social networks and undocumented mozambican migration to south africa

Geoforum 41 (2010) 885–896

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geoforum

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /geoforum

Social networks and undocumented Mozambican migration to South Africa

Ramos Cardoso Muanamoha a, Brij Maharaj c,*, Eleanor Preston-Whyte b

a University of Eduardo Mondlane, Mozambiqueb School of Development, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africac Geography Discipline, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 27 November 2007Received in revised form 19 May 2010

Keywords:Social networksMigrant labourUndocumented migrationMozambiqueSouth AfricaXenophobia

0016-7185/$ - see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Adoi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.06.001

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +27 31 260 1027; faxE-mail address: [email protected] (B. Maharaj)

a b s t r a c t

This paper analyses the social networks which facilitate and sustain undocumented migration fromMozambique to South Africa. A key contention is that the migrant social networks are not limited to aspatially bounded area; transcend geography, location and territory; can be considered as spatial convey-ors of social capital; and operate transnationally at three different locations: in the sending communities,on borders and in the destination areas. In the sending communities, interpersonal relationships arebased on bonds of kinship, and friendship through which the migrants get moral and material supportfor the movement. At the borders migrants establish connections with border agents, guides, and convey-ors who support them in entering South Africa and provide transportation to their preferred destinations.At the destination areas the newcomers have also counted on the bonds of kinship and friendship amongformer immigrants, who assist them on their arrival with accommodation and food as well as in the pro-cess of getting jobs and documentation. In South Africa undocumented migrants were subjected to highlevels of xenophobia, exploitation and deportation, structural, sociopolitical forces against which socialnetworks are largely ineffective. However, through the social networks the undocumented Mozambicanlabour migration to South Africa has become a self-sustained circular process that is difficult to control.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Since the early 1990s Mozambican labour migration to South

One consequence of the economic disparities between SouthAfrica and neighbouring countries is the exacerbation of immigra-tion, both legal and illegal, into South Africa. This is part of a globaltrend in which the world’s more developed countries are experi-encing a greater influx of illegal migrants from less developedcountries (Cornelius et al., 2004; Human Development Report,2009).

The migration of workers from other parts of Africa to SouthAfrica has a long history (Davies and Head, 1995). Historically, themining and agriculture sectors in South Africa have been dependenton migrant labour from southern African countries. In fact much ofSouth Africa’s mineral wealth has been produced on the backs ofmigrant mine workers (Jeeves, 1985; Murray, 1995). Migrant la-bour from Southern African states has always been a thorny issuein South Africa’s already troubled relationship with its neighbours,during the apartheid years and afterwards. In the post-apartheidera there have been long delays in developing a new progressiveimmigration policy in South Africa, and this has been attributedto ‘‘national politics, bureaucratic bungling, and the very real dilem-ma of formulating democratic, rights-based migration in what is ahighly xenophobic society” (Dodson, 2002, p. 1).

ll rights reserved.

: +27 31 260 1391..

Africa has been assuming new contours (Crush and Williams,2001a). In spite of a decrease in Mozambican contract labourmigration to South Africa (SAMP, 2005a) there was an increase inundocumented labour migration. In 2003, it was estimated that75,000 Mozambicans were working legally in South Africa, whilethose working illegally in Mpumalanga and Limpopo provincesalone were estimated to be more than 145,000 (SAMP, 2003). How-ever, the actual number of undocumented migrants (including theMozambicans) in South Africa is still unknown. Given its currentmagnitude, the undocumented Mozambican labour migration toSouth Africa has given cause for concern for both governments.In South Africa undocumented migrants are seen to be taking jobsfrom locals, and this has influenced the development of xenopho-bia (Crush et al. 2000a; Landau, 2004; Maharaj, 2004).

In the international literature (and in contrast to other kinds ofirregular migration like refugees and asylum seekers), undocu-mented labour migration has been portrayed as being primarilymotivated by economic factors (Chiswick, 2001; Clark, 2002). Thesupply and demand for low wage illegal migrant workers was con-sidered the main reason for the increase in undocumented migra-tion flows, which was fuelled through social networks (Singer andMassey, 1998). Once the social networks grow and the migrant-supporting institutions develop, the migration tends to sustain it-self in ways that make additional movement progressively morelikely over time (Massey et al., 1993, 1994, 1998).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.06.001

mailto:[email protected]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.06.001

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00167185

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/geoforum

886 R.C. Muanamoha et al. / Geoforum 41 (2010) 885–896

As a result of the expansion of social networks, every new mi-grant reduces the costs and risks of subsequent migration forfriends and relatives (Massey et al., 1998). A key practical contribu-tion of social networks is that it lowers the costs of migration, andcan also sustain the process even when the original incentives dis-appear or are greatly weakened (Portes, 2000).

A key contention of this paper is that social networks havedeveloped in both Mozambique and South Africa which sustainundocumented migration over time by making subsequent entryand stay in the latter easier, cheaper and less risky (see Minnaarand Hough, 1996; McDonald et al., 2000; Crush and Williams,2001a). However, there is little understanding of the mechanismsthrough which these social processes facilitate, support and sustainthis undocumented migration. This was because ‘‘immigrationresearchers have excluded a variety of actors involved in the orig-ination and perpetuation of migratory flows from data collection”(Krissman, 2005, p. 5). This paper seeks to address this gap inunderstanding. A key contention is that the migrant social net-works are not limited to a spatially bounded area; transcend geog-raphy, location and territory; can be considered as spatialconveyors of social capital; and operate transnationally at threedifferent locations: in the sending communities, on borders andin the destination areas.

The rest of this paper is divided into four sections. In the firstsection the role of social networks in influencing migration is pre-sented as a theoretical context for the paper. The second sectionpresents a brief historical overview of labour migration fromMozambique to South Africa. This is followed by an analysis of so-cial factors sustaining undocumented migration from Mozam-bique. Section four analyses the challenges that Mozambicans inSouth Africa experience as a result of their illegal status.

This study is based on fieldwork conducted in selected researchsites in southern Mozambique in the districts of Magude andChókwè (Fig. 1), and South Africa (in the provinces of Gauteng

Fig. 1. Location of Magude and Cho

and Mpumalanga). The two selected sites in Mozambique are ma-jor sending areas of labour migrants, partly because of their geo-graphical proximity to South Africa. Gauteng and Mpumalangawere the main South African destinations of Mozambicanmigrants.

Two different approaches – qualitative interviews and surveys –were used to gather data for this paper. Qualitative interviewswere conducted in both Mozambican and South African researchsites, whilst sample surveys were only undertaken in Mozambique.The survey included a multi-stage probabilistic sample of 745households from Magude and Chókwè districts (which representedabout 2% of the total of households). The unit of observation wasthe household. The unit of analysis was each member in the house-hold who ever had experienced undocumented labour migration toSouth Africa.

A structured questionnaire, consisting mainly of closed ques-tions, was used in the survey, and it focused on: (i) basic socialand demographic characteristics of the household and identifica-tion of people with prior experience of undocumented labourmigration to South Africa (returned migrants); (ii) data on returnedundocumented labour migrants (profile, remittances, labourmigration experience); and (iii) socio-economic status of thehousehold.

The qualitative method consisted of 22 in-depth interviews(with key informants such as individuals, organisations and profes-sionals dealing with issues concerning undocumented labour mi-grants) and recording 32 life migration histories from returnedmigrants (in Mozambique) and current migrants (in South Africa).Most of the migrants approached for life migration histories (inMozambique) had been identified during the survey interviewsin the sample households. All names used in this paper arepseudonyms.

The fieldwork was done during April–May 2004 (in Mozam-bique), and July and September 2005 (in South Africa). A major

kwe districts in Mozambique.

R.C. Muanamoha et al. / Geoforum 41 (2010) 885–896 887

problem encountered in this study was the reluctance of undocu-mented migrants to reveal information about themselves tostrangers, particularly inside South Africa. In order to overcomethis problem, community leaders were approached to facilitatecontact with potential interviewees. However, this reliance oncommunity gatekeepers could have affected the sampling.

