Urban localities in global lives of expatriates : how personal characteristics and the socio-spatial environment affect the transnational lives of highly skilled migrants in Amsterdam and Hong Kong

(1)

(2)

1

2.4. Choice of Methods ... 22 2.5. Selection of respondents ... 23 2.6. Data collection ... 23 2.6.1. Hong Kong ... 23 2.6.2. Amsterdam ... 24 2.7. Data Analysis ... 25 2.8. External validity ... 26 3. Results ... 27 3.1. Motivations ... 28 3.1.1. Hong Kong ... 28 3.1.2. Amsterdam ... 28 3.2. Personal traits ... 29 3.2.1. Hong Kong ... 29

(3)

2 3.2.2. Amsterdam ... 31 3.3. Socio-spatial environment ... 32 3.3.1. Hong Kong ... 32 3.3.2. Amsterdam ... 34 4. Conclusion ... 36 4.1. General findings ... 37

4.2. Hong Kong: from interested to indifferent ... 37

4.3. Amsterdam: from indifferent to interested ... 38

4.4. Concluding ... 39

4.5. Discussion ... 41

(4)

(5)

4

1. Introduction

1.1. ‘War for talent’

Highly-skilled labour migration has become more important than ever and has received growing attention from migration studies. These highly skilled migrants are growing in numbers, not only because migration has become more widespread due to new technologies in transport and communications (Pries, 2001), but also because of the intensification of economic competition between corporations that more than ever spans globally (Saxenian, 2002; Ewers, 2007). In this global competition for economic success, these corporations - and local or national governments - are actively searching for skilled human capital to infuse the local economy with highly specialised skills, as this will benefit their global competitiveness (OECD, 2013). This process has been framed as the ‘global war for talent’ (Yeoh & Huang, 2011) and is geographically articulated in urban areas, as these are the places where global talent as well as multinational companies gravitate towards. The epitome of this process is arguably the global city. Global cities are nodes of command and control in the global economy (Friedmann, 1986; Sassen, 2001), and attract a large share of valorised talent (Ewers, 2007). In the global city literature (Friedmann & Wolff, 1982; Sassen, 2001), this so-called professional class (Sassen, 2001) or otherwise framed as ‘transnational capitalist class’ (Sklair, 2002) has been recognised as the crucial link which connects the city with a transnational network and gives the city its global significance (Beaverstock, 2011). Hence, these highly skilled migrants simultaneously need to be considered as a consequence as well as a driver of the global economy. Talent migration forms a key factor in determining if an urban area is able to keep up with competing with other centres of command and control (Sassen, 2001; Florida, 2002). As a result, national governments are significantly easing the migration policies for highly-skilled migrants by reducing restrictions to enter the country and urban governments are actively facilitating their incorporation by setting up - publicly funded - expat centres (OECD, 2013; Ewers, 2007). The entrance of highly-skilled migrants into the city is politically – as well as economically – widely appreciated and has therefore also been referred to as the invisible, accepted form of migration (Beaverstock, 2005; O’Connor, 2010) as opposed to less accepted low-skilled migrants (De Jong, 2010). As a result of a continuous influx of highly skilled migrants (combined with the global elite), housing prices in London (Butler & Lees, 2006) and New York (Lees, 2003) have skyrocketed and, in addition, set in motion a process called ‘super-gentrification’ (Lees, 2003). Even though this process currently involves only the top one per cent of the highly skilled migrants and is until now only investigated in the above examples, the easing migration policies towards highly skilled as compared to the lower skilled does raise complex issues revolving around the ‘just city’ (Fainstein, 2012; Soja, 2012). For instance, Germany is now seen as being one of the easiest migration destinations for highly skilled, whereas simultaneously this very same country is blocking further influx of lower skilled migrants (OECD, 2013).

