‘The problem is that I don’t know’ – Agency and life projects of transnational migrant children and young people in England and Spain

Life projects of migrant children and young people in context

The complex and varied roles and experiences of children in migration processes are increasingly acknowledged in the literature. Whereas children traditionally were neglected in studies of family migration (Dobson, 2009; Hutchins, 2011), recent research has shown the multiple ways in which children are part (or not) of making decisions about migration (Tyrell, 2011) and some of the complex feelings they may have following family migration (Sime and Fox, 2014). Bushin (2009) has argued for a ‘children-in-families’ approach and devised a ‘ladder’ for involvement, which includes five different levels of involvement by children in migration decisions. This framework provides a useful tool to think about the various ways in which parents provide their children with information about the move and the extent to which the children are included in decisions to migrate. However, not much is included in the framework about children’s position and scope of action in case of parental disagreement. Furthermore, Bushin’s framework is based on a study of internal migration within the United Kingdom, and therefore does not include the impact of legal barriers and international regulations on migration.

Another important framework to understand the everyday realities of young migrants and their plans for the future is the now widely acknowledged concept of transnationalism. Transnational theory acknowledges that migration is not necessarily a one-way and final movement, which involves detachment from a country of origin and integration into a receiving country. Migrants often engage in various cross-border relationships and transactions, and maintain social and cultural identities that incorporate both country of origin, country of settlement and also often third countries (Schiller et al., 1991; Vertovec, 2009). They take part in various transnational practices, and have a range of transnational perspectives and feelings (Gardner, 2012). Children and young people may experience these practices and processes in different ways than adults, and this emphasises the need to explore their ideas and understandings separately and in their own right.

Studies of children and migration have often focused on children’s integration within ‘host-societies’ and their prospective future as adults, rather than their immediate experiences as migrants (White et al., 2011). The research project which this article is based on was inspired by studies of educational mobility patterns of different groups of migrant and minority ethnic youth, particularly in Europe and the United States (e.g. Crul and Vermeulen, 2003; Ogbu, 1990; Portes and Zhou, 1993). It was assumed that by approaching the migrant and minority ethnic young people’s hopes and wishes for the future, also their ideas about their current positioning in society would be reflected. However, in the process of data analysis it became apparent that for the young migrants in the study, both their short and long term plans for the future were often shaped by quite different considerations than their integration into the ‘host’-society. One particular concern expressed by several of the young people was the uncertainty of their future location. In addition, the comparison between the two research sites showed that the situation of the young people and their families could not be seen in separation from the legal and economic climates in which they lived, and the transnational links formed with families in other countries. The discussion of the young people’s life projects thus began to reveal much more about their current experiences and concerns as recent migrants, rather than their lives as ‘future adults’ or ‘becomings’ (Uprichard, 2008).

Methodology and settings

The findings presented in this article derive from an ethnographic study, which included a total of 14 months of fieldwork in Birmingham and Madrid. ² The two cities were chosen as the focus for the research for a number of reasons. First, both are relatively large and have a significant migrant and minority ethnic population. Birmingham is the second largest city in England with a population of just under 1 million. A total of 47% of the population come from a minority ethnic background, ³ and the largest minority ethnic communities are Pakistani, Indian, Black Caribbean and Bangladeshi (Birmingham City Council [BCC], 2012). Madrid is the capital of Spain and has around 3.3 million people. Approximately 15% are foreign nationals, of whom Europeans (over half from Romania) and Latin Americans constitute the largest groups (Instituto Nacional de Estadística [INE], 2013). The terminology used to describe migrant and minority ethnic groups in the two countries is very different. While the United Kingdom uses a classification system based on ethnicity, the Spanish census defines people in terms of birthplace and nationality. The figures are therefore not directly comparable, but still demonstrate a significant degree of diversity in both cities, making a comparison feasible and relevant.