2. Migration and social networks

The continued increase in international migration is linked tothe world economic system, in which the unequal developmentand differences in wages and job opportunities between countrieshave been identified as one of the most important reasons to mi-grate (Canales, 2000). In addition to the economic issues, a key fac-tor that can influence the decision to stay or to move is the role ofsocial networks and social capital.

Massey et al. (2005, p. 29) have defined social networks as ‘‘setsof interpersonal ties that connect migrants, former migrants, andnonmigrants at places of origin and destination through reciprocalties of kinship, friendship, and shared community of origin”.According to Curran and Rivero-Fuentes (2003, p. 289) the role ofsocial networks for ‘‘explaining migration has strong theoreticaland intuitive purchase, as well as empirical support. As Massey(1990, p. 60) emphasised ‘‘[n]etworks build into the migration pro-cess a self-perpetuating momentum that leads to its growth overtime, in spite of fluctuating wage differentials, recessions, andincreasingly restrictive immigration policies in developedcountries”.

Studies on international migration show that long-distancemigration is associated with risks pertaining to personal safety,comfort, income, and security. Where relatives, friends, neighboursand workmates already have good connections with the projecteddestination, it is possible to minimise and dilute the risks (Levittand Jaworsky, 2007). Networks can help reduce the cost of thejourney, assist in adapting to the host society and finding employ-ment, and provide support in times of need (illness, unemploy-ment) (Gold, 2005). A key argument of the social network theoryof migration is that, once the number of migrants reaches a criticalthreshold, the expansion of networks reduces the costs and risks ofmovement, which increases the probability of migration, generat-ing additional movement and expanding the networks, and so on(Massey et al., 1993, 1994, 1998; Singer and Massey, 1998;Ammassari and Black, 2001; Durand and Massey, 2003). Social cap-ital plays an important role in mitigating risks and can influencethe decision-making processes of potential migrants.

According to Putnam (1993, p. 35) social capital refers to ‘‘fea-tures of social organisation, such as networks, norms, and trust,that facilitate action and co-operation for mutual benefit”. Twotypes of social capital – ‘bounded solidarity’ and ‘enforceable trust’– can be regarded as very crucial to the migration process. Accord-ing to Portes and Sensenbrenner (1993, p. 1327), ‘bounded solidar-ity’ ‘‘is limited to members of a particular group who findthemselves affected by common events in a particular time andplace”. In the case of immigrants, the solidarity arises out of ‘‘con-frontation with a foreign society with a sense of cultural continuityand autonomous presence” (Portes and Sensenbrenner, 1993, p.1331).

In turn, in the context of immigration, the concept of ‘enforce-able trust’ refers to the social capital that emerges from common-alities in experiences of departure from the home country andconditions at arrival in the receiving country, creating bondsamong immigrants and giving rise to ‘‘a multiplicity of social net-works that frequently coalesce into tightly knit ethnic communi-ties” (Portes and Sensenbrenner, 1993, p. 1332). However, socialcapital can also serve as a ‘‘form of social control”, and the associ-

ated negative consequences include making excessive demands onthe group; excluding outsiders; and reducing personal autonomyand freedom (especially that of the youth) (Portes, 1998, p. 18).Sometimes migrant social networks also

involve the abuse of distressed workers and consumers, keepalive outdated business practices, and drain valuable resourcesfrom communities with few to spare . . . migrant networks func-tion not as springboards to affluence, but rather, as mobilitytraps to all but owners and a few high level employees. Workersencounter low wages, long hours, and poor working conditionsand are offered few opportunities to learn the host society lan-guage or other skills required to move beyond bottom-rung jobs(Gold, 2005, p. 277).

In short, social networks have little or no influence in the macrosocio-political and economic domains, ‘‘forces over which individ-uals have little or no control”, as well as ‘‘[s]tructural forces, suchas policies of reception and the local economy” (Menjívar, 2000,p. 34). This paper will reveal that migrants were subjected to xeno-phobic attacks and exploitation.

The social networks approach ‘‘permits understanding migra-tion as a social product - not as the sole result of individual deci-sions made by individual actors, not as the sole result ofeconomic or political parameters, but rather as an outcome of allthese factors in interaction” (Boyd, 1989, p. 642). A further roleof social networks in the migration process is that it helps migrantsmaintain multiple relationships in the society of destination aswell as in the one of the origin, which suggests a transnationaldimension to the contemporary migrant flows which operates atdifferent locations (Sasaki and Assis, 2000).

The type of migration also influences the preponderance ofstrong or weak ties within a migrant network (Grieco, 1998). Forinstance, ‘‘migration based on the movement of individuals, suchas labour or refugee migration, would encourage the preponder-ance of weak ties within social networks” while ‘‘migration basedon the movement of social units, such as family or chain migration,would encourage the preponderance of strong ties in migrant net-works” (Grieco, 1998, p. 706). Migrant networks based on weakties would encourage more rapid assimilation and integration ofmembers, while networks based on strong ties would encouragesocial closure and slower assimilation, leading to the developmentof ethnic communities in the host society (Grieco, 1998). Socialnetworks have less explanatory significance when applied toforced migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers (Collyer, 2005).

The social network approach was particularly relevant to thisstudy of labour migrants from Mozambique to South Africa be-cause it considers the social context in which a decision to migrateis initiated which permeates the process from place of departure todestination. It also explains the challenges of regulating suchmovement through policy interventions, and demonstrates thatbecause of social networks the ‘‘movement of people has a power-ful internal momentum . . . which perpetuates migration regardlessof any efforts of receiving or sending countries” (Elrick, 2005, pp.5–6). Hence, it also suggests why attempts to regulate migrationthrough legislation and policy are likely to be unsuccessful.

While migration is a basic geographical concept, scholars havebeen ‘‘less explicit about the spatial or toponimical dimension of so-cial capital” (Herández-León and Zúniga, 2002, p. 7, originalemphasis). Although human and physical capital are ‘‘embodiedin material or individual forms, social capital is embedded in therelations between actors. . . [and] . . . tied to a certain place” (Elrick,2005, p. 2). It is also ‘‘an unevenly distributed resource” (Hakli andMinca, 2009, p. 1). However, as this paper will demonstrate, socialnetworks transcend place, location and territory, and can be con-sidered as spatial conveyors of social capital.


3. Labour migrants from Mozambique to South Africa: historicalcontext

Undocumented Mozambican labour migration to South Africabegan to receive more attention in the 1990s. This was because‘‘in colonial and apartheid South Africa, the ‘barbarians’ were keptat bay through a sophisticated and very brutal system of pass lawsand immigration legislation which determined who had the rightto enter the country” (McDonald, 2000, p. 1). These systems servedto control most of the internal movement of black South Africansas well as the cross-border movement of Africans from other coun-tries on the continent (McDonald, 2000). Foreign workers comingmostly from Mozambique and other neighbouring countries weresubject to strict controls which were related to length of stay, typeof work and place of residence. Labour rotation was strictly en-forced and transportation to and from South Africa was providedthrough organised groups so that the return of workers whose con-tracts had expired could be assured (Zlotnik, 2001).

Historically, the documented Mozambican labour migration toSouth Africa should be understood as part of a regional labour mar-ket system (Crush, 1997; Covane, 2001). According to Crush (1997)the South African mining industry – in cooperation with the SouthAfrican State and the British and Portuguese colonial governments– created a regional labour market for mine labour in the late nine-teenth and early twentieth centuries that included most of thecountries that now comprise the Southern African DevelopmentCommunity (SADC). In the apartheid era labour migration fromMozambique to South Africa did not constitute any serious prob-lem whether in Mozambique or in South Africa, since this occurredin officially controlled ways (Crush et al., 2000b). However, it is be-lieved that in the apartheid era there was also illegal labour migra-tion. Maharaj (2004, p. 3) argues that ‘‘the apartheid governmentsubtly encouraged or turned a blind eye to clandestine migrationin order to ensure an abundant supply of cheap labour, but was op-posed to black migrants applying for citizenship.”