The economic significance of talent migration is highly appreciated internationally, but there are also socio-cultural consequences of their urban mobility (Ley, 2004; Smith, 2005). This group of highly skilled has been labelled as being hyper-mobile and disconnected from the places they – may it temporary – inhabit: ‘forever-on-the-move, forever-in-transit, forever unmoored, forever part of the ‘space of flows’ (Yeoh & Huang, 2011: 682). Their mobility and their consequential transnational

(6)

5 social networks affect the way the lives of these migrants are developed in cities. Terms such as ‘global citizenship’, ‘transnational elite’, ‘true cosmopolitan’ have been introduced to grasp the relative novelty of the current migration process (Ley, 2004; Smith, 2005; Beaverstock, 2005), characterised by the supposed hyper mobility and foot looseness of individual migrants. It is stated that highly skilled migrants are the true careerists and exploit the different localities around the world to pursue their individual goals (Brenda, Yeoh & Willis, 2005; Ewers, 2007). Even though these respective characterisations are contested (Yeoh & Huang, 2011; Beaverstock, 2011), this notion of hyper-mobility of the talent migrants does underline the complexity of their lives, as the movement is not one-directional, but rather multi-directional and perhaps even transient (Glick-Schiller & Levitt, 2004; Brenda, Yeoh & Willis, 2005).

To better understand the lives of the highly skilled migrants, and to better grasp what it means to be highly mobile and maintain a social network transnationally on a daily basis, a transnational urbanism approach was introduced (Smith, 2005). With this approach, more emphasis was put on the individual migrant and its personal experiences (Ley, 2004; Conradson & Latham, 2005; O’Connor, 2010; Dunn, 2010). The approach of transnational urbanism is taking the individual migrant as the unit of analysis and looks into the individual opportunities and constraints that are – taken broadly - related to one’s social, cultural and financial capital. The importance of individual life stories and experiences in interaction with the direct localities is emphasised. As a result, the apparent footloose and borderless lifestyle of these highly skilled migrants is problematised. In this research, the personal narratives of individual migrants show us a glimpse of what moving within a globalising world may mean. As a result, notions of globalisation and spatial mobility become grounded in place and time and concrete experiences embedded in social networks and everyday lives of these migrants (Ley, 2004).

The two cases where this research delves into are global cities Hong Kong and Amsterdam. These two cities try actively to attract more highly skilled migrants, but due to their socio-spatial differences in terms of economic significance (Hong Kong) and cultural significance (Amsterdam), it is interesting to see what this means for what kind of highly skilled migrants they attract and how these migrants relate to the locality of the city. The aim of the research is to better comprehend to what extent the socio-spatial context and personal characteristics of migrants is affecting the individual experiences of the highly skilled. The extent to which highly skilled migrants are either interacting or not integrating within the locality is emphasised.

The thesis is structured as follows. Firstly, relevant theoretical perspectives on transnationalism and global cities in connection to the individual experience of highly skilled migrants are discussed, followed by the aim of the research and a legitimisation of the social and scientific relevance. In Chapter 2, the methodological foundation of the research is described. Here the chosen methods, the data collection and data analysis are elaborated on. In Chapter 3, the results of the data in terms of the main concepts are delineated. In Chapter 4, the data results are analysed in line with the main concepts described in the theoretical framework. Finally, in Chapter 5, the main arguments are brought together in the conclusion, while suggestions for further research are made in the discussion.

(7)

6

1.2. Theoretical framework

1.2.1. Introduction

The theoretical framework is structured as follows. Firstly, a short background of transnationalism as a field of study is given. It is provided to position transnationalism as a relatively new concept within migration studies. Secondly, different definitions of transnationalism are highlighted. Thirdly, in connection to the cases of Hong Kong and Amsterdam, the field of transnational urbanism is further elaborated. Hereby, the theoretical background of how highly skilled migrants might relate to locals in the global city is given. Fourthly, how context and personal traits might affect the relation between highly skilled migrant and the locality is delineated.

1.2.2. Transnationalism

Transnationalism as an approach to better understand the lives of migrants is relatively new. In the 1990s, transnationalism rapidly developed and became acknowledged by several scholars (Glick Schiller et al., 1992; Basch et al., 1994; Smith, 2005). Its development was mainly due to its opposition to the domination of assimilation theory within migration studies. Assimilation is closely linked to the concept of integration, and looks at to what extent a migrant shows signs of cultural resemblance of the host society. In other words, one’s own culture gets more accustomed to the culture of residence the longer one lives there. The focal point within these studies primarily emphasises the differences between migrants and locals, whereby the cultural characteristics of the latter is seen as the dominant one, to which the former needs to adjust (Water and Jimenez, 2004). As a result, many concepts came to the fore, such as the classical work on acculturation (Thomas & Znaniecki, 1918) or New York presented as the perfect urban melting pot (Koser & Salt, 1997) and later on social experimentation revolving around the multicultural society (Pries, 2001). These concepts were mainly driven by a cultural deterministic perspective on the interactions people have in the urban setting, obscuring the relationships these migrants have outside of these cultural communities (Baumann, 2009).

