfortune. This is also a deeply hierarchical and poten-tially humiliating script, however. While each request may be presented asurgent and unique, sequential requests and assistance create a structuralrelationship of dependence.

The help script places great importance on the senders perceptionof recipients needs, which, in turn, often depends on the recipients ownaccounts. In other words, although the logic of the script is centred onprivation, it affords the recipient greater scope for agency than many otherscripts. The exercise of this agency can be deceptive, as when non-migrants present fictive or excessive needs. Lindley (2009b:1327) conveysthe suspicion of a Somali woman in London: I have an aunt who had


had all the diseases in the whole wide world! Shes had diabetes, diar-rhoea, blood pressure, cancer, heart and kidney problems. [. . .] People sayanything to get money. The line between deception and ingenuity isblurred, however. Tazanu (2012) describes a group interview in Camer-oon, in which his informants boasted about having outwitted theirmigrant brothers and sisters by presenting their needs in ways that maxi-mized the likelihood of receiving remittances, based on an intricateknowledge of what counts as morally appealing.

Investment

In discourse on remittances, the consumption/investment dichotomy usu-ally refers to how remittances are ultimately spent and whether that usagecontributes to longer-term livelihoods for receiving families and develop-ment for receiving communities. When we consider the perspective of theremitting migrant, however, investment takes on different meanings. Inpurely financial terms, there are four ways in which investment can be ascript for remittances.

First, money can be invested in potentially income-generating assetsin the country of origin. For instance, migrants build multiunit housesthat provide income from rent as well as accommodation for themigrant during holidays or upon return. In these cases, the remittedmoney is never relinquished by migrants, simply managed on theirbehalf.

Second, migrants can reduce future needs to remit by helping to cre-ate livelihoods for the recipients. Even if the likelihood of a real impacton the migrants purse seems remote, this form of investment remittanceshas appeal because of its moral virtue: Migrants sow a seed. Remittancesfor education fall into this category, lodged between remittances for riskybusiness ventures that might come to nothing and remittances for imme-diate consumption that do not alleviate tomorrows needs. Not surpris-ingly, education expenditures feature prominently among the uses thatprospective recipients know will appeal to senders (Tazanu, 2012). Remit-tances earmarked for education thus blur the investment, help, and allow-ance scripts.

Third, migrants could more realistically affect the future demandsfor their remittances by letting others share the burden. Helping a sibling,for instance, migrate and contribute remittances to ageing parents couldbe the most financially rewarding way to allocate remittances.


Fourth, remittances can represent investments by creating obligationson the part of recipients. This is an elusive form of the investment script,overlapping with informal insurance arrangements. Parents remittances tochildren, for instance, could be interpreted partly as investments in futuresocial security (Forde, 2011).

All these forms of investment have non-monetary impacts on thesenders social standing and relationships. Such impacts can motivateinvestment in their own right and might be more important to remittanceflows overall than purely financial returns (Van Hear, 2002). As Lucasand Stark (1985:904) noted, migrants remit to invest in social assets andrelationships with family and friends. This makes it hard to distinguishbetween altruism and self-interest, they argued, since one cannot probewhether the true motive is one of caring or more selfishly wishing toenhance prestige by being perceived as caring. Such investment in rela-tionships and social standing, seen partly as an untestable nuisance in theeconomics-oriented literature, is at the heart of ethnographic studies ofremittances. The relative importance of the economic and the social issuccinctly expressed by Kerry James (1997:5) with reference to Tongans:It matters less to them how the remittances are used than that they havefulfilled their family duty. Fulfilment of this obligation represents a farmore important social investment than any economically productiveinvestment could be.

Also when remittances are earmarked for specific uses, they can havea social investment value that contrasts a purely economic logic. Expendi-tures on lavish ceremonies, for instance, could be a particularly productiveinvestment in social terms.

Lucas and Stark (1985) saw investment in social assets exclusively aspreparation for return. The transnational turn in migration studies under-pins a different view, acknowledging the value of investing in relationshipsand reputation regardless of the prospect of returning permanently to thecommunity of origin.

Donation

Migrants also send remittances in the form of charitable or religiousdonations. This script differs from the others because there is no clearsenderrecipient dyad. Donations may be gathered and transferred collec-tively, by hometown associations for instance, or they could be sent byindividuals to institutional recipients. Proper consideration of such partly


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

institutionalized transactions lies beyond the scope of this paper. However,donation can be recognized as a script alongside others.