The second rationale for selecting Birmingham and Madrid was that both England and Spain have a history as colonial powers. Links with former colonies have played an important part in the composition of major migrant communities in both countries. Furthermore, due to the impact of the English and Spanish languages in former colonies, migrants coming from these countries are often familiar with the language upon arrival, whereas migrants from other countries may not be. For children and young people, this is an important distinction, which may shape their education and social lives in different ways.

Finally, the history and timing of migration into England and Spain was considered as an important element in the choice of research settings. England is most often considered a post-Second World War labour migration country, due to the significant number of immigrants coming in the 1950s and 1960s (Mason, 2000). Migration into Spain is a more recent phenomenon, which has gained importance in the last 20–25 years (Arango, n.d.). In addition, migration policies have developed differently in the two countries, with the United Kingdom imposing gradual and increasing restrictions on immigration (Sales, 2007) and Spain relying on a more open immigration policy, combined with regularisation processes (Arango, 2013). Nevertheless, as both countries are located in the European Union (EU), the legal distinction between EU and Non-EU citizens applies to migrants in both settings. The legal context of the two countries therefore forms an important background upon which the narratives of the young migrants in the study must be understood. In addition, the different timings of migration into the two countries meant that many of the students interviewed in Birmingham were children or grandchildren of migrants, whereas most of the students in Madrid were first generation migrants. As the analysis will show, this had important implications for their agency and for the role that family dynamics and legal status played in their perceptions of the future.

The main methods employed in the study were participant observation and semi-structured interviews, including two participatory activities. In both Birmingham and Madrid, I carried out participant observation within an average sized multi-ethnic secondary school, and took part in classes, school trips and extra-curricular activities. As part of the fieldwork, I furthermore conducted qualitative interviews with a total of 54 young people from a mixture of ethnic and national backgrounds (Table 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Research participants.

Birmingham		Madrid
Age range	14–16	Age range	12–17
Total number of participants	26	Total number of participants	28
Gender		Gender
Boys	13	Boys	16
Girls	13	Girls	12
Ethnicity		Nationality
White British	6	Spanish	8
Asian	8	South American	7
Black African	6	African	5
Black Caribbean	2	Chinese	1
Mixed heritage	2	Dominican	3
Other	2	Eastern European	4
Birthplace		Birthplace
UK	20	Spain	8
Outside the UK	6	Outside Spain	20

Source: Jørgensen (2015).

The school in Birmingham had an intake of students from two local neighbourhoods which varied significantly in their level of education and social deprivation. The student population was diverse and the participants in the study came from a range of backgrounds. The school in Madrid was located in a more traditional working class neighbourhood and many of the Spanish parents had a limited educational level. The educational background of the migrant parents was more diverse. While some had little or no education, many had some education, and one had a doctorate. However, similar to the Spanish parents at the school, the majority was working in manual or service sector jobs. As mentioned below, the young people in both Birmingham and Madrid often referred to the educational or occupational background of their parents when developing their own ideas about what a ‘good life’ would or would not entail.

The study aimed to explore the young people’s ideas about their future educational, occupational and personal trajectories following compulsory schooling. Therefore, the majority of the young people who took part in the project were in their last year of secondary school (Year 11 in England and Ciclo 4 in Spain). Rather than selecting individual children and young people from a particular ethnic or migrant group, I chose to work with an already settled group within the two schools. In Birmingham, I worked with students on a specific module and in Madrid, students in a particular class. Both groups included migrant, minority ethnic and majority ethnic young people. This selection strategy enabled me to work around existing ethnic/national categories and explore both differences and similarities between and within various groups of children and young people (Jørgensen, 2015).

As the fieldwork progressed, additional students from Year 10 in England and the ‘bridging class’ (Aula de Enlace) in Madrid were included in the project. The bridging class was a specific class for recently arrived migrant students with little or no knowledge of Spanish. At the time of my fieldwork, it consisted of 13 students, aged 12–16 years. The inclusion of this group resulted in a wider age span among the participants in Madrid compared to Birmingham. In addition, it also made the proportion of migrant students in relation to minority and majority ethnic students larger in Madrid than in Birmingham. This is reflected in the relative weighing of data from the Spanish context in the discussion below.

