Ines M. Miyares

Re)producing Salvadoran Transnational Geographies

As contemporary international migrants forge new webs of connection and social fields between distant places, transnational scholarship seeks to understand and theorize these emerging spaces. Our account of the Salvadoran transnational social field centered in northern New Jersey contributes to the development of transnational theory by considering how a particular legal provision—temporary protective status (TPS)—permeates daily life. We argue that material and nonmaterial aspects of daily life become associated with an experience of space-time relations to which we refer as permanent temporariness. Permanent temporariness limits the geographic, economic, social, and political ambitions of Salvadorans, but is increasingly resisted through acts of strategic visibility. Our article reflects on the implications of permanent temporariness for the production of scale in the particular transnational field we study, and on links to broader discussions about transnationalism, the international political economy of migration, and capitalist restructuring. To represent the experiences of Salvadorans, we use a transnational mixed-methods approach to pool quantitative and qualitative data that were collected serially at multiple sites.

Changing Perceptions of Space and Place as Measures of Hmong Acculturation

Immigrant and refugee acculturation has both behavioral and spatial manifestations. The purpose of this study is to examine the spatial acculturation process of Hmong refugees in Californias San Joaquin Valley in order to understand changing perceptions of the concepts and uses of space and place. Through in-depth interviews and participant observation among 120 Hmong university students and their families, the process of change in settlement and use of space is traced from traditional cultural practices in Laos through the refugee camp experience to the first and 1.5 generation enclaves. Each generation has recreated and adapted the immediately preceding socialization experience such that settlement patterns and the use of space by the 1.5 generation only minimally resemble traditional culture, yet maintain its underlying cultural values.

“LITTLE ODESSA”—BRIGHTON BEACH, BROOKLYN: AN EXAMINATION OF THE FORMER SOVIET REFUGEE ECONOMY IN NEW YORK CITY

Since the mid-1970s, the United States has resettled over 400,000 refugees and immigrants from former Soviet Republics, a quarter of whom have settled in New York City. The focal point and economic center of the former Soviet community has become Brighton Beach, a neighborhood in southern Brooklyn where a growing number of Russian and Ukrainian small businesses have emerged. This study examines ethnic entrepreneurship among the former Soviets in light of three models: human capital model, disadvantage theory, and culture theory. These models are applicable to the former Soviet population only when understood in light of federal refugee assistance programs.

Legal status gender and employment among Salvadorans in the US.

This paper investigates the labor market experiences of Salvadorans who reside and work in the US. Many Salvadorans work on temporary visas which are currently renewed annually until the Immigration and Naturalization Service or the courts hear their asylum cases under the American Baptist Church vs. Thornburgh ruling. Acknowledging that gender provides the foundation for most occupational segregation and income inequality the authors evaluate how legal status and gender interrelate and shape (and are shaped by) the work experiences of Salvadorans. The authors also consider how transnational obligations to family in El Salvador influence employment behavior and outcomes and in so doing the research asks the authors to think anew about the localness of local labor markets. The study relies on data collected during 15 months of fieldwork in northern New Jersey and El Salvador. (authors)

Introduction: Rethinking Practices for Enhancing Diversity in the Discipline

W hen students consider higher education, they often ask, “Where should I go to college?” Meanwhile departments ask, “Where do we find a more diverse faculty and student body?” These questions hint at how the nature of participation in higher education is fundamentally spatial and geographic. Where universities are, from where and how far their underrepresented students or faculty come, and the complex dynamics of their geographic context matter considerably. A predominant habit of thinking and speaking about “diversity” persists, however, and might be limiting our opportunities to increase the participation of underrepresented groups and promote greater inclusion in geography as well as higher education more broadly. The so-called pipeline principle—that is, building relationships among educational institutions serving students at different stages from grade school, middle school, secondary school, community colleges, undergraduate programs, and graduate programs to faculty—is fairly well understood as a framework for recruitment efforts. It continues to serve as the underlying metaphor characterizing the way we conceive broadening the participation of underrepresented groups in higher education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, health sciences, geosciences, law, biosciences, and education, as well as in private-sector professions (Thomson and Denk 1999; Tienda 2001; Chang 2002; Jackson 2003; Alfred et al. 2005; McCarty et al. 2005; Calleros 2007; Levine et al. 2007; Cullinane 2009; Hinton et al. 2010; Subotnik et al. 2010). Yet the pipeline metaphor glosses over how such relationships are geographically contingent, spatial in nature, or connected across scales. It essentially overlooks the importance of retention and institutional climate in efforts to enhance diversity and provide

Diverse Experiences in Diversity at the Geography Department Scale

Departments are critical intervention points for enhancing diversity in any academic discipline, yet their experiences related to diversity differ widely. This article explores how several geography departments that vary by region, setting, and institutional type have experienced and promoted diversity. We also explore geography at different types of institutions, particularly minority-serving institutions and land-grant colleges and universities. We conclude that plans for improving the recruitment and retention of diverse students and faculty should make explicit the connection between structural factors, such as institutional contexts, and the agency of geography departments as key actors.

Immigrants and the American Dream: Remaking the Middle Class. By William A. V. Clark

In his new book, Immigrants and the American Dream, William A. V. Clark explores the question of the geography of immigrants’ success relative to accepted measures of middle-class status. He examines the relationship between source country, entry status and arrival period, educational attainment, and region of settlement within the United States to address whether immigrants are achieving “the American Dream,” as described by contemporary American culture, including such measures as owning a home, entering a profession, having a middle-class income, and engaging in civic affairs. In doing so, he presents an important picture of the new socioeconomic landscape that has resulted from contemporary immigration—that the immigrant population following the segmented path of assimilation (Portes and Zhou 1993) into the middle class is larger and more diverse than it is typically portrayed and that there is spatial variation within this segmented path. Clark argues that the middle-class American Dream of professional employment, a middle income, and homeownership is still desired and attainable by recent immigrants. His research complements studies that have shown the economic success of positively selected immigrants, but Clark challenges the notion that the middle class is inaccessible to the lesser skilled or the lesser educated. Although the analyses occasionally become tedious, Clark shows that striving for and achieving middle-class status is not exclusively the purview of immigrants who enter the United States on either third-preference or H1-B visas. This book is divided into eight chapters that are built around a progression of themes addressing immigrant entry into the middle class. Each chapter is rich with descriptive statistics, graphs, and a limited set of maps that are based on data that were obtained primarily from the U.S. Bureau of the Census, including decennial censuses and current population surveys, and from the (former) Immigration and Naturalization Service. Clark supplements his data presentations with brief vignettes describing the life experiences of representative immigrant households. In his opening chapter, Clark operationalizes the concept of the American dream and of entry into the middle class. Since there is no official, or even standard, measure of middle-class status, Clark reviews various measures, definitions, and existing debates on assimilation within the context of a changing economy and changing immigration laws, acknowledging the reality of bifurcated flows based on transferable human capital. He also introduces the importance of examining the relationship between new immigrants and the communities in which they settle, particularly since immigration is no longer a coastal large urban phenomenon, and shows that medium and small communities throughout the country are also being affected by contemporary immigration. Clark develops this theme further in the second chapter by presenting a spatial and demographic profile of the foreign-born and second-generation populations in the United States in light of post-1965 immigration laws and immigrant flows. In the third chapter, he examines relative middle-class attainment using income and homeownership as proxies, contrasting the experiences of foreignborn and native-born Asians, Hispanics, and whites, as measured in 1980, 1990, and 2000, and in the states receiving the largest numbers of immigrants. He argues that if #2123—ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY—VOL. 81 NO. 2—81207—miyares-br