When donations take the form of alms to the poor, there is ablurred boundary with the help script, which is premised on pre-existingsocial relations. As Erdal (2012) observes, recipients can be relatives whoqualify as a worthy cause because of their poverty and virtuous behaviour.Moreover, collective remittances also often involve interaction betweenindividuals. Issues of trust, for instance, can consequently be as prominentas in other scripts (Fitzgerald, 2008).

REMITTANCE SCRIPTS COMPARED

The preceding discussion of scripts invites a more systematic comparisonof their characteristics. What are the elements that define similaritiesand differences between scripts? Examining the distinguishing characteris-tics of scripts can help extend the list of scripts presented here and iden-tify relevant scripts in the field. I have chosen to address fourcharacteristics:

1 Relinquishment whether and how senders give up ownership of themoney that is transferred;

2 Requitals what recipients may offer, or be expected to offer, inexchange for remittances;

3 Gratitude whether remittances express or invite gratitude, and howsuch gratitude may be expressed or not;

4 Positioning how the remittance transaction affects the proximityand hierarchy between the sender and the recipient.

Other characteristics would have been possible. However, these fouraccount for much of the diversity between the scripts discussed in the pre-vious section and, in combination, address the material, emotional, andrelational aspects of scripts.

Relinquishment

Most of the remittance scripts involve complete relinquishment of theremitted funds, in line with the idea of a financial transfer. Moneychanges hands. The prime exception is the authorization script, in whichthe remitted money remains the senders. Relinquishment is partial in the


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

case of pooling, where individual ownership of a smaller amount isexchanged for collective ownership of a larger amount.

What complicates the issue of relinquishment in many other scriptsis the senders continued moral claim over the money after it has beentransferred. The scripts differ in this respect too. When the script impliesearmarking remittances for specific purposes as the assistance, allowance,and investment scripts typically do spending the money in other waysrepresents a breach of trust. However, earmarking is itself a grey area. Theethnographic literature shows a continuum: At the one end, there areinstances of micromanagement of expenses and control of receipts; at theother end, there are implicit understandings of acceptable uses. Inbetween, there is, for instance, the practice of giving advice about theuse of remittances (Pinnawala, 2008).

Analysts who warn against policymakers eager attempts to steerremittance spending have pointed out that these are private funds. In thewords of Don Terry (2004:3), One overwhelmingly important fact mustalways be recognized: Its Their Money. This is a valid point vis-a-visstates. When we zoom in on the social microdynamics of remittances,however, the question of whose money it is becomes puzzling. At whatpoint and on which terms do migrants relinquish ownership of the moneythey send? Even before the remittances are sent, and after they arereceived, multiple individuals can feel ownership or moral claims to themoney. By identifying the logic of different remittance scripts, we becomebetter equipped to understand the dynamics of ownership.

Requitals

Remittance scripts vary with respect to what senders obtain from recipi-ents, if anything. That is, do the scripts involve expectation of requitals?Three of the scripts discussed here stand out by having explicit, but verydifferent, requitals. In the compensation script, services are rendered inreturn for remittances. Blackmail involves an explicit requital in the formof avoiding the negative consequences of not remitting. The repaymentscript is premised on reverse transfers in the past, making the currentremittance itself the requital.

In most of the scripts, however, requitals are more subtle. Forinstance, recipients can reciprocate through the way in which senders gen-erosity is recognized. Expressions of gratitude are then a form of requitalin their own right. Requitals also take the form of hospitality during


senders holidays. Peggy Levitt (2001:90) writes about this from the per-spective of a woman in the Dominican Republic. She has three siblings inBoston and knows it is her responsibility to clean, wash, and cook forfive extra people and treat them as royal guests when they come to visit.

Remittance transfers typically take place in contexts of materialinequality, and reciprocity is consequently asymmetrical. As Eckstein(2010:1651) points out, unequal exchanges such as typical remittancetransactions contribute to and reinforce honour, prestige, and authority.This claim is mirrored in Akessons (2011) account of remittances beingreciprocated through recognition of the senders moral virtue and con-comitant support of their social standing.

Gratitude

The relationship between exchange and social relationships is mediated inpart through feelings and displays of gratitude. Remittance transactionsengage with gratitude in three ways. First, remittances can be an expressionof gratitude. For instance, when remittances to parents are motivated byparents efforts in raising the remitter, the money that is transferred as aform of repayment can be seen as a demonstration of gratitude.

Remittances can also elicit gratitude. Feelings of gratitude are likelywhen the recipients perceive that the money makes a real difference inmaterial or symbolic terms and that the transfer reflects an intentional,non-obligatory effort by senders to increase the recipients well-being (cf.McCullough et al., 2001). Gratitude is thus central to the help script, inwhich transfers are driven by the needs of the recipient and represent avoluntary and virtuous act by the sender. Similarly, the gift script invitesgratitude because it constructs remittances as a gesture of goodwill andrecognition. A more generalized form of gratitude is also relevant to otherscripts, such as the sacrifice and allowance scripts. Feelings of gratitude areimportant because they affect reciprocation and shape the longer-termrelationship between the transactors.