The semi-structured interviews were carried out in either English or Spanish. All efforts were made to ensure that children and young people, for whom English or Spanish was not their first language, understood the questions, were given the option to explain or query particular words, and had plenty of time to think about their answers. The interviews followed a semi-structured question guide, consisting of a few standard introductory questions, and a number of more flexible and open-ended questions. Inspired by the benefits of participatory methods, described by other researchers working with children and young people (e.g. Cook and Hess, 2007; Punch, 2002; Wilson et al., 2007), I furthermore included a participatory activity in the interviews. As part of this activity, the young people were asked to write down on yellow post-it notes ‘the people or the things that they believed would influence their future life’. Their notes were placed on a large piece of paper and subsequently discussed. This activity gave the participants the option of bringing up issues that they themselves found important, without me probing. It also gave me the opportunity to explore their ideas and thoughts about the future and discuss them using their own words. In the following, some of the findings from these discussions are presented, focusing mainly on the experiences of the young migrants in the study, but also including those of the other participants, when relevant.

Life projects and transnational ideas

When asked what they wanted to do after secondary school, all of the young people interviewed in Birmingham were planning to go to college. What they wanted to do in college, however, varied significantly. Some of them were very clear about the connection between their choices in college and their future careers, while others had not yet made this link. Most of the young people’s discussions about the future focused on education and occupation, but a few also mentioned marriage and children as part of their plans. Six of the students, all from migrant or minority ethnic background, furthermore described moving abroad as a possibility. Four of them wished to go to the United States and mentioned a variety of ‘pull-factors’, such as expected career opportunities and the weather, as part of their motivation. Two were recently arrived migrant girls who missed their familiar environment and wanted to return to their country of origin. One of them, Vanida ⁴ (girl from East Asia, 15 years old, 1 year in Birmingham), had lived in her country of origin with her grandmother for 11 years before coming to the United Kingdom. She explicitly expressed a longing for her friends, the food and ‘everything’. Her plan was to complete university in the United Kingdom and then go back to open a restaurant. The other, Hana (girl of Middle Eastern origin, 15 years old, 3 years in the United Kingdom) had come to Birmingham with her mother and siblings to live with her father, who had previously migrated. The recent reference to another country, expressed by the two girls, distinguishes migrant children and young people from both minority and majority ethnic youth. Their narratives furthermore demonstrate some of the feelings which may result from recent migration and transnational living. These were further illustrated in the data from Madrid.

Like their peers in Birmingham, the Spanish and migrant young people in Madrid had a variety of ideas and wishes regarding their future. Those, who were about to leave secondary school, all wanted to continue their studies. However, their access to further education depended on the result of exams that they had not yet taken at the time of the fieldwork, and therefore they were still unsure of their options. The majority of them planned to do a Bachillerato (General Post-compulsory Secondary Education), but a sizeable number also considered vocational training in combination with employment.

The narratives of the young migrants in Madrid often incorporated an implicit comparison of life in different countries and illustrated their awareness of the opportunities in these respective countries. Nadia (girl from Ukraine, 17 years old, 2 years in Spain), for example, explained her preferred choice of career by its relevance in both Spain and her country of origin:

… There are prospects [for being a dentist] here in Spain or if I go to Ukraine for example, there are prospects in that …

The ideas of the migrant students in the bridging class were less clear than those of the migrant students in Ciclo 4, and they had not always considered the way in which their plans could materialise. This should be seen in relation to their age, and to the time that they would have to spend in secondary school, before being able to move on to another educational level or employment. However, in addition to the age factor, many of them also experienced high levels of uncertainty with regard to their future location. Their ideas were influenced by the transnational field of which they were part and included both awareness of perceived opportunities, but also doubts and mixed feelings of belonging. This was particularly evident in the way they talked about their family and its impact on their future.