Much of this has changed with the end of apartheid and thedemocratic election of a majority government in 1994. The numberof Mozambicans employed in the South African mines has fallen by

SENDING AREAS (MOZAMBIQUE) ON BORDERS

Returned Migrants (family members / relatives, friends, and neighbours)

- Border agents

- Guides

- Conveyors

Potential Labour Migrants

Labour Migrants

Non-Migrants (family/ relatives and friends)

Support given to migrants Dec

RIntegration in the destination

Moral + Material Support

Support for Border-crossing + Transportat

Fig. 2. Forces sustaining support and continuity of undocum

about 16% between 1996 and 2005, from 56,000 workers to 46,000,(SAMP, 2006). Possible reasons for this reduction include:

(i) the new South African Immigration Act (2002) which fixesquotas for the number of foreign workers that each companycan employ, in an attempt to promote jobs for South Africanworkers;

(ii) the closure of some gold mines whose reserves areexhausted;

(iii) the ageing of the Mozambican workforce on the mines, sinceabout 75% of Mozambican miners are 48 years or older,while the retirement age on the mine is 55; and

(iv) the ‘‘catastrophic” levels of mortality from AIDS amongMozambican miners (SAMP, 2005b, c). The relationshipbetween migration and HIV/AIDS is very important in asouthern African context because of the movement ofmigrant labour (Williams et al., 2002, p. 1).

In the post-apartheid era ‘‘there are no longer any restrictionson movement within the country and there has been a dramatic in-crease in cross-border traffic from other African countries intoSouth Africa” (McDonald, 2000, p. 1). South Africa continues to at-tract undocumented migrants from nearly all neighbouring coun-tries in the SADC region, with the highest numbers of cross-border migrants coming from Mozambique.

4. Social networks and undocumented migration to SouthAfrica

No car can go ahead without fuel . . . Nearly all people whodecide to leave their homes in order to get job in South Africamay know someone here that can guide them. Those who comehere without knowing anybody end up having many problemsin the process. Some of them end up giving up their intentionof staying here for some time looking for job. Others end upbeing deported . . . (Manuel, undocumented labour migrant,Tembisa, July 2005)

DESTINATION AREAS (SOUTH AFRICA)

Former Mozambican Immigrants (home communities, family members / relatives, friends, and neighbours)

South African citizens, employers, and immigration officers

Newcomer Undocumented Labour Immigrants

ision to migrate Illegal border-crossing

eturn migration

ion Support for social and economic integration

ented Mozambican labour migration to South Africa.

Table 1Sources of financial support for travelling to South Africa on first trip.

Source of financial support District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 69.2 42.0 48.6Friends (%) 3.9 3.7 3.7Own resources (%) 26.9 54.3 47.7Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0

Number of migrants 26 81 107

Table 2Migrants’ contacts at the destination on first trip to South Africa.

Whom migrants knew District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 65.4 85.2 80.4Friends (%) 30.8 11.1 15.9Nobody (%) 3.8 3.7 3.7Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0


Table 3Who accompanied migrants on first trip to South Africa.

Who accompanied migrants District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 19.2 27.2 25.2Friends (%) 65.4 55.5 58.0Alone (%) 15.4 17.3 16.8Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0


Table 4Source of assistance for sustenance and accommodation in South Africa on first trip.

Who assisted District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 53.9 75.3 70.1Friends (%) 34.6 14.8 19.6Nobody (%) 11.5 9.9 10.3Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0


Table 5Assistance in obtaining first job in South Africa.

Who assisted District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 57.7 65.4 63.5Friends (%) 23.1 9.9 13.1Self (%) 19.2 18.5 18.7Never got job (%) – 6.2 4.7Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0



This section analyses the main social networks that supportedundocumented Mozambican migration to South Africa.

It is evident from Fig. 2 that there were various factors sustain-ing the continuity of undocumented Mozambican labour migrationto South Africa, and which were operating at three different spatiallevels: in the migrants’ sending areas, on borders, and in the desti-nation areas.

At the level of sending areas families1 and/or relatives2 providesome moral and financial support for potential and returned mi-grants. The returned migrants themselves form another force thatassists the potential migrants with information and guidance.

At the borders the migrants were assisted by three distinctforces. This includes immigration agents, who facilitate the passageof undocumented migrants through the border in return of bribes;smugglers/guides that show the illicit ways of entering South Afri-ca along the border; and conveyors, who help the migrants withtransport from the border to preferred destinations in South Africa.

In the destination areas there are two sets of forces assisting mi-grants. A first set of forces is formed by established Mozambicanimmigrants in the destination areas, who could be family mem-bers/relatives, friends or neighbours of the new immigrants. Theestablished immigrants are always the first ones who assist thenewcomers on their arrival with accommodation and food, as wellas in the process of getting jobs and documentation in South Africa.The second one is constituted by some South African employersthat shelter and protect the undocumented migrants because theyprovide cheap labour; and some immigration officers, who facili-tated the process of getting fraudulent South African documenta-tion by undocumented migrants through bribery.

The support that migrants receive from sending areas and alsofrom the established immigrants in destination areas is based ontwo kinds of ‘‘social bonds”3: kinship and friendship relations. Mi-grants were also assisted by other social actors such as borderagents, smuggler/guides, and conveyers. These will now be discussedin more detail.

4.1. Kinship connections

The kinship connections include ties that migrants maintainwith some family members or relatives throughout the migrationprocess. In the sending communities as well as in the destinationareas, the migrants have relied on interpersonal emotional ties thatbind them to other family members or relatives. The survey datareveals that kinship ties were very important in influencing the mi-grants’ decision to move as well as in adapting in the new destina-tion (see Tables 1–5).

The survey results from Magude and Chókwè districts revealedthat during their first trips to South Africa, about half of the mi-grants received financial support for the journey from their fam-ily/relatives at home (Table 1). About four-fifths of the migrantshad at least one family member or relative in the destination areawhen they left home for the first time (Table 2). Moreover, 25.2% ofmigrants had left on their first trip in the company of a familymember or relative who had already experienced labour migrationto South Africa (Table 3). More than two-thirds of the migrants re-ceived assistance for sustenance and accommodation from family/relatives (Table 4) following their arrival in South Africa, and these

1 The term ‘family’ denotes a set of persons who are genealogically close to themigrant such as parents, brothers and sisters, or spouse and children.

2 The word ‘relatives’ is applied for those people who are not members of themigrant’s immediate family, for example, uncles, aunts, brothers and sisters-in-law,cousins, nephews, nieces, etc.

3 The concept of ‘‘social bond” has been defined by Schensul et al. (1999, p. 11) as‘‘the type of relationship between ego and other members” of a network. ‘‘Egos” arethe ‘‘focal individuals” of the network (Schensul et al., 1999, p. 5), therefore themigrants, in this case.

contacts also assisted them to get their first jobs (Table 5). Theinfluence of kinship ties on the different phases of the migrationprocess will be illustrated with reference to the experiences ofLuís, Joaquim, and Rodrigues.

Luís had been an undocumented labour migrant in South Africawho had returned home to the Magude district in 2002. He hadmoved to South Africa for the first time in 1999, when he was


17 years old, unmarried, and had completed the eighth grade inschool. He had been invited to go to South Africa by his cousinwho had been living and working in Tembisa for many years. Luísexplained that his cousin had a small shop and needed his help:

When my cousin came here for holidays, he invited me to go withhim to Tembisa, because he needed my help in his shop. I wouldbe selling in that shop. . . When we arrived in Tembisa, I stayed bymy cousin. . . I took three months without starting, since I hadfirst to get adapted to the new environment. I had first to learnhow to deal with the South African currency. I had never seenthe Rand. Then, I started selling diverse goods: beer, wine,refreshments, flour, eggs . . . (Luís, Magude district, April 2004).

