What Forms of Migration and Mobility Will We Condemn in 2050?

Some of the ways we practice and regulate human movement today may be fundamentally reassessed in the future. The Covid-19 pandemic, the ensuing travel restrictions, and the social experience of being in lockdown may trigger or accelerate a profound transformation in how we perceive human movement and its social impact, environmental consequences, and spatial changes. The blog series that begins with this contribution presents a collection of reflections about the question: What forms of migration and mobility will we condemn in 2050?

Human movement is embedded in normative discourses about its social, environmental, and spatial impact. As these discourses evolve, certain forms of migration and mobility that we have taken for granted may appear in a different light. Colonial expeditions, the slave trade, racial criteria for selecting immigrants, forced expulsion of religious minorities: these are some instances of human movement that are considered morally unacceptable today. By the same token, some of the ways we practice and regulate human movement in the present may be fundamentally reassessed by future generations, triggering feelings of responsibility, regret, or even shame. We take up this issue and ask our researchers the following question: What forms of migration and mobility will we condemn in 2050?

We could, for example, imagine that in 2050 we will hide old flight tickets in an attempt to distance ourselves from practices that are heavily contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming (Sheller 2018). Many of us academics may even deny that we ever traveled to a conference on a different continent. Others may claim they took to the streets to protest against European governments’ failings during the so-called refugee crisis’ and, more generally, against their moral failings in the field of asylum and refugee policy (Hamood 2008). Perhaps future generations will berate every kind of politics vis-à-vis international migration, realizing the ideas of those who argue that closed borders are not morally justifiable (Carens 1987). Or, maybe, by 2050, our societies will reassess the value of mobility in general. Having celebrated movement as a source of freedom and progress, we may rediscover the beauty of staying put and decry the hyper-mobile society’s stresses and inequalities (Emmanuel Ravalet et al. 2014). These are only some examples of how different forms of migration and mobility that we consider normal today may be seen in a different light tomorrow.

The Covid-19 pandemic, the ensuing travel restrictions, and the social experience of being in lockdown may trigger or accelerate profound transformations. For instance, the virus has already changed tourism-related mobility: in 2020, people traveled shorter distances and outside of big cities, mainly rejecting long-distance holidays in urban spaces (Gössling, Scott and Hall 2020). Profound and long-lasting changes to human movement may also be dictated by the adaptation of transportation and urban design (Sharifi and Khavarian-Garmsir 2020). While some of these transformations are currently underway, it is difficult to predict whether they are here to stay.

We have asked some of our researchers to provide examples of what forms of migration and mobility we may look back on with regret or shame 30 years down the line. This exercise differs slightly from the usual format of this blog. We are not eliciting full-fledged scientific analyses. Instead, we are collecting scientifically grounded opinions on how political and social change may transform our understanding of human movement. Our objective is to stimulate critical thinking that can advance the public debate. Migration and mobility are always associated with particular representations and meanings: while we cannot predict the future, we can sketch some ideas of how future generations may rethink the choices we make today.

Lorenzo Piccoli is the Scientific Officer of the nccr – on the move. He also works as a Research Associate for GLOBALCIT at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies in Florence.

If you want to participate in this online debate, get in touch with lorenzo.piccoli@nccr-onthemove.ch. We would be happy to discuss your additional proposals.

Contributions of this blog series: 

– Nick Van Haer, Immobilia (24.11.2020)
– Laure Sandoz, The Future of My Dreams – The Future of My Nightmares (3.12.2020)
– Marco Bitschnau, Don’t Expect Too Much of 2050 (11.12.2020)
– Salomon Bennour, The Next Stop (15.12.2020)
– Joanna Menet, A Day in a Marketplace (22.12.2020)
– (Next contribution in January 2021)

References:

– Carens, J. H. (1987). Aliens and Citizens: The Case for Open Borders, The Review of Politics 49(2), 251.
– Emmanuel Ravalet et al. (2014). Tranches de vie mobile. Enquête sociologique et manifeste sur la grande mobilité liée au travail. Lausanne: Loco, Forum vies mobiles.
– Gössling, S., Scott, D. and Hall, C. M. (2020). Pandemics, Tourism and Global Change: A Rapid Assessment of COVID-19, Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29(1), 1–20.
– Hamood, S. (2008). EU-Libya Cooperation on Migration: A Raw Deal for Refugees and Migrants?, Journal of Refugee Studies 21(1), 19–42.
– Sharifi, A. and Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. (2020). The COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts on Cities and major Lessons for Urban Planning, Design, and Management, Science of the Total Environment 749, 1–3.
– Sheller, M. (2018). Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes. London: Verso.