Family and (mixed) transnational feelings

When asked who they thought would influence their future, most of the young people in both Birmingham and Madrid mentioned their parents or other close family members. This was regardless of their ethnic, national or migratory background. They explained that their families were a source of support, advice, direction and practical help. Some of them described particular family members as role models and aimed to replicate their career or lifestyle choices. Others gave examples of family members, whose educational level or type of jobs motivated them to ‘do better’. In addition, the migrant young people, particularly in Madrid, often mentioned family members in both their country of origin and country of residence, when discussing who would influence their future life. Jorge and César (two Ecuadorian boys, 16 and 17 years old, 2 and 3 years in Madrid, respectively), for example, listed a number of people, including their uncles, aunts and grandparents in Ecuador, whom they said would ‘help you almost like a mother or father’. Jorge explained that he had spent most of his childhood with them and added, ‘There is almost no difference for me, [between them and] my parents’. Similarly, Diogo (boy from Brazil, 14 years old, 8 months in Madrid), included his grandmother, who was still in Brazil, in a line of people whom he believed would have an effect on his future life:

They [my mother, my grandmother, my best friend and my girlfriend] help me and when I do something bad they help me, but they help me to improve. They help me when I need something, when I am sad … they make me happy and when I do something bad they are always there so that I can do good things …

Serial migration is a common global pattern, which often involves children of migrants being left with relatives in the country of origin for shorter or longer periods of time (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2011). Most of the migrant young people interviewed in Birmingham had lived with one of their parents or close relatives before coming to the United Kingdom. Similarly, several of the migrant students interviewed in Madrid had lived a substantial part of their lives with other relatives in their country of origin. Particularly, the children and young people in Madrid described maintaining close relations with their family members, also after having migrated. The role of family in their lives thus spanned over several countries and continents, resulting in a range of (sometimes mixed) transnational feelings.

Feelings are an area of transnationalism which has received little scholarly attention (Gardner, 2012). The narratives of the young migrants in Madrid however emphasise their importance to young people in the context of migration. César and Jorge, who had lived with their extended family in Ecuador before coming to Spain, both explained that they had been happy to be reunited with their parents in Madrid. However, Jorge quickly added that he also had felt a bit sorry for his younger brothers, whom he had left in Ecuador. Similarly, Marcial (a boy from the Dominican Republic, 13 years old, 8 months in Spain) expressed a certain level of mixed feelings. When asked where he preferred to be, he answered ‘Spain’, but not without reservations:

I like it [Spain] better, but I feel sorry for my grandfather, but I like Spain more, because here are also my mother and my father and my brother.

Marcial had stayed with his grandparents in the Dominican Republic after his parents had left for Spain and had only recently joined them. He explained that he had not initially wanted to come, and had felt sad for his grandfather after his grandmother had passed away. He was planning to go to the Dominican Republic over the summer, but reiterated that he would like to return to Spain after the holiday.

This preference for Spain was not shared by all of the young migrants interviewed in Madrid, and some of them were more ambivalent in their beliefs. When asked what he liked the best, Mario (boy from Ecuador, 17 years old, 3 years in Madrid), for example, answered ‘both Ecuador and Spain’:

there [Ecuador] because my family is there, and here [Spain] because my friends are here.

Diogo said that he preferred going back to Brazil, similarly with reference to the people he knew there:

[I would like to] go back. Here are my friends, but they are not my friends. But those from my country, when they want to be friends, they are your friends.

When identifying their preferred future location, these young migrants thus mainly focused on their family and social relations in Spain and in their country of origin. This was similar to the previously described experiences of Vanida and Hana in Birmingham. However, unlike the two girls, who were relatively clear in their wish to return, the accounts of the young migrants in Madrid illustrate that preferences may not always be straightforward and may involve conflicting feelings of loyalty and affiliation in both country of origin and country of residence (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2011).