Finally, there are scripts in which there is no prominent role for grati-tude. When recipients feel entitled to the money or perform services inreturn, gratitude for remittances is unwarranted. The absence of gratitude,like its presence, influences reciprocation and the longer-term relationship.

By choosing whether and how to communicate gratitude, recipientsaffect the scripting of remittances. That is, they influence how the transac-tion maps onto possible scripts, and consequently what expectations it


ilkaHighlight

embodies. Expressing gratitude upon receiving remittances could signalindebtedness and imply that the sender remitted with requitals in mind.Akesson (2011) observes that the Cape Verdeans she did research amongrefrain from displays of gratitude in order to spare the sender this embar-rassment. Karen Richmans (2005) Haitian informants also avoid express-ing gratitude for remittances, but with the purpose of preempting themigrant benefactors opportunity to feel superior. By not acknowledgingthe money sent by migrants, they distance the transaction from the helpscript and underplay their protracted dependence on remittances.

Positioning

The ways in which remittances shape and are shaped by, social relation-ships, are core themes in the ethnographic literature. This is an extensivetopic that goes beyond the scope of this article. However, a comparisonof scripts needs to consider how they affect the positioning of senders andrecipients in relation to each other.

Across the diversity of scripts, the dominant function of remittancesis to recognize, sustain, and strengthen relationships, bringing people clo-ser despite the geographical separation. From senders point of view,remittances can thus be seen as expressions or claims of membership(Goldring, 2004:820). Stopping the flow of remittances can have anequally powerful negative effect on relationships.

Even when remittances continue being sent, however, they canweaken relationships in two ways. First, remittances create distance whenthe monetary transactions are perceived to crowd out the emotional con-tent of relationships. The blackmail script is a case in point, sincemigrants are likely to feel that they are reduced to remittance makers inthe eyes of their relatives. Requests for help can have a similar effect, cast-ing migrants primarily as donors.

Recipients too can feel the wedging effect of remittances on closerelationship. A case in point is the Mexican concept of padres de chequeno mas, fathers only by virtue of a cheque (Dreby, 2009). The money thatthese migrant fathers send to children left behind is constructed as anti-thetical to the intimacy of fatherhood.

The other way in which remittances create distance is through thetensions that often accompany remittance transactions. Conflicts can arisebetween senders and recipients over the use of remittances for instanceunder the allowance or authorization scripts or over incessant or suspect


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

requests for help remittances. The obligation script induces distance whenmigrants who are unable to meet their perceived obligations opt for socialwithdrawal, often with considerable shame and anguish (Hernandez,2002; Schmalzbauer, 2004; Akuei, 2005; Graziano, 2013).

The Haitian example that I recently referred to illustrates the powerof remittances to define, reinforce, or challenge hierarchical relationships(Richman, 2005). In the Haitian case, the remittance-backed superiorityof migrants was particularly sensitive because the migrants were typicallyyounger than the people receiving remittances. In other words, the migra-tion-induced aspects of the relationship clashed with the intrinsic ones.The same mechanism is what, in some cases, gives remittances fromfemale migrants the power to challenge patriarchal structures.

Like the help script, the allowance, alms, and authorization scriptsimply a superior position for migrants. When migrants give amounts thatare unimaginable to reciprocate, the transaction is constitutive of a socialhierarchy (Newell, 2012). The situation is reversed in the case of theblackmail script, which is premised on the recipients power over themigrant. The repayment script could entail a levelling of the relationship,in the sense that the debtors settle their obligations and thereby escape aninferior position. Since, as we have seen, repayment often takes the formof an open-ended process, however, remittances under this script couldalso serve to continually reinforce subordination.

REMITTANCE SCRIPTS COMBINED

Remittance transactions typically combine several scripts. Since bothscripts and transactions have blurred contours, they cannot be matched ina straightforward fashion. On the contrary, a given transaction might bebest interpreted with respect to two or more ideal types in the form ofscripts. This is a basic way in which related scripts are blended. However,remittance transactions also combine scripts that are clearly different fromeach other. Such mixing takes two forms, which I refer to as segmentedtransfers and layered transactions.