Joaquim, from Chibuto district (Gaza province), who was inter-viewed in Tembisa in 2005, had entered South Africa for the firsttime in 2003 when he was 19 years old. His schooling level wasthe fourth grade. Joaquim came to South Africa with his uncle Fer-nando who had been working as a barber in Johannesburg, and wasalso an undocumented migrant. Once in Johannesburg, Joaquimgot his first job as a bricklayer’s assistant, through his uncle Fer-nando’s acquaintance from the church. After three weeks in thatjob, Joaquim left for Bekkersdal where his brother-in-law Arturwas staying. Artur helped Joaquim to find a job in a kiosk wherehe sold a variety of goods.

Rodrigues, who had been deported from South Africa at thetime of fieldwork in Magude district, left illegally for the first timein 1995 when he was 18 years old, and had completed the sixthgrade in school. Rodrigues had been invited to come to South Africaby his cousin, Júlio, who was living in Tembisa and had returned tothe Magude district for a holiday. Rodrigues explained that his cou-sin Júlio had promised him a job in Tembisa:

My cousin, who came here for holidays, invited me to go therewith him. He told me that there was a job for me. I should gothere to work with him as bricklayer. He was working thereas bricklayer. When he went back there he took me. I didn’thave any passport. He had got one. We couldn’t pass throughthe border post, because of my situation. So, we had to useanother way, jumping the border fence. Once in Tembisa, Ihad to stay by my cousin. After four months I got employed inthe workplace of my cousin. I went to work with him as a brick-layer’s assistant. I stayed in that job until 1998 when I wasdeported (Rodrigues, Magude district, May 2004).

These three case studies reveal three different ways in whichnewly-arrived undocumented Mozambican immigrants in SouthAfrica obtained their first jobs through kinship bonds. Familymembers or relatives played a mediating role between theiremployers and the newcomer kinsmen.

In the sending communities, the migrants also depended ontheir family/relatives to get other forms of support. For instance,among the female migrants who were single mothers at the timeof leaving for South Africa, the most common concern was thatthey had to have someone who could take care of their childrenthroughout their absence. In these circumstances, the migrants’parents were very helpful, since they felt obliged to assume theresponsibility for looking after their grandchildren. A good exam-ple is that of Maria, a female undocumented labour migrant fromthe Magude district.

Maria left for South Africa for the first time in 1992 when shewas 27 years old. Her schooling level was the sixth class. At thattime she had four small children and was separated from her hus-band. Also, because of the war, she had given up her job as analphabetizer4 for adults, in Magude district. She and her four chil-

4 Maria used to teach illiterate adults to read and write.

dren were living with her parents on the outskirts of Maputo city.Maria’s main concern when deciding to leave for South Africa wasthat she did not know who would look after her children. Fortu-nately, Maria got help from her mother, as she explained in herown words:

I met a female friend in Maputo city, with whom I used to talkabout my suffering. That friend used to buy goods from SouthAfrica and sell them in Mozambique. She told me that her lifewas getting better thanks to her movements to South Africa.Before she started to travel to South Africa, her situation wassimilar to mine. Now she was feeling much better, becauseshe had succeeded in getting a passport. I told her that I wasnot able to travel to South Africa like her; because of my chil-dren. I asked her what I could do with my children, since Iwanted too to travel to South Africa. She advised me to leavethe children with my mother. So, I asked my mother for helpto take care of my children (Maria, Magude district, January2004).

Bonds with kin have also been very important to manage themigrants’ affairs at home. In general, the migrants have relied onsome family members or relatives who remain behind to take careof their properties/projects when they are absent. To some extent,this has to be considered as a kind of social division of labour with-in the family circle, in which the most active family members mi-grate to South Africa in order to earn money, while the familymembers or relatives left behind had the task of using this moneycorrectly for the purposes already determined by the migrants. Inmany cases, the fathers, brothers or wives left behind have beenthe most trusted kin by migrants to be the managers of their prop-erties/projects.

For example, after Manuel established himself in business inTembisa, he decided to improve living conditions of his family athome in Mozambique. While Manuel was busy with the businessin Tembisa, his wife Anita had the task of dealing with the correctuse of the income to support their projects at home. For that, Anitahad to get a Mozambican passport, which allowed her to enterSouth Africa in order to collect her husband’s income. At the timeof interview with Manuel (in July 2005), Anita had gone home withsome money in order to buy building material for the constructionof their house.

Another example is that of Mr. Vuma, a successful businessmanin Tembisa, who returned home, where he began to develop agri-cultural activity and raise cattle. He subsequently became a bigfarmer and cattle breeder in his motherland. Some time later heleft all this agricultural business under the care of his brotherand returned to Tembisa. Another Mozambican migrant, Petrous,interviewed in the ‘Nova Sun’ farm (Mpumalanga), reported thathe was able to build and furnish a big house at home, which he leftunder the care of his father. He also bought a fishing-boat that wasbeing used by his father as a means of generating income in thefamily. The above examples demonstrate the impacts on remit-tances sent back home (de Haan, 2006).

This section illustrated how the social capital emanating fromsocial networks, especially that associated with ‘enforceable trust’and ‘bounded solidarity’ assisted migrants in the new destinationas well as in taking care of affairs back home (Portes and Sensen-brenner, 1993). While social capital is place specific, social net-works are capable of transcending such boundaries.

4.2. Friendship bonds

It was evident from Table 3 that more than half of undocu-mented labour migrants of the survey sample had left with friendson their first trips to South Africa. Hence, friends played a very spe-


cific role in the migration process. Maria, for instance, had left onher first trip to South Africa with a female friend who knew theway. After her arrival in South Africa, Maria met other Mozambicanfriends who helped her to establish herself in business. She ex-plained it as follows:

I left with my friend who knew everything about the border. Iwas being guided by her. Because she was a well-known person,she succeeded in guiding me through the Komatipoort border.After we crossed the border we got accommodation with a fam-ily in the Komatipoort area. Next day we travelled by car up toCarletonville. When we arrived there I did not have any moneyand could not buy anything. My friend had some money, sinceshe was travelling frequently to South Africa. Then she led meto a South African citizen who would help me to get job. In turn,that citizen led me then to a South African family, where Istarted working as a domestic servant.

While I was working for that family, I met some Mozambicanfemale friends that were doing their own informal business.They were buying and reselling diverse goods. With them Italked about my suffering. At that time I was earning only onehundred and fifty Rand monthly. Those friends told me thatwhat I was earning was very little. So they invited me to jointhem to earn one hundred Rand weekly. They told me that withR100 per week I would be able to buy and resell my own goods.Therefore, I joined them. After two weeks, they advised me tostart doing my own business. In this way I started buying andreselling diverse goods. From that moment on I started to feelthat my life was getting better (Maria, Magude district, January2004).

Maria also reported that in the same way that she had beenhelped with the improvement of her life, she assisted three femalefriends from her community, who were experiencing similar prob-lems that she had encountered before leaving Mozambique. Theyalso moved to South Africa without documents. Maria helped themto get South African documentation as well as to start their ownbusiness, as she explained:

I managed to take with me three friends who were suffering likeme. They did not have passports. But, when we arrived there, Itook them to the Home Affairs in order to get South AfricanID’s. It was easy, because I knew someone working in the HomeAffairs . . . we had to pay some money . . . While the three friendswere looking for job they were staying by me, since I had my ownhouse. At the same time they were learning the language and thehabits of South African daily life. Later on they became used tothe South African life and started to do their own business (Inter-view with Maria in Magude district, on January 23, 2004).

Here, it is important to point out that the friendship networks inmany cases were differentiated by gender. In general, women haverelied on the help of other women. For them, it becomes much eas-ier to deal with other women than men. An example of solidarityamong female migrants is provided by the case of Angelina. Atthe time of fieldwork Angelina was also buying and reselling freshproduce in a market close to her community in Tembisa. Angelinaused to deposit a part of her income in a savings account in a localbank. This savings account belonged to a female friend, who was arelative of her uncle’s wife. Angelina could not open her own ac-count because of lack of documentation. So she had to use herfriend’s account for saving money. Sometimes, she rewarded herfriend when she got her money back. She was operating in thismanner for six years. According to her, there were many Mozamb-ican women in a similar situation. This is yet another example ofhow ‘enforceable trust’ supported the migration process fromMozambique to South Africa.