However, later in the twentieth century, as more international companies and non-governmental organisations were set up on a wider scale (e.g. Greenpeace), migration studies started to divert the attention towards more inter-relational [communities] as well as transnational perspectives (Basch et al., 1994; Levitt & Jaworsky, 2007). This diversion of perspective became really grounded in the 1990s, when scholars such as Basch, Glick Schiller and Levitt criticised the domination of assimilation theorists in migration studies and argued for more awareness of the transnational existence of certain migrant groups. While settling in the host society, migrants still participated in social, cultural, economic as well as political practices based in the country of origin. To better understand the social dynamics of integration and insertion, the need for a transnational lens became more urgent. Rather than solely pointing at processes of assimilation of migrants within the host society, they emphasised the importance of the social links they maintained with the country of origin (Glick Schiller et al., 1992). Together with significant innovations in communication and transportation and the growth in global movement of people, the transnational field gained more importance in explaining and identifying the social and geographic dimensions of the people under scrutiny. Hence, the migration field broadened by not taking only the migrants into

(8)

7 consideration but also including the people who stayed behind. In other words, they looked at the wider diaspora of a certain socio-cultural group (Appadurai, 1991). In addition, they actively contested the approach, widely used within assimilation studies that geographic and social space necessarily coincides with the nation state (Pries, 2001). Social ties are no longer constrained by nation state borders, but increasingly extended beyond them (Appadurai, 1991; Glick Schiller et al., 1992; Basch et al., 1994; Koser & Salt, 1997; Kennedy, 2004; Kleinschmidt, 2006). Although this has been going on for centuries, transnational scholars stress the fact that this process is ever more common for a larger part of society. Consequently, one of the major points made by this strand of migration studies was that the nation state would become less important and would eventually diminish as the most significant shaping force of individual lives and societies as a whole (Basch et al., 1994). As anthropologists Al-Ali and Koser (2002: 3) mention, they ‘conceive transnational migrants not as anomalies, but rather as representative of an increasingly globalized world.’

But with the development of a new field in migration studies, critiques developed. Some scholars mentioned that there was nothing new about transnationalism. The European migrants in the United States served as prime examples to argue that migrants had always maintained social connections to family who stayed behind (Morawska, 2004; Waldinger & Fitzgerald, 2004).

Besides, some scholars were critical about transnationalism as it was primarily based upon case studies concerning Latin America in connection to the United States. As this was considered to be different from other continents and migrants, the scope of transnationalism was too slim, and therefore less robust (Dahinden, 2005).

Also, by reducing the importance of nation states, some transnational migration scholars seem to focus too much on the social dynamics of transnational migrants’ lives and tend to miss the link to the spatial dimension of their social networks. Contrary to that, it is argued here that social networks and everyday lives are always embedded socio-spatially and that the geographic attributes of the local environment will always affect transnational migrants.

1.2.3. Transnationalism Defined

There are different approaches in the field of transnationalism connected to socio-spatial activities. It is important to define the concept and include these different views in order to locate the perspective which is used in this thesis.

Transnationalism includes social activities of migrants which span different nation states. These could entail the sending of remittances, contact via telephone and other socio-political activities. With the rapid development of the internet and the resulting world-wide communications, scholars started to emphasise the effect of these developments on the social and business links a migrant could have. The sociologist Thomas Faist (2000: 189) suggested an insightful and straightforward definition on the matter, when writing ‘[w]hether we talk of transnational social spaces, transnational social field, transnationalism, or transnational social formations in international migration systems, we usually refer to sustained ties of persons, networks and organisations across the borders across multiple nation states, ranging from little to highly institutionalized forms.’ In this definition he includes every single tie which is sustained across borders. In other words, this description entails single migrants as well as large institutions or nation states. In other words, he includes both an agency and a structuralist narrative. In the field of transnationalism, the agency and institutional narrative are conceptually distinguished by the use of the terms transnationalism from

(9)

8 ‘above’ and ‘below’. It is a distinction made to delineate the different spheres of power concerning on the one hand the individual migrant and on the other hand the domination of capital and states. Transnationalism from above focusses on the structural narrative of globalisation and new processes in which power and domination come to the fore. It primarily looks at how international capital is shaping the world and how nation states and transnational institutions try to keep hold of that capital (Pries, 2001). It is concerned with transnational power struggles with regards to wealth and as a result, focusses on the spatial configuration of power and control (Friedmann, 1986). Within this field, it is argued that individual people are more or less subject to and are therefore structured by this transnational power struggle (Marcuse & Van Kempen, 2000). In this light, the global cities paradigm (Sassen, 2001) primarily uses a structuralist perspective on the world.