Segmented Transfers

Remittance scripts can be combined by assigning portions of a transfer todifferent scripts, either explicitly or implicitly. Such a transfer can bedescribed as segmented. For instance, when a migrant parent remits to a


ilkaHighlight

caregiver, it is typically assumed that part of the money will cover theactual cost of caring for an additional child, but that there will also be asurplus that benefits the caregiver or the household overall. The formerpart then follows the allowance or authorization script. If the caregiver isa close relative, such as the migrants mother, the latter part of the transfermight conform to the obligation or repayment script. If the child is in thecare of a non-relative, this part of the money might be thought of as com-pensation for the child-rearing service.

Such segmentation is most overt when the authorization script isinvolved; that is, when part of the money is simply being managed on themigrants behalf, be it for specific expenditures or for forwarding to sec-ondary recipients. As noted above, authorization can be bundled withother scripts that benefit the recipient. Smith and Mazzucato (2009)describe such an arrangement, in implicit form, among Ghanaians whooversaw the construction of migrants houses. The recipients felt entitledto skim part of the money remitted for construction, not as deception,but in an unspoken mutual understanding with the migrant. In this case,the skimmed part follows the compensation script, as payment for the ser-vices of overseeing construction.

Segmented transfers imply a potential for conflict when uses underdifferent scripts are mutually exclusive. For instance, migrant parentscould feel that too little of their remittances directly benefit their child,resulting in strained relationships with caregivers (Dreby, 2010; Akesson,Carling, and Drotbohm, 2012). Segmentation is not the same asearmarking, since transfers made under a single script could beearmarked for one or more purposes, but the resulting potential fordisputes is similar.

Layered Transactions

Scripts can be layered in a single transaction, meaning that scripts aresuperimposed through selective, deceptive, or disparate communication.Senders and recipients may well have a shared understanding of such lay-ering and engage in it to avoid embarrassment or circumvent socialnorms. Two examples from Albania serve to illustrate layering.

Albanian society has strong patriarchal elements, one of which is theprescription that a married woman should devote herself to the well-beingof her parents-in-law rather than her own parents. If she and her hus-bands are migrants, they should remit to his parents, not hers, conforming


to the obligation or repayment script. By defining remittances as gifts,however, a woman can justifiably send money to her own parents. Thegift script thus becomes the public face of the transfer, backed up by char-acteristics such as being irregular rather than monthly. The accumulatedamounts can nevertheless be substantial and make a significant contribu-tion to her parents subsistence a fact that would be a source of shamehad it not been masked by the gift script (King, Dalipaj, and Mai, 2006;Smith, 2009; Vullnetari and King, 2011).

The other Albanian example concerns remittances that men send tofathers or brothers to finance the construction of a house (Dalakoglou,2010). Such transfers are usually larger than the cost of the constructiontasks that the money is meant to cover. This is a fact that both transactorsare aware of. The arrangement thus resembles what Smith and Mazzucato(2009) observed among construction managers in Ghana, referred toabove. In the Albanian case, however, the transaction is layered in thesense that the allocation script masks the assistance that the surplus repre-sents. By embedding contributions to family members subsistence withinthe construction enterprise, senders reduce the shame associated withbeing dependent on migrants.

The same money can, in some situations, play sequential roles inmultiple scripts. This form of layering occurs when recipients areinstructed to spend the money in particular ways. For instance, migrantsmay refrain from making religious donations or offering gifts directly, butinstead earmark remittances to family members for these purposes. Themoney then follows the authorization script in the sense that it neverbecomes the recipients property. However, the arrangement bestows pres-tige or virtue upon the family members when they make donations(James, 1997). The transaction could therefore simultaneously conform tothe repayment or obligation script, with the twist that migrants bestowprestige rather than money upon the recipients.

Layering can also take the form that senders and recipients assignthe transaction to different scripts. For instance, Erdal (2012) describeshow Pakistani migrants send remittances that they regard as zakat reli-giously prescribed charitable giving to the poor to unknowing relativeswho may have refused the money if they had known the senders interpre-tation. Such divergent scripting can have a deceptive element when trans-actors appeal strategically to specific scripts. A case in point is thatrecipients may feel entitled to remittances beyond the prospective senderscorresponding sense of obligation. If migrants fear this scenario, they can,


ilkaHighlight

as previously noted, be inclined to select non-relatives as proxy managersof their finances in the country of origin.

Prospective recipients can sense the same divergence between per-ceived entitlements and obligations. A possible reaction is to appeal toother scripts, at times deceptively. Tazanus Cameroonian (2012) intervie-wees, referred to above, justified their disingenuous requests for remit-tances with reference to migrant relatives being too greedy. In otherwords, they relied on the help script as a means of extracting remittances,but identified with an entitlement script that morally sanctioned theremittances they cunningly obtained.