Almost all male migrants interviewed affirmed that they hadentered South Africa for the first time together with some malefriends who knew the way. António’s migration story encapsulatesthis trend. António is a Mozambican from Zavala district (inInhambane province), interviewed in 2005 in Johannesburg. Hisfirst trip to South Africa took place in 1999 when he was 20 yearsold and he had the eighth class as his schooling level. He had togive up school, because his family was very poor. In addition, hehad fathered a child. António had to care for the child and itsmother, and needed a job, which was not available locally. So, hedecided to leave for South Africa.

Before António came to South Africa he went first to Maputocity, where some of his relatives were living. Thereafter, he movedto South Africa together with four friends. One of his four friendswas Zito, who like him came from Zavala district. They had grownup in the same home community. In fact, António had beenencouraged by Zito to migrate to South Africa who already madeseveral trips. Zito had offered to guide António from Zavala districtto South Africa. In Maputo city they met three other friends whohad also been to South Africa previously.

António’s friends had previously worked in Johannesburg,therefore this city was chosen as their destination, since the fourfriends were familiar with the environment. António trusted Zitoto manage his money for travelling expenses. They crossed the Res-sano Garcia/Komatipoort border. After they had entered SouthAfrica they proceeded to Johannesburg. Once in Johannesburg, Zitodisappeared with António’s money. António’s three friends lenthim some money, while they were looking for jobs. Two weeks la-ter they were employed by a Portuguese entrepreneur in the con-struction sector. António’s three friends had previously worked forthat entrepreneur. They were accommodated in a workers’ resi-dence, where they shared a single room.

On the one hand, this story reveals that in some cases, the newmigrants have had unpleasant experiences with friends. Apartfrom António’s case, other interviewees reported that there havebeen some opportunistic friends who have taken advantage ofbeing guides to extort money from newcomer immigrants. Thisphenomenon has been almost exclusively associated with malemigrants, and is an illustration of the negative aspects of social net-works (Gold, 2005).

4.3. Links to other social actors

Between the areas of origin and destination there were alsoother social actors that influenced the process of undocumentedMozambican labour migration to South Africa. The most noticeablesocial actors were the border agents, border smugglers/guides, andthe conveyors. While the border agents and smugglers/guidesfacilitated entry into South Africa without any valid documenta-tion, the conveyors provided transport from the border to the areasof destination. In addition to the remarkable assistance providedby friends and relatives, 28% of the undocumented labour migrantsof the survey sample had been helped by border agents and smug-glers/guides to enter South Africa (Table 6).

4.3.1. Border agentsAs shown in Table 6, 12.1% of the sampled undocumented la-

bour migrants were assisted to enter South Africa by border agents.Some interviewees admitted that their illegal entry into South Afri-ca had been facilitated by paying bribes to border officials.

For instance, Luís, who had left with his cousin from Magudedistrict in 1999, reported that he had managed to enter South Afri-ca without any documentation, since his cousin knew some borderguards on the Komatipoort border. The cousin gave one hundredand fifty Rand (R8 = 1 US$) to the border guards who then allowedthem to cross into South Africa. Luís returned home in 2002, still

Table 6Who assisted migrants to cross the border.

Who provided help District Total

Magude Chókwè

Family/relatives (%) 3.9 16.0 13.1Friends (%) 23.1 38.3 34.6Border agents (%) 26.9 7.4 12.1Border smugglers/guides (%) 26.9 12.4 15.9Nobody (%) 19.2 25.9 24.3Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0



undocumented and had to cross the same border. He did not expe-rience any problems on the border. He gave twenty Rand to someborder-guards of the South African side, and they let him passthrough to Mozambique.

Similarly, Hortência, who was living in Johannesburg for twentyyears at the time of interview (July, 2005), related that she had of-ten passed through the Komatipoort/Ressano Garcia border officeswithout any valid documents by paying bribes to border agents:

Whenever I return home and enter South Africa I pass throughthe Komatipoort/Ressano Garcia border offices, although I donot have any passport. I never had problems because of goingout from South Africa without any passport, neither on SouthAfrican nor on Mozambican side of the border. I always had tobribe the border-guards with some money, one hundred toone hundred and fifty Rand, on both sides of the border (Hortê-ncia, Johannesburg, July 2005).

Jorge, another undocumented migrant interviewed in Magudedistrict (in May 2004), also reported that when he moved for thefirst time in 1999, he and his two friends had to bribe a borderagent at Komatipoort border post with three hundred Rand to crossinto South Africa. Furthermore, Jorge explained that after the bor-der agent had received the money he took them personally to theplace from where they got transport to Daveyton.

Many similar stories were reported by other interviewees,emphasizing the role of some border agents in supporting illegal bor-der-crossing into South Africa. Other migrants, however, had to jumpthe border fence because they could not bribe the border guards. Inthis case, the border smugglers/guides played an important role.

4.3.2. Smugglers/guidesAbout sixteen percent of undocumented labour migrants of the

sample (Table 6) had been guided by smugglers to the South Afri-can side of the border. They paid a ‘fee’ for this service. Luís, anundocumented migrant from Magude district, went to South Africain 2002 for the second time without documents. He succeeded incrossing the Ressano Garcia/Komatipoort border with help fromsome boys who lived in the Ressano Garcia area (on the Mozamb-ican side of the border). He explained how it happened:

Those boys knew the way that I had to use to enter South Africa.They helped me to pass through the border fence. They man-aged to raise the barbed wire with some stakes. So, I could passthrough. They charged me two hundred and fifty Rand (Inter-view with Luís in Magude district, on April 28, 2004).

However, it is important to note that sometimes the migrantshad unpleasant experiences with some smugglers/guides at theborder that were engaging in criminal activities. This is illustratedby the experience of Dércio, a young migrant who left for SouthAfrica in 1999 from Maputo city with three friends. On the RessanoGarcia/Komatipoort border they met a group of boys, residentsaround the Ressano Garcia area, who offered to help them to cross

the border at night. The boys managed to raise the border fence byusing tree props so that Dércio and his friends could pass through.Thereafter, the boys forced them to hand over all their money. La-ter, Dércio became aware that what had happened to them was acommon phenomenon when crossing the border:

Actually, those boys, who offered to help us, are supposed tobelong to a group of criminals that use to stay around the Res-sano Garcia area. There, they guide people who cross the borderillegally for payment of some money. But, in many cases, theyend up attacking these people physically and violently in orderto seize their financial and material resources. Most of thesecriminals come from the outside of Ressano Garcia. They arethose individuals that, after their deportation from South Africato Ressano Garcia, didn’t succeed in returning home. Forinstance, this is the case of individuals from Inhambane prov-ince, mainly the matswas, who have a bad reputation for beingthe most violent people in southern Mozambique (Dércio, Nels-pruit, September 2005).

4.3.3. ConveyorsOnce the migrants crossed the border, another category of so-

cial actors – the conveyors – played an important role. Conveyorsplayed a significant role in the migration process, since they pro-vided the migrants with transport from the border area (usuallyKomatipoort) to the destination areas (mainly Johannesburg andNelspruit). According to a Mozambican border guard at the Ressa-no Garcia border post (interviewed in September 2004), most ofthe deported migrants did not return to their areas of origin inMozambique, they ended up going back to South Africa. The depor-tees contacted facilitators residing on the border, who madearrangements for transportation facilities with the conveyors onthe South African side of the border (Komatipoort area). Once thelegal conduits for migration are restricted, the migrants are oftenat the mercy of human smugglers (Mavris, 2002). It is evident fromthis section that notwithstanding the supportive role of social net-works, the transactional costs and risks endured by migrants werehigh and illustrated the negative dimensions of this process, whichincluded the paying of bribes, courting arrest and being robbed(Human Development Report, 2009). The next section focuses onhow migrants adapt and adjust in their new environment in SouthAfrica.

