Solidarities and Divisions of Hometown and Hometown Associations

Increasingly, in the migration field of research the question of how migration is related to development of the sending country appears as a pressing topic Presumably, as a consequence of securitization of international migration, the connection between migrants and development is on the agenda of European policy makers . One aspect of this nexus is migrants’ engagements in the developing homeland. Thus conditions on which migrants forward remittances and the ways they engage in development projects in their homeland has come under scrutiny, nourished by recently expanding transnational studies, i.e. a perspective in which the activities of migrants are located and perceived as out folding in a space covering several national frames, but as a minimum in the sending as well as the receiving frame of the nation state..

Currently, a number of home town associations (HTAs) are established among migrants who originate in rural areas within the Konya region, linking these migrants who originate in the same village but are settled predominantly in the Copenhagen area, Denmark, and villagers who have remained in Turkey. As a direct or indirect consequence, Internet pages – for Kücükkale three – have concurrently been established for the villages, each of them showing links to the homepages of the surrounding villages, referred to as “friendship homepages”, facilitating important information channels. Home Town Associations formed in the Konya region show different shapes and purposes, in spite of their proximity in geographical terms. Moreover, some of the villages in this region have not formed any organization, even though migration from the village equally dominates village life. I argue that the formation and non-formation of HTAs of this area serve as a prism for illuminating the way migrants differ in regard to engagements with the home town, not least as the migration process develops and transforms into new phases. In the following I go into more detail on the establishment of one of these associations, Kücükkale Dayanisma Dernegi (or Kücükkale Solidarity Association). Like the surrounding villages, Kücükkale is a Kurdish village and for the migrants this is relevant for their motivations to engage in such activities. The associations are formed independently of state or local authorities in Denmark, whereas in Turkey some cooperation with local leaders seems to be the case.

The kind of engagement of migrants is however not clear by the emergence of these associations. They have, to a varying degree, development projects in the home town as part of their purpose, but within each association essentially social conflicts over purpose and activities, combined with confrontations of a more personal character, paralleling divisions in the home town, seem to halter their potential. In other words, the associations are not of the entire same format, presenting themselves as, on the one extreme, associations with integration in the receiving society as their purpose, and on the other, development of the home town (or village) or more precisely, solidarity with the village and villagers. In reality, of course, purposes are often mixed.

Could it perhaps be argued that migrants’ engagement in development projects in their sending societies merely represents a chance for migrants – along with conspicuous consumption – to prove their own success in the destination country to the ones who remain in their native village? This is what is sometimes suggested by migrants, village residents as well as migration scholars. I do not intend to embark on this line of argument, but I want to ask what impact migration has on pre-existing social hierarchies in the home town collectivity. Consumption is relevant, however, as different consumption practices and opportunities, notably between inhabitants in the village and migrants are important signals of the social hierarchy, exacerbated by migration. In other words I propose two empirical entries: 1. the formation of home town association, 2. the consumption gap existing in the village collectivity. Picking up from transnational studies, I emphasize continuation between the social space of the village in the sending country and the locality in which migrants have residence in the receiving society. By implication migrants are included in the village collectivity, to the extent that they have close relatives permanently residing in the village, or have built a house on the family lot, or just continue to spend lengthy vacations there.



Increasingly, in the migration field of research the question of how migration is related to development of the sending country appears as a pressing topic (Levitt 1996, Fischer et al 1997, Hermele 1997, Sørensen 2004). Presumably, as a consequence of securitization of international migration, the connection between migrants and development is on the agenda of European policy makers (Castles & Miller 2003, Buzan & Wæver 2003). One aspect of this nexus is migrants’ engagements in the developing homeland. Thus conditions on which migrants forward remittances and the ways they engage in development projects in their homeland has come under scrutiny, nourished by recently expanding transnational studies, i.e. a perspective in which the activities of migrants are located and perceived as out folding in a space covering several national frames, but as a minimum in the sending as well as the receiving frame of the nation state (Glick-Schiller et al 1994; Faist 2000, Levitt 2001).

Currently, a number of home town associations (HTAs) are established among migrants who originate in rural areas within the Konya region, linking these migrants who originate in the same village but are settled predominantly in the Copenhagen area, Denmark, and villagers who have remained in Turkey. As a direct or indirect consequence, Internet pages – for Kücükkale three – have concurrently been established for the villages, each of them showing links to the homepages of the surrounding villages, referred to as “friendship homepages”, facilitating important information channels. Home Town Associations formed in the Konya region show different shapes and purposes, in spite of their proximity in geographical terms. Moreover, some of the villages in this region have not formed any organization, even though migration from the village equally dominates village life. I argue that the formation and non-formation of HTAs of this area serve as a prism for illuminating the way migrants differ in regard to engagements with the home town, not least as the migration process develops and transforms into new phases. In the following I go into more detail on the establishment of one of these associations, Kücükkale Dayanisma Dernegi (or Kücükkale Solidarity Association). Like the surrounding villages, Kücükkale is a Kurdish village and for the migrants this is relevant for their motivations to engage in such activities. The associations are formed independently of state or local authorities in Denmark, whereas in Turkey some cooperation with local leaders seems to be the case.

The kind of engagement of migrants is however not clear by the emergence of these associations. They have, to a varying degree, development projects in the home town as part of their purpose, but within each association essentially social conflicts over purpose and activities, combined with confrontations of a more personal character, paralleling divisions in the home town, seem to halter their potential. In other words, the associations are not of the entire same format, presenting themselves as, on the one extreme, associations with integration in the receiving society as their purpose, and on the other, development of the home town (or village) or more precisely, solidarity with the village and villagers. In reality, of course, purposes are often mixed.

Could it perhaps be argued that migrants’ engagement in development projects in their sending societies merely represents a chance for migrants – along with conspicuous consumption – to prove their own success in the destination country to the ones who remain in their native village? This is what is sometimes suggested by migrants, village residents as well as migration scholars. I do not intend to embark on this line of argument, but I want to ask what impact migration has on pre-existing social hierarchies in the home town collectivity. Consumption is relevant, however, as different consumption practices and opportunities, notably between inhabitants in the village and migrants are important signals of the social hierarchy, exacerbated by migration. In other words I propose two empirical entries: 1. the formation of home town association, 2. the consumption gap existing in the village collectivity. Picking up from transnational studies, I emphasize continuation between the social space of the village in the sending country and the locality in which migrants have residence in the receiving society. By implication migrants are included in the village collectivity, to the extent that they have close relatives permanently residing in the village, or have built a house on the family lot, or just continue to spend lengthy vacations there.