Introduction

Traditional approaches to migration theorising, particularly in a European context, have tended to focus rather narrowly on a limited number of economic determinants and, in particular, the effect of wage differentials in shaping migration and location decisions. The emphasis on the migration decision has also tended to characterise migration as a one-time event, perhaps followed by a return move. In recent years, research has drawn attention to the role that a much wider range of factors play in shaping what are now conceptualised more accurately as migration processes or, in a European context ‘mobilities’. This might include a more holistic appraisal of economic factors to encompass living costs and expenditures and their impact on family resources. In addition to this, research has encouraged us to consider the impact that personal and family relationships and obligations might have on migration behaviour, perhaps generating resistance to the ‘pull’ of economic considerations or, in other contexts, lubricating mobility. Concerns around spousal employment rights and the impact of dual career situations form the focus of an increasing body of research reflecting a move away from the individualistic and consensual ‘male breadwinner’ model towards acknowledging the role that couples play in migration decision making. Boyd critiques economic rationality models that “emphasise the movement of people as a result of rational calculations performed by individual actors”, drawing attention to the role of partners and wives in particular (1989, p 640). A necessary development to this has been research exploring the impact of migration on family life (Mincer, 1978; Litcher, 1980; Bailey and Cooke, 1998; Cooke, 2001; Ackers and Stalford, 2004; for a review of research in this area, see Kofman, 2004). Bailey and Boyle (2004), in their review of the multidisciplinary literature in this area, refer to the traditional assumption that migration decisions involving families are based on rational, economic logic. This implies a process by which the migrant worker parent (typically the male) weighs up the net economic gain to the family unit of moving. Similarly, Scott refers to the relationship between mobility and family/life course, suggesting that, “There is … a work–life balance that matches the acquisition of mobility capital against familial priorities” (2006, p 1113).

Specific attention to the influence of children on migration processes has emerged more slowly. Where this is recognised, children tend to be viewed as the passive appendages or, indeed, intractable obstacles to their parents’ migration.