4.4. Mozambican communities in South Africa

In most of the research sites in South Africa, the Mozambican la-bour immigrants were organized into communities. Mozambicanmigrant communities were evident in Johannesburg, Tembisa, So-weto and Bekkersdal, which constituted the research sites in Gaut-eng. It was not possible to determine the actual number ofimmigrants within each community. However, officials in the Con-sulate of Mozambique in Johannesburg estimated that each com-munity comprised on average about seven thousand. The highlevel of organization in the communities in Gauteng was not evi-dent in Mpumalanga, particularly in Nelspruit. Some form of orga-nization in that province could be found by the Mozambicanimmigrants working in the ‘Nova Sun’ farm, who were staying inhostels under the control of their employer. The high level of orga-nization within the Mozambican communities in Gauteng was theresult of the efforts of the Consulate of Mozambique in Johannes-burg who persuaded the immigrants to organize themselves sothat they could be easily assisted in case of need.

Each Mozambican community in Gauteng had a leader and hisassistant. The leaders were the connecting link between their com-munity members and other authorities (Mozambican or South


African). Within their communities the migrants had social net-works which provided assistance in times of need. For instance,most of the newcomer immigrants in the Mozambican communityof Tembisa were assisted with accommodation by Mr. Vuma, aninfluential businessman who had been living there since 1971.Immigrants also received assistance from social groups establishedby community members, for example, the church network. Hortê-ncia, a female immigrant interviewed in the Mozambican commu-nity of Johannesburg (July, 2005), reported that she would neverforget the support that she received from her ‘Assembly of God’church, which had a congregation that comprised South Africansand Mozambicans.

Table 7Occupations of undocumented Mozambican labour migrants in South Africa.

Occupation District Total

Magude Chókwè

Construction (%) 38.5 53.1 49.5Service (%) 26.9 21.0 22.4Informal trade (%) 11.5 14.8 14.0Industry (%) 15.4 3.7 6.6Farm work (%) 7.7 1.2 2.8Unemployed (%) – 6.2 4.7Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0


5. Impacts of illegal status

Notwithstanding the support received from home communitynetworks, migrants encountered numerous problems as they triedto integrate into South African society. Migrants were criminalizedfor not having official travel documents as well as by media stereo-typing that associated them with criminal activities. Exploitationof migrant workers was also quite common. It is necessary tobriefly elaborate on problems relating to legal documentation,employment, xenophobia, exploitation and deportation. Ulti-mately, socio-political forces influence ‘‘the structure of opportuni-ties that immigrants encounter”, an area in which social networksare likely to be largely ineffective (Menjívar, 2000, p. 34).

5.1. Legal documents and integration

Possession of a legal document, particularly the South Africanidentification document (ID) was crucial for the migrants’ integra-tion into mainstream South African society. This did not mean thatthey wanted to stay permanently in South Africa, rather, legal sta-tus would ensure that they were less vulnerable. The most com-mon problem among the migrants was related to the lack ofvalid documentation to stay in South Africa. Many migrants didnot even have the Bilhete de Identidade or birth certificate withwhich they could apply for a passport from the Consulate ofMozambique in Johannesburg. After they obtained their passportthey had to go back to Mozambique and apply for a work permitvisa from the South African Embassy in order to enter the countryto seek employment. However, it was difficult to obtain a workpermit visa from the South African authorities.

Fifty-seven percent of (a total of 107) undocumented labour mi-grants (in Magude and Chókwè districts) had tried to legalize theirsituation when they arrived in South Africa, but very few were suc-cessful. Immigrants without legal documents in South Africa wereworried because they could not obtain jobs easily or get access tohealthcare, education, banking and other services. They spent agreat deal of time trying to evade the police because of their illegalstatus.

Migrants were desperate to obtain a South African ID and re-sorted to illegal ways to obtain it. The most common methodwas to bribe corrupt officials working in the Department of HomeAffairs. Bribery and corruption persists despite attempts by theSouth African government to stop this practice. For example, Man-uel (in Tembisa, July 2005) explained how he had succeeded inobtaining a South African ID by resorting to bribery:

I met a South African guy in the area where I was living after myarrival from Mozambique. That guy was almost my age. I usedto play with him. His name was Peter. He was aware of my deepconcern about the lack of documentation. So, one day Peterdecided to help me with the process of getting documentation.He took his birth certificate and then we went together to theHome Affairs. When we arrived there I told the Home Affairs

officers that Peter was my half-brother and that we were fromthe same South African mother but from different fathers. Iexplained them that my father was a Mozambican who wasnot living in South Africa anymore. Also, I told them that ourmother was not able to be there, because of her age. Then Iasked them for ID. They charged me three hundred Rand and Igot the ID. . . (Manuel, Tembisa, July 2005)

A few undocumented migrants were assisted by their employ-ers to regularize their status.

Other migrants succeeded in getting a South African ID becauseof the immigration amnesty for SADC nationals that was imple-mented in July 1996. This amnesty ‘‘offered the opportunity forSADC citizens to apply for permanent residence, provided that theyhad been living in South Africa for five years or more, had no crim-inal record, and either were involved in economic activity or had aSouth African spouse or dependant born or residing lawfully in thecountry” (Crush and Williams, 2001b, p. 8). The majority (73%) ofapplicants for the 1996 SADC Amnesty were Mozambicans (Crushand Williams, 2001a, p. 18).

5.2. Integration into labour market

The process of integration of immigrants into the labour marketwas adversely affected by their illegal status. It was difficult for theimmigrants to obtain a permanent job without valid documents,particularly in the formal sector. The majority of the immigrantsfrom the Mozambican communities in Gauteng worked in theinformal sector. Many of them bought and re-sold different kindsof goods on the streets or within the markets close to theircommunities.

Those immigrants that succeeded in getting formal jobs wereworking in the construction industry (Table 7), particularly thosewho were living in Johannesburg. Other immigrants had beenworking within the service sector (as mechanics, waiters, garden-ers or domestic servants). The main concern of undocumentedMozambican workers in South Africa has always been the instabil-ity of their employment conditions. The majority obtained short-term contract work with low salaries. Hence, there was a frequentchange of jobs. . In addition to lower wages, they were also de-prived of benefits like pensions and medical aid. They did not be-long to trade unions, hence they received no protection fromexploitation and were often summarily dismissed.

Migrants were perceived to be threatening the jobs of locals andalso undermining wages in an economy that had a high unemploy-ment rate. The view that the migrants were parasites influencedthe development of xenophobia. It has been argued that xenopho-bia thrives when there is competition for employment and socialproblems increase: illegal immigrants ‘‘become tempting scape-goats for alienated citizens” (Wood, 1994, p. 625). The prejudice


and hostility towards migrants translated into high levels of xeno-phobia, exploitation and demands for their immediate deportation.

5.3. Xenophobia, exploitation and deportation

Almost all migrants interviewed revealed that they had beenvictims of xenophobia during their stay in South Africa. South Afri-cans perceived them to be ‘inferior’ because of their Mozambicanorigin and illegal migrant status. Luís, a returned migrant in Mag-ude district, commented as follows: ‘‘The South Africans do not likeMozambicans. . . They do not show consideration for Mozambi-cans. . . For them, seeing a Mozambican is the same as seeing adog. . .” (Luís, Magude district, April 2004).

Xenophobia is rife in South African townships, where the mi-grants are referred to as kwerekwere (disparaging word for Africanimmigrant). The young and newly-arrived immigrants argued thatthey were envied by South Africans because of their capacity towork hard and be successful. Another group of elderly immigrantswho had been living there for many years believed that xenopho-bia was a very recent phenomenon. To the latter, this phenomenonwas associated with the violent and criminal nature of someundocumented Mozambican immigrants who had entered SouthAfrica in recent years. This was also the dominant xenophobic viewamong South Africans with regard to the presence of undocu-mented immigrants in the country (see Mattes et al., 1999; Dansoand McDonald, 2000; Crush, 2001).

At a policy level there has been considerable debate about theneed for a progressive migration policy with a human rights orien-tation. Mattes et al. (1999, pp. 1–2) found that the majority ofSouth Africans were opposed to any immigration policy that mightwelcome newcomers, and that all South Africans appeared to havethe same stereotypical image of southern Africans, citing job loss,crime and disease as negative consequences associated with immi-grants. Danso and McDonald (2000, p. 4) observed that South Afri-cans on the whole carried strong anti-immigration sentiments,‘‘with 25% of the population calling for a complete ban on migra-tion into the country and approximately half . . . calling for a strictlimit on the number of foreigners allowed into the country.”