REMITTANCE SCRIPTS IN CONTEXT

The purpose of introducing the concept of remittance scripts is to breakup the aggregate remittance flows and examine microlevel decisions thatfollow different logics under different scripts. However, the artificial amal-gam of remittances in general carries social meanings of its own, whichform part of the context for peoples action. In some contexts, remittancesare portrayed as fuelling terrorism and crime, hindering integration in thesociety of settlement, or corrupting home communities (Coutin, 2007;Lindley, 2009a; Horst et al., in press). The dominant macrolevel dis-course, however, seems to render remitting in general both natural andvirtuous. This remittance norm is bolstered by the confluence of severalweighty forces.

First, remitting is typically underpinned by the moralities of transna-tionalism. That is, within transnational social fields, meeting remittanceexpectations is often appreciated as morally virtuous, and failing to do sois similarly condemned. This is an overarching pattern across a range ofscripts.

Second, commercial actors in the money transfer business use mar-keting strategies that capitalize on and thereby reinforce both the vir-tue and the naturalness of remitting. The paramount example is WesternUnion, which, in the mid-2000s shifted from stressing efficiency toemphasizing devotion: Taglines changed from the fastest way to sendmoney to sending so much more than money, with accompanyingimagery of family affection (DeParle, 2007). The companys own marketsurveys indicate that a staggering eighty per cent of consumers worldwideare aware of Western Union. In most markets, other companies also havea strong presence. Like the fashion industry promotes particular body


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlightshould explain how it's enacted (enforced)

ideals as much as specific clothing brands, the ubiquitous marketing ofremittance services functions as a massive public awareness campaign thatpromotes remitting.

The third contributor to the remittance norm is the current policyenvironment. As Page and Mercer (2012:12) argue, the right of those athome to expect remittances from those in the diaspora is enshrined inthe argument about the developmentmigration nexus. The dominantefforts in policy development and research do not question the centralityof remitting in a socially constructed norm for what it means to be amigrant, but tends to take remitting itself for granted.

Transnational communities, corporate marketing strategies, and thedominant policy discourse thus underwrite the same message: Goodmigrants remit.

CONCLUSION

The notion of scripts is useful for understanding how remittance sendersand recipients make sense of the transactions they engage in. Such under-standing can, in turn, help us appreciate the dynamics of remitting towhom remittances are sent, what determines remittance amounts, whytransfers stop, and so on. These microlevel decisions add up to shape themuch-heralded global flows of remittances in hundreds of billions of dol-lars.

But remittance scripts, as an analytical concept, can easily be misun-derstood. Several features of scripts call for caution in attempting to clas-sify transactions. First, remittance scripts are elusive cultural constructs.This means that there is not a finite set of mutually exclusive scripts. Sec-ond, remittance scripts typically coexist, as described above, in segmentedtransfers and layered transactions. Senders and recipients might elicit dif-ferent scripts for making sense of the same transaction. There is, conse-quently, not necessarily an optimal script for labelling a transaction. Foranalysts, scripting remittances is a means as much as an end.

What remittance scripts offer is a structured way of thinking aboutboth the compound and variable nature of remittance transactions. Thetransactions are compound in the sense that they fuse material, social, andemotional elements. Recognizing features of specific scripts in a transac-tion could mean that other pieces of the puzzle fall into place. Or if atransaction seems counterintuitive from one perspective, eliciting scriptscan help locate drivers of the transaction in other realms.


ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlight

ilkaHighlighta really specific sort of migrants tho: not the one from Fr in the US and so on

underlying geopolitical desqulibrium should be brought into the picture

ilkaHighlightbut he didn't account for "how" and with which consequences

Remittance transactions are variable in the sense that remittances aregoverned by different logics in different circumstances. This insight was astarting point for Lucas and Starks (1985) framework of motivations toremit. Remittance scripts similarly offer a tentative set of options, whichinspires examining similarities and differences. Appreciation of variabilityis easily lost in ethnographic studies that focus on a single context. Thereis a danger of constructing remittances as special money in an artificiallyunitary way. When remittance transactions elicit different scripts, themoney is also special in different ways.

An increasing number of ethnographic studies examine remittancesnot only as a minor theme in research on migration and transnational-ism, but as an important object of study in their own right. The remit-tance scripts framework can contribute to this development in fourways. First, scripts can be used as alternative lenses of observation inthe field. When possibly relevant scripts are identified, interpretationsand questions emerge. Second, the comparative parameters presentedhere relinquishment, requitals, gratitude,

carling - 2014 - scripting remittances making sense of money trans

Documents