ICT and Migration: A Conceptual Framework of ICT Use by Migrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International migration has steadily increased to become a significant trend. ICT have had a major impact on it, giving rise to a new age of “connected migrants”. Drawing from the emerging field of ICT and migration, this paper explores the use of ICT by migrants. Based on a literature review, it presents a conceptual framework of ICT use by migrants throughout the migration process. The framework includes four main components, situated along two axes: the “host society – source society” and the “pre-migratory phase – post-migratory phase” axis. We conclude with some avenues for future research. ICT and migration research area International migration has steadily increased to become a significant trend in Western societies (Massez, Arango, Hugo, Kouaouci, Pelligrino & Taylor, 1993), stirring scientific interest. For example, Urry (2010) urges sociology to reframe its perspectives by moving from the “social as society” to the “social as mobility” (p. 348); which he calls “mobile sociology”, highlighting the attention that is given to migration, as a growing social trend. Currently, an estimated 215 million people are on the move (World Bank, 2011), for an 11 % rise on average from 2002 to 2007 (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD, 2010). ICT have certainly had a major impact on the entire process of mobility and migration (Codagnone & Kluzer, 2011). In his conceptual study, Kellerman (2011) concludes that all current mobilities are based on and dependent on ICT. Whence the emerging research on ICT and migration, it is recognized that ICT have had a major impact on migration trends by considerably diversifying and increasing migration opportunities (Codagnone & Kluzer, 2011; Hamel, 2009). ICT have also helped change our conception of migrants. According to Diminescu (2005), migrants have traditionally been perceived as uprooted individuals who must overcome a series of breaks with the past. However, the new image is that of connected individuals (the “connected migrants”) whose mobilities are parts of a continuum. This new perception is made possible by ICT, which allow us to develop an “inclusive cosmopolitan point of view ‘both here and there’, rather than an exclusive vision based on “neither... or’” (free translation, Nedelcu, 2009, p. 171). This contrasts with the view of the migrants as lacking, torn between two realities and never truly belonging to either one (Sayad, 1999). Although ICT and migration is a recent research area (Codagnone & Kluzer, 2011), it has generated growing interest (Borkert, Cingolani & Premazzi, 2009) and is an emerging research stream. A multidisciplinary topic, it involves a diverse mix of expertise, approaches and purposes. Some studies focus on defining, conceptualizing and delineating the field (e.g., Borkert, Cingolani & Premazzi, 2009; Diminescu, Jacomy & Renault, 2010). Our study belongs in this theoretical stream. Objective and methodology Our aim was to contribute to the collective reflection on ICT and migration by identifying ICT use by migrants. We drew our portrait of ICT and migration based on a literature review using the methodology proposed by Gall (2005) and Fraenkel and Wallen (2003). Thus, we began by formulating a research question for the literature review: How are ICT used by migrants throughout the migration process? We then determined key words: ICT + migrants/migration + uses. We searched for key words combinations in general online databases (e.g., Google, Google Scholar) and specialized websites on this question (e.g., section “State of the art” section of the
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".