Given their illegal status in South Africa the undocumentedMozambican immigrants were vulnerable to exploitation anddeportation. Some South African employers, mainly farmers, tookadvantage of the presence of undocumented workers in theirfarms, who were employed without any guarantee of protectionof their rights. As a result, many undocumented Mozambicanworkers have been working without any remuneration, receivingonly food and accommodation. When they claimed for their sala-ries they were arrested and repatriated without any money (seealso Solomon, 2003, p. 98). The Deputy Administrator of Chókwèdistrict commented on this situation as follows:

It is exactly from the farms where we have been receiving manycomplaints . . . What has been happening is the following: Whenin a certain farm there are many Mozambicans working for along time without remuneration and waiting for their salaries,the owner of this farm goes to the police to denounce the exis-tence of those Mozambicans . . . In many cases, it has been hap-pening after several months, one or two years of work withoutremuneration, since the accommodation and food are providedby the farmer. When the Mozambican workers claim their sal-aries, the immediate response from the farmer is to call thepolice to denounce those undocumented workers. When thepolice arrive, the farmer feigns innocence and the Mozambicansend up being deported without any salary . . . Therefore, whathas been happening is a kind of fraud, practiced by some SouthAfrican farmers against the undocumented Mozambican work-ers (Deputy Administrator of Chókwè district, May 2004).

Hence, migrants led a precarious existence with the constantfear of being arrested and deported. As Cohen (1991, p. 158) hasemphasized, the immigrants formed part of a ‘helot class’, whowere basically at the mercy of ‘‘ruthless landlords or exploitativeemployers, cut off from the protection of the police and the courts,and excluded from the political and social benefits” of the countryin which they presently lived.

Finally, the repatriated migrants who arrived in that border postwere abandoned to their fate. They arrived there without anymoney and the Mozambican authorities did not have the resourcesto transport them to their areas of origin. Those migrants who wererepatriated with some goods ended up selling them in order to getmoney for their return home in Mozambique or to re-enter SouthAfrica. Most of deportees did not return home; they went back toSouth Africa because the distance was relatively short, repeatingthe steps of the first entry, and making the undocumented migra-tion process a vicious circle. With each subsequent entry, migrantswill be less dependent on social networks. However, through thesocial networks the undocumented Mozambican labour migrationto South Africa has become a self-sustained circular process that isdifficult to control. While influential in the context of common ori-gins, ethnic affiliation, and similar migration experiences, this sec-tion suggests that social networks are ineffective againststructural, socio-political forces (Menjívar, 2000).

6. Conclusion

This paper revealed that social networks influenced the migra-tion process from Mozambique to South Africa in four specificways: firstly, who migrates, the timing of the move, the journey(particularly border crossings), and the migrant’s destination(especially adjustment and adaptation to the new environment).Furthermore, social networks also linked the migrant to the desti-nation as well as the home country (Massey et al., 1998; Moretti,1999; Portes 2000).

The experienced migrants have repeated their journey to SouthAfrica because they could depend on their knowledge and skills ac-quired in the earlier trips (human capital) and also on the socialcontacts already established on the borders and at the destination(social networks). During this process they were also able to accu-mulate households assets back home.

The experience of undocumented Mozambican immigrants con-firms that networks provided the migrants with social capital,especially in the form of ‘bounded solidarity’ and ‘enforceabletrust’ in Mozambique and South Africa (Portes and Sensenbrenner,1993). For example, personal contacts with relatives, friends,neighbours, churches – which allowed them to get access to jobs,accommodation and financial assistance in South Africa, and en-sured that children left behind were taken care of, all which ulti-mately decreased the social and economic costs of migratingfrom Mozambique (Carrington et al., 1996; Singer and Massey,1998; Portes, 2000). Hence, social networks enabled the transferof spatially bounded social capital (Elrick, 2005), to permeate allfacets of the journey from home to destination. In contrast to pre-vious research, this study made a concerted to identify and analysein some detail the different social actors (including family, rela-tives, friends, border agents, smugglers/guides, and conveyors) thatinfluenced the migration process from home to destination (Kriss-man, 2005).

Although poverty was the primary motivation for leavingMozambique, the availability of social capital facilitated by socialnetworks throughout the journey and at the destination in SouthAfrica, served as a catalyst. In regions where there are widespreadsocial and economic inequalities, rapid migration would be ex-pected between countries. According to the World Bank the coun-


tries surrounding South Africa, with the exception of Namibia andBotswana, are among the poorest in the world (World Bank, 1999).Although there are internal institutional restrictions on move-ments between the countries, Mozambican migrants took greatrisks (which were mitigated by social networks) to enter SouthAfrica because of the perceived better economic opportunities.

However, social networks have no influence at the macro-polit-ical context, and were unable to protect many migrants from xeno-phobic attacks, exploitation and stigmatization as criminals, and aspeople who undermine economic development and take jobs fromSouth Africans. A major challenge facing undocumented migrantsis their integration socially and economically into the new society.Without formal legal status, migrants are daunted by surviving andeking out a living in a hostile socio-economic and political environ-ment. In this regard social networks play an important mitigatingrole.

Acknowledgement

The helpful comments of two anonymous referees and KatieWillis are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Ammassari, S., Black, R., 2001. Harnessing the Potential of Migration and Return toPromote Development. Sussex Migration Working Papers. Sussex Centre forMigration Research.

Boyd, M., 1989. Family and personal networks in international migration: recentdevelopments and new agendas. International Migration Review 23, 638–670.

Canales, A., 2000. Migración Internacional y Flexibilidad Laboral en el Contexto delTLCAN. Revista Mexicana de Sociologia 62, 3–28.

Carrington, W.J., Detragiache, E., Vishwanath, T., 1996. Migration with endogenousmoving costs. The American Economic Review 86, 909–930.

Chiswick, B.R., 2001. The economics of illegal migration for the host economy. In:Siddique, M.A.B. (Ed.), International Migration into the 21st Century: Essays inHonour of Reginald Appleyard. Edward Elgar Publishing, London, pp. 74–85.

Clark, W.A.V., 2002. Human mobility in a borderless world: proximity migration inspite of borders, the Mexican-United States context. In: Montanari, A. (Ed.),Human mobility in a borderless world? Societa Geografica Italiana, Roma, pp.227–240.

Cohen, R., 1991. Contested Domains – Debates in International Labour Studies. ZedBooks, London.

Collyer, M., 2005. When do social networks fail to explain migration? Accountingfor the movement of Algerian Asylum-seekers to the UK. Journal of Ethnic andMigration Studies 31, 699–718.

Cornelius, W.A., Tsuda, T., Martin, P.L., Hollifield, J.F., 2004. Controlling Immigration:A Global Perspective, second ed. Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Covane, L.A., 2001. Southern Mozambique: migrant labour and post-independencechallenges. In: de Wet, C., Fox, R. (Eds.), Understanding Changing Patterns ofSettlement and Resettlement in Southern Africa. University of Edinburgh Press,Edinburgh, pp. 48–64.

Crush, J., 1997. Contract Migration to South Africa: Past, Present and Future. SAMPBriefing for the Green Paper Task Team on International Migration.<www.polity.org.za/html/govdocs/green_papers/migration/crush.html>.

Crush, J., Mattes, R., Richmond, W., 2000a. Losing our Minds: Skills Migration andthe South African Brain Drain. SAMP Migration Policy Series No. 18.

Crush, J., Lincoln, D., Maririke, C., Mather, C., Mathebula, F., Ulicki, T., 2000b.Borderline Farming: Foreign Migrants in South African Commercial Agriculture.SAMP Migration Policy Series No. 16. SAMP, Cape Town.

Crush, J., 2001. Immigration, Xenophobia and Human Rights in South Africa. SAMPMigration Policy Series No. 22.

