Postcolonizing Europe? An International Workshop // May 10-12, 2010

Maria Schwertl (Munich) - Between Cultural Remittances and Translocal Knowledge Formation? 'Migration and Development' at local Levels. Attempts of Local Governments to cooperate with Diasporas
For some decades, “diasporas“ have attracted much attention in science and research promoting old concepts such as “Hybridity“ and also many new concepts such as “Third Space“ (Homi K. Bhaba). At the same time, politics have had their own point of view on migration and especially diasporas: For the target countries migration and even more the supposedly non-integrating, “homeland-oriented“ and non-returning diasporas seemed to be a tremendous threat to nations. For the countries of origin, diasporas seemed to be similar to brain drain, that is loss of human cognitive abilities. Because of these discourses, migration was to be prevented and diasporas were to be integrated.
For some years (approximately since 2007, at least this is the point where the concept was first internationalized at the first Global Forum on Migration and Development), the concepts of threat and loss/drain have been replaced in some fields of politics by the concepts of potential and brain gain that migrants/diasporas bring along. The question is: why? And, how is this done on levels of discourse? Furthermore, what does this change of view on migrants imply for their daily transnational practices?
To answer these questions, my research deals with new forms of cooperation between local governments and diasporas. Launched by transnational and international, but also national debates and discussions on “Brain Gain” and “Migration and Development”, some European cities now do what they call “Communal Development Cooperations”. The concept behind these cooperations is as follows: Migrants settle in cities and particularly in metropolitan areas. They bring along lots of expert and practical knowledge about their countries of origin and have used this knowledge for decades to facilitate relief projects or economic commitments there. Having realized the new discourse and international projects, cities and communal agents therefore gather knowledge on the diasporic activities within their cities now and try to establish networks of local associations active in this field. Thus they not only position their cities as internationally and globally important (cities in this agenda are THE place to change the world into a better place full of cooperation and sustainability, because city is, where citizens can be directly reached by politics), but at the same time gain some knowledge and power over migrants. Migrants/diasporas on the other hand use the described new positive interest in them for their own goals and gain some kind of voice in communal and transnational political processes.
In my presentation I want to stress some of the implications behind all of these processes, as expressed in the following questions: how is politics done locally in this context? What kind of “gaze” on their home country, on development, brain gain and communal development cooperations do diasporas have? To what extent do they have a hybrid gaze? From which place are they gazing therefore? Are diasporas referred to and treated as equals, others, mediators, or in-betweens in this process? What does this new positive interest in them mean to diasporas and their daily practices? What kind of knowledge is activated in this process? And overall: How can postcolonial theory be fruitfully applied to the concept of communal development cooperations and their backgrounds of “Migration and Development”-Discourse? What does it mean that migrants are permitted political agency without citizenship and even more because of their diasporic status? Is this postcolonializing Europe?

Agnes Woolley, Sabrina Marchetti and Maria Schwertl