Scholars who use transnationalism from below see transnationalism as a grassroots movement (Smith & Guarnizo, 1998; Portes, 2001; Kennedy, 2004). They tend to focus on individual migrants or migrant groups and look into the extent to which they affect their socio-spatial environments and build up new transnational networks. They are considered as agents of change, able to reshape urban structures and move institutions to develop new policies (Glick Schiller & Caglar, 2011). Other than from above, they see individual agents as important explanatory factors in the transnational discourse. In line with Guarnizo, Portes and Haller (2003), Glick Schiller and Fouron (1999: 344) – considered here as scholars of this particular strain of transnationalism – state that ‘transnational migration is a pattern of migration in which persons, although they move across international borders, settle, and establish relations in a new state, maintain ongoing social connections with the polity from which they originated. In transnational migration people literally live their lives across international borders. Such persons are best identified as ‘transmigrants’.’

The geographer Smith (2005: 237) agrees with Glick Schiller and Fouron but rather than solely focussing on the social dynamics, he also tries to emphasise the spatial dynamics around transnationalism by looking into the urban articulation of transnationalism: ‘[t]he study of transnational urbanism (…) underlines the socio-spatial processes by which social actors and their networks forge the translocal connections and create the translocalities that increasingly sustain new modes of being-in-the-world.’ In his understanding, transnational migrants that maintain transnational ties develop new ways of being, that are predominantly constituted and continually influenced by its transnational embeddedness (Vertovec, 2004). In other words, he emphasises the interaction of transmigrants with the local environment and argues that these ‘transmigrants’ actually may change the ‘local’ into ‘translocal’, a social space that is significantly influenced by its transnational ties (Roger, 2005). Smith provides an example of such a translocal place such as a Mexican village, developing rapidly after getting a vast amount of remittances from family members that moved to the United States (Smith, 2005). His research signifies the importance of focussing on individual migrants, which are able to change their direct environment. Hence, he is able to link up the social dynamics of the lives of transnational migrants with the spatial dynamics of the urban environment.

One scholar who includes the urban environment in her analysis on individual migrants’ experience is Kate Walsh (2012). In her research on British transnational migrants in Dubai, she focusses on geographies of emotion. As she is interested in the perceptions of individual (British) migrants, she recognises the migrant as an individual agent with genuine emotions and experiences connected to the identification processes of the subjects in a transnational setting. As the unit of analysis is the individual migrant and his/her emotions, Walsh is able to outline the struggles and benefits of living in between two culturally very different worlds. In doing so, she emphasises ‘the

(10)

9 spatial and temporal constitution of British migrant identities’ (Walsh, 2010: 57) by arguing that the emotions are mostly shaped by the time one stays in a particular place and the space one inhabits (enclave residence). The specificity of the British migrants is that they recognise a certain ‘collective status’ in Dubai.

Other scholars who emphasise the importance of the urban environment are Levitt and Glick Schiller (2003). In their theorisation of transnational communities, they suggest to use ‘a social field approach’. They define (2004: 1009) a ‘social field’ as ‘a set of multiple interlocking networks of social relationships through which ideas, practices, and resources are unequally exchanged, organized, and transformed.’ With this approach, they argue against the prevalence of case studies which focus solely on one ethnic minority group, which, they mention, would obscure the social reality of a migrants’ interconnectivity to a diversity of people in the city. In such an approach the research could for example take the city as the geographic focal point and investigate with whom migrants interact and with whom and with what they identify themselves. They define the two aspects of interaction and identification as ‘ways of being’ and ‘ways of belonging’ (Levitt & Glick Schiller 2004: 1010). They both entail socio-spatial practices of migrants.

The first concept addresses the interaction migrants have with their ‘social field’. It concerns itself only with the so-called tangible parts of the ‘social field’ which are the socio-spatial activities a migrant undertakes. For example, the social connections one maintains with the direct environment or the organisations and institutions one is involved with. Who are one’s friends, or one’s business partners, or where does one hang out and with whom? In which company does one work, and which communities is one part of?

