Datensatz

Zusammenfassung

Transnational social fields and transnational social spaces are concepts used interchangeably
in transnational literature. Although both of them refer to the complex
of connections between borders, each of them represents a different – and complementary
– perspective. In this paper, it will be argued that the adoption of the social
networks approach by transnational studies actually inherited two different traditions
for studying relational phenomena: the anthropological egocentric or personal
network tradition and the sociological or whole network tradition. “Transnational
fields” would reflect the former and “transnational spaces” would reflect the latter. In
this way, transnational fields would be especially feasible for studying embeddedness
in given places, whereas transnational spaces would be useful for studying dynamics
between regions, representing two different levels of analysis of the same range of
phenomena.
The operationalisation of the concept of transnational fields suggested in this
paper involves a) the collection of ensembles of personal networks, b) the selection
of a focal place, and c) the assessment of types and levels of embeddedness in the
identified field using the method of Clustered Graphs, and the Index of Qualitative
Variation. This proposal will be exemplified with the data collected in Barcelona
from three groups (Chinese, Sikh and Filipino, N=25 in each group, 30 alters by ego).
Finally, the pros and contras of the proposal will be discussed.