Crush, J., Williams, V. 2001a. Making Up the Numbers: Measuring ‘‘IllegalImmigration” to South Africa. SAMP Migration Policy Brief No. 3.

Crush, J., Williams, V. 2001b. The Point of No Return: Evaluating the Amnesty forMozambican Refugees in South Africa. SAMP Migration Policy Brief No. 6.

Curran, S.R., Rivero-Fuentes, E., 2003. Engendering migrant networks: the case ofMexican migration. Demography 40, 289–307.

Danso, R., McDonald, D.A., 2000. Writing Xenophobia: Immigration and the Press inPost-Apartheid South Africa. SAMP Migration Policy Series No. 17.

Davies, R., Head, J., 1995. The future of mine migrancy in the context of broadertrends in migration in Southern Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies 21,439–450).

De Haan, H., 2006. Migration, remittances and regional development in SouthernMorocco. Geoforum 37, 565–580.

Dodson, B., 2002. Gender and the Brain Drain. SAMP Migration Policy Series, No. 23.

Durand, J., Massey, D.S., 2003. Clandestinos. Migración México-Estados Unidos enlos albores del siglo XXI. Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas, México.

Elrick, T., 2005. Migration Decision Making and Social Networks. EU Marie CurieExcellence Grant Project ‘KNOWMIG’. <http://www.migration-networks.org/Dokumente/Elrick.pdf> (accessed 12.06.07).

Gold, S.J., 2005. A summary and critique of relational approaches to internationalmigration. In: Romero, M., Margolis, E. (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion toSocial Inequalities. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 257–285.

Grieco, E.M., 1998. The effects of migration on the establishment of networks: castedisintegration and reformation among the Indians of Fiji. InternationalMigration Review 32, 704–736.

Hakli, J., Minca, C. (Eds.), 2009. Introduction. Social Capital and Urban Networks ofTrust. Ashgate, London, pp. 1–10.

Hernández-León, R., Zúñiga, V., 2002. Mexican Immigrant Communities in the Southand Social Capital: The Case of Dalton, Georgia. Center for ComparativeImmigration Studies, University of California, San Diego.

Human Development Report, 2009. Overcoming Barriers: Human Mobility andDevelopment. UNDP, New York.

Jeeves, A., 1985. Migrant Labour in South Africa’s Mining Economy. McGill-QueensPress, Kingston.

Krissman, F., 2005. Sin Coyote Ni Patrón: why the ‘‘migrant network” fails to explaininternational migration. International Migration Review 39, 4–44.

Landau, L.B., 2004. Democracy and Discrimination: Black African Migrants in SouthAfrica. GCIM Global Migration Perspectives No. 5.

Levitt, P., Jaworsky, B.N., 2007. Transnational migration studies: past developmentsand future trends. Annual Review of Sociology 33, 129–156.

Maharaj, B., 2004. Immigration to Post-apartheid South Africa. GCIM GlobalMigration Perspectives No. 1.

Massey, D.S., 1990. The social and economic origins of immigration. Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and Social Science 510, 60–72.

Massey, D.S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., Taylor, J.E., 1993.Theories of international migration: a review and appraisal. Population andDevelopment Review 19, 431–466.

Massey, D.S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., Taylor, J.E., 1994. Anevaluation of international migration theory: The North American case.Population and Development Review 20, 699–751.

Massey, D.S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., Taylor, J.E., 1998.Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration at the End of theMillenium. Clarendom Press, Oxford.

Massey, D.S., Durand, J., Malone, N.J., 2005. Principles of operation: Theories ofInternational Migration. In: Suarez-Orozco, M.M., Suarez-Orozco, C., Qin, D.B.(Eds.), The New Immigration. Routledge, New York, pp. 21–33.

Mattes, R., Taylor, D.M., McDonald, D.A., Poore, A., Richmond, W., 1999. Still Waitingfor Barbarians: SA Attitudes to Immigrants and Immigration. SAMP MigrationPolicy Series No. 14.

Mavris, L., 2002. Human Smugglers and Social Networks: Transit Migration Throughthe States of Former Yugoslavia. UNHCR, Working Paper No. 72.

McDonald, D.A., 2000. Introduction: towards a better understanding of cross-bordermigration in Southern Africa. In: McDonald, D.A. (Ed.), On Borders: Perspectiveson International Migration in Southern Africa. St. Martin’s Press, New York, pp.1–11.

McDonald, D.A., Mashike, L., Golden, C., 2000. The lives and times of Africanmigrants and immigrants in post-apartheid South Africa. In: McDonald, D.A.(Ed.), On Borders: Perspectives on International Migration in Southern Africa. St.Martin’s Press, New York, pp. 168–195.

Menjívar, C., 2000. Fragmented Ties – Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America.University of California Press, Berkeley.

Minnaar, A., Hough, M., 1996. Who Goes There? Perspectives on ClandestineMigration and Illegal Aliens in Southern Africa. Human Sciences ResearchCouncil, HSRC Publishers, Pretoria.

Moretti, E., 1999. Social networks and migrations: Italy 1876–1913. InternationalMigration Review 33, 640–657.

Murray, J.M., 1995. ‘Blackbirding’ at ‘Crooks’ Corner’: illicit labour recruiting in theNortheastern Transvaal, 1910–1940. Journal of Southern African Studies 21,373–397.

Portes, A., 1998. Social Capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology.Annual Review of Sociology 24, 1–24.

Portes, A., 2000. Immigration and the metropolis: reflections on urban history.Journal of International Migration and Integration 1, 153–175.

Portes, A., Sensenbrenner, J., 1993. Embeddedness and immigration: notes on thesocial determinants of economic action. American Journal of Sociology 98,1320–1350.

Putnam, R.D., 1993. The prosperous community: social capital and public life.American Prospect 13, 35–42.

SAMP, 2003. Migration News, March. <www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationnews>.SAMP, 2005a. Migration News, August. <www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationnews>.SAMP, 2005b. Migration News, December. <www.queensu.ca/samp/

migrationnews>.SAMP, 2005c. Migration News, September. <www.queensu.ca/samp/

migrationnews>.SAMP, 2006. Migration News, July. <www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationnews>.Sasaki, E.M., Assis, G.d.O., 2000. Teorias das Migrações Internacionais. XII Encontro

Nacional da ABEP 2000. Caxambu, Brasil, Associação Brasileira de Estudos

http://www.polity.org.za/html/govdocs/green_papers/migration/crush.html

http://www.migration-networks.org/Dokumente/Elrick.pdf

http://www.migration-networks.org/Dokumente/Elrick.pdf

http://www.queensu.ca/samp/migrationnews








Populacionais (ABEP) <www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br/docs/anais/pdf/2000/Todos/migt16_2.pdf> (accessed 11.03.07).

Schensul, J.J., Le Compte, M.D., Trotter, R.T., Cromley, E.K., Singer, M., 1999. MappingSocial Networks, Spatial Data and Hidden Populations. Altamira Press, WalnutCreek.

Singer, A., Massey, D.S., 1998. The social process of undocumented border crossingamong Mexican migrants. International Migration Review 32, 561–592.

Solomon, H., 2003. Of Myths and Migration: Illegal Immigration into South Africa.Unisa Press, Pretoria.

Williams, B., Gouws, E., Lurie, M., Crush, J., 2002. Spaces of Vulnerability: Migrationand HIV/AIDS in South Africa. South African Migration Project.

Wood, W.B., 1994. Forced migration: local conflicts and international dilemmas.Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84, 607–634.

World Bank, 1999. World Development Report 1999–2000, Washington.Zlotnik, H., 2001. Past trends in international migration and their implications for

future prospects. In: Siddique, M.A.B. (Ed.), International Migration into 21stCentury: Essays in Honour of Reginald Appleyard. Edward Elgar Publishing,London, pp. 227–261.

http://www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br/docs/anais/pdf/2000/Todos/migt16_2.pdf

http://www.abep.nepo.unicamp.br/docs/anais/pdf/2000/Todos/migt16_2.pdf

social networks and undocumented mozambican migration to south africa

Documents