The second concept focusses also on these practices but explicitly looks at the identification processes connected to these socio-spatial practices. Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004: 1010) state that this concept ‘refers to practices that signal or enact an identity which demonstrates a conscious connection to a particular group.’ Although less tangible as ways of being, the two researchers do try to operationalize it in a measurable way by stating: ‘These actions are not symbolic but concrete, visible actions that mark belonging (p 1010).’ An example of these symbols could be a picture on the wall of the country of origin or the host society or a statement of a migrant that he is part of a certain ethnic or socio-economic group. It is this action connected to the awareness of the symbol as a kind of identification which signifies one’s ways of belonging. ‘If individuals engage in social relations and practices that cross [nation state] borders as a regular feature of everyday life, then they exhibit a transnational way of being. When people explicitly recognize this and highlight the transnational elements of who they are, then they are also expressing a transnational way of belonging,’ state Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004: 1012). In other words, socio-spatial practices that are part of ways of being only become ways of belonging when the migrant is explicitly referring to their identity connected to these socio-spatial practices.

Ways of being and ways of belonging are valuable concepts which link up to the main question: to what extent do highly skilled migrants engage with the host society while simultaneously living a transnational life? The main focus within this strand of research is how the everyday lives of migrants are affected by their migration and to what extent their socio-spatial environment affects them. However, the two concepts ways of being and belonging are still very broad with regards to the highly skilled migrant. It also emphasises the lives of people that stay behind. But as this research actually focusses on the migrants that do move, it is more relevant to delve deeper into certain categorisations of the highly skilled migrants.

(11)

10 Categorisations of highly skilled migrants that delve more deeply into the characteristics of this research group are given by sociologists Brenda, Yeoh and Willis (2005). Like Levitt and Glick Schiller, they have a similar focus on social networks of interaction and look into so-called contact zones. They define these zones as ‘an attempt to invoke the spatial and temporal copresence of subjects previously separated by geographic and historical disjunctures, and whose trajectories now intersect (271).’ Brenda, Yeoh and Willis focus on Singaporean and British transnational elites in China (including Hong Kong) and the extent to which they interact with locals and the effect this has on their insertion within the host society. They analyse the qualitative features of these contact zones by looking into the permanence and the psychological attachment of transmigrants involved. Even though they use an agency narrative, they acknowledge that the way these migrants interact is dependent on ethnicity, class and gender. They make a distinction between three different groups of expatriates: culturalist, colonialist, and imperialist. The former is characterised by transmigrants that find the cultural challenge fascinating and make the step towards a new environment because of its exotic appeal. The colonialist can be defined as a person who enjoys the sameness in the country/city of arrival, which sometimes articulates itself in ‘social exclusivity’. Hence, there is not much social interaction between expatriates and locals. The latter group is characterised by transmigrants that look at the city of arrival as being part of the old colonies on the one hand and on the other as exploiters of their own national identity. Brenda, Yeoh and Willis predominantly use the second group with regards to English people living in Hong Kong and the latter to describe Singaporean migrants who brand their own identity to ensure business links. Although they distinguish between three different groups, the latter two seem to overlap to a huge extent. Colonialists as well as imperialists are seen as migrants that ‘flock together’ in the city of arrival, the only difference being that the latter group has a strong perception of their own superiority with regard to locals, which the colonialists more or less lack. In this conceptualisation, every imperialist is a colonialist, but not every colonialist is an imperialist. Hence, it makes more sense to merge these two groups into one that can be used in this research. Also, the terminology used by Brenda, Yeoh and Willis, is strongly connected to the history of European domination, which could make sense in the context of Hong Kong, but is obviously not in the case of Amsterdam. So a new terminology is necessary to actually link up to the context of both Hong Kong and Amsterdam. In both groups the transmigrants’ segregation from the host society is the most prudent characteristic, whereby their indifference shapes their lack of interaction. Therefore, this newly merged group is identified as the group of indifference. The group of culturalists will be termed group of interested. This new terminology is more neutral and is less imbued with connotations regarding a cultural deterministic understanding dating from the era of colonialism and imperialism (Wallerstein, 2004).

Brenda, Yeoh and Willis make a strong point in contesting the view of high-skilled migrants as being hyper-mobile to solely support their career trajectory rather than looking at them as embodiments of their own culture, ethnicity and gender. Also they contest the view that high-skilled migrants would be unaffected by social space and locality.

With regards to the broad conceptualisation by Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004), the categorisation based on the work of Brenda, Yeoh and Willis (2005) emphasises the relationship between the migrant and locality in more specific terms. