Beyond the Prototypical Male Migrant

The primary theoretical accounts of migration have been largely unaffected by the feminisation of migration. But this does not mean that they are gender neutral. Drawing on the concept of gender knowledge developed by German sociologists Irene Dölling and Sünne Andresen, on the feminist critique of knowledge, feminist economics and studies on gender and migration, the paper interrogates two influential models of migration from neoclassical economics for their gendered assumptions: the Roy-Borjas selection model of migration and Jacob Mincer’s model of family migration. An analysis of their gendered assumptions about the individual, the family, the institution of the labour market and immigration policies shows that both theories explicitly and implicitly assume a male migrant as the norm and frame female migrants as passive dependents. However, the paper argues that it is not “men as such” who serve as prototypical migrants, but a specific type of white, heterosexual and middle-class masculinity, which is set as the norm while other migration realities and knowledge about the structuration of migration processes through social relations of gender, race and class are excluded. Finally, it is argued that with knowledge being a powerful site for the production of meaning in social relations, the gender knowledge in mainstream migration theories could lead to discriminatory migration policies and might also affect migrant subjectivities. This underscores the need for a more sustained dialogue between feminist and mainstream migration scholarship to further engender the field.

Decision‐Making in Public Good Dilemmas: Theory and Agent‐Based Simulation

In many real world contexts individuals find themselves in situations where they have to decide between options of behaviour that serve a collective purpose or behaviours which satisfy one’s private interests, ignoring the collective. In some cases the underlying social dilemma (Dawes, 1980) is solved and we observe collective action (Olson, 1965). In others social mobilisation is unsuccessful. The central topic of social dilemma research is the identification and understanding of mechanisms which yield to the observed cooperation and therefore resolve the social dilemma. It is the purpose of this thesis to contribute this research field for the case of public good dilemmas. To do so, existing work that is relevant to this problem domain is reviewed and a set of mandatory requirements is derived which guide theory and method development of the thesis. In particular, the thesis focusses on dynamic processes of social mobilisation which can foster or inhibit collective action. The basic understanding is that success or failure of the required process of social mobilisation is determined by heterogeneous individual preferences of the members of a providing group, the social structure in which the acting individuals are contained, and the embedding of the individuals in economic, political, biophysical, or other external contexts. To account for these aspects and for the involved dynamics the methodical approach of the thesis is computer simulation, in particular agent-based modelling and simulation of social systems. Particularly conductive are agent models which ground the simulation of human behaviour in suitable psychological theories of action. The thesis develops the action theory HAPPenInGS (Heterogeneous Agents Providing Public Goods) and demonstrates its embedding into different agent-based simulations. The thesis substantiates the particular added value of the methodical approach: Starting out from a theory of individual behaviour, in simulations the emergence of collective patterns of behaviour becomes observable. In addition, the underlying collective dynamics may be scrutinised and assessed by scenario analysis. The results of such experiments reveal insights on processes of social mobilisation which go beyond classical empirical approaches and yield policy recommendations on promising intervention measures in particular.