Longing for family members in the country of origin is a common feature of transnational migration, and children may adopt an active role in maintaining transnational networks through communication technology and visits (Sime and Fox, 2014). Family visits were not an option for all the young migrants in Madrid, due to the costs involved and pending legal documents. In addition, the narratives of many of the young migrants in Madrid highlighted that as minors they were also relatively dependent on decisions made by their parents. Family dynamics, combined with legal status, thus played an important role in their envisioning of the future.

Family dynamics, legal status and ‘transnational uncertainties’

When talking about their lives 5–10 years ahead, many of the migrant students in Madrid revealed a significant level of uncertainty. César and Jorge explained that they were not yet sure where they would be and linked this to the indecision of their families:

They explained that their parents were working very hard in Spain and longed for the more relaxed and familiar lifestyle in Ecuador. Also Alejandro (boy from Colombia, 17 years old, 5 years in Spain) said that he did not know where he would be in 5–10 years. He conveyed an experience similar to César and Jorge in terms of his parents’ preferences, albeit more explicitly economic:

My parents have planned to go back [to Colombia] within two years, because here the economy is a bit difficult. So, quickly save and go back to my country. But I will study, doing the profession I have done, and practice it.

Alejandro, César and Jorge were all approaching 18 years of age, and even though their narratives show the continued influence of their families, their formal and legal dependence on their parents would thus soon end. The possibility of their parents returning to their country of origin was furthermore not presented as an immediate concern. However, some of the younger migrants in the study described a more present uncertainty with regard to their future lives, which illustrated their status as minors within their families and their dependency on the decisions of their parents. Diogo, for example, mentioned that he would be going back to Brazil for the summer (approximately 1 month after the interview), and did not yet know whether he would return or stay with his father in Brazil:

It’s because my mother would like me to return [to Spain], but if I return she can’t save up money. It’s because I cost a lot. It’s because she has to buy food, etc.

As this quote shows, Diogo had a clear awareness of his own position as an economically dependent minor. While he was the only participant to explicitly note the costs of having dependent children, (un)employment and the costs of living were also mentioned by other migrant students in Madrid as contributing to the uncertainty of their future location. Iulian (boy from Romania, 14 years old, 9 months in Spain) said that due to job opportunities and family links in Italy, he was perhaps not coming back to Spain either after his summer holiday in Romania:

The problem is that I don’t know [what will happen after the vacation]. My mother would like to go to Italy to live, because her sister is there and my cousin that I lived with and who is more like a brother to me, since I was very small I lived with him. Well, here she doesn’t have much work …

When asked whether he would like to go to Italy as well, he quickly answered,

… of course. Because there is my family, a bit more distant, but there are my cousins, my mother’s cousins, my mother’s sister, my uncles, my mother’s cousins. There are many that I know. And in all of Spain there is not anyone from my family.

Iulian’s account emphasises how employment opportunities and transnational family links, not only in the country of origin, but also in third countries, may impact on the mobility of parents and as a result, influence the life projects of their children. Individual parents may furthermore vary in their ideas about the preferred (re)location of their children. While Iulian was living alone with his mother and did not mention his father, some of the other participants in the study described the location preferences and considerations of their parents individually. Mingxia (girl from China, 14 years old, 7 months in Madrid), for example, referred to the considerations of both her mother and her father, when asked whether her parents wanted to stay in Madrid:

Contrary to Mingxia’s parents, who were both in Spain and, according to her, more or less in agreement on where to be, some of the other young migrants had parents in different locations. As the story of Alina (girl from Romania, 15 years old, 9 months in Spain) illustrates, this could lead to uncertainties about the permanency of their settlement. Alina had initially migrated with both her parents, but at the time of the interview she lived alone with her mother in Madrid and her father had gone back to Romania. She explained that she was planning to visit her father over the summer. When asked if she would return, she said,

If my father lets me go back to Spain, I will go back to Spain and begin a new school year, but I don’t know …

Later in the interview she added that her father needed to provide the necessary documents in order for her to be able to return and that she was not yet sure that he would do so. Her story illustrates the importance of acknowledging family dynamics and potential conflicts in models of family migration decision-making (Ryan and Sales, 2011) and consider their impact on young migrants’ future lives. Only a few of the young people in this study explicitly mentioned disagreements in their family, and they did not further elaborate on their own role within them. The experiences of migrants like Alina however show that family dynamics may have an important impact on the transnational uncertainties experienced by young migrants and thus should be considered in ‘children-in-families approaches’. They furthermore interlink in important ways with another factor, which was directly or indirectly mentioned by several of the young people as impacting on their future, the issue of documents.

The legal status of migrant and minority ethnic youth is a controversial and debated issue. Depending on the particular context, legal status may impact on migrant children and young people’s mobility and their access to education and employment (Figueroa, 2012). As illustrated by Mangual Figueroa’s (2012) work on mixed-status families in the United States, citizenship may furthermore shape the way that children and parents envision the future and their varying opportunities within a given country. Aware of the current European context of increasing restrictions, and the potential sensitivity around the topic of legal status, I did not ask the young people in the study directly about these matters, and none of them specifically mentioned on what terms they had entered the two countries. However, the issue of legal documents was brought up in several of the interviews with the young migrants in Madrid. Some of them mentioned that they were waiting for their nationality or documents to ‘come through’ and that this impacted on their mobility and options of visiting family and friends in their country of origin.

The young people’s focus on legal matters was quite specific for the Spanish context. It reflects not only the recent nature of migration into the country, but also its particular immigration policy and tradition of legalising migrants through regularisation processes (Arango, 2013). None of the young people of migrant background interviewed in Birmingham talked about legal issues. This does not imply that migration policy and regulations are of less relevance to migrant young people in the UK context, but rather that the majority of the young people interviewed for this project most likely already had a secure status. They were thus not as restricted in their movements as their Spanish counter-parts and their future lives were not to the same extent dependent on it. The comparison between the two settings and the different experiences conveyed by the young people thus emphasise the importance of considering legal frameworks, along with family dynamics, in discussions of young migrants’ life projects. They may act as potential limitations to the young migrants’ agency and furthermore contribute to the transnational uncertainties that many of them experience.

Conclusion

This article has discussed the agency and decision-making of migrant children and young people in Birmingham and Madrid in relation to their future. Similar to other studies that have argued for an increased and more direct inclusion of children and young people’s experiences of migration (Ní Laoire et al., 2010), the article emphasises the importance of exploring young migrants’ ideas about the future and their active engagement in shaping their own lives. The accounts of the young migrants in the study show that transnational ties in the country of origin play a significant role in the perspectives of migrant young people (Bak and Von Brömsen, 2010) and that their life projects often include a transnational dimension. However, the data also show that the agency of young migrants may be limited by some very particular factors. As children and young people, their ideas and wishes are often dependent on their families and their particular dynamics. This supports the case for an extended children-in-families approach (Bushin, 2009), which takes into account both the family as a unit and the decisions of individual parents. As migrants, the young people are furthermore potentially restricted by migration legislations, which may vary from country to country and impact on different migrant groups in different ways. This illustrates the relevance of more comparative research in this area.

The comparison between the two settings in this study, Birmingham and Madrid, stresses the importance of a contextual analysis of migrant children’s agency, including the impact of different family members and local legal frameworks. Combined, these factors may result in a significant sense of ‘transnational uncertainty’ experienced by migrant children and young people with regard to their future location, both short and long term. Transnational uncertainties are important, as the emotional capacity of young migrants to incorporate themselves in receiving countries may be related both to the circumstances under which they were brought there, and the permanency of their situation (Orellana et al., 2001). A focus on family dynamics, legal frameworks, and the uncertainties experienced by migrant children and young people furthermore highlights some of the particular limitations to their agency. It illustrates some of the grey areas between seeing migrant children and young people as active and empowered agents in their own right, on the one hand, and as passive dependents, on the other. As such, the analysis presented in this article responds to the call from other researchers for a more nuanced and contextual understanding of children’s participation (Thorne, 2008) in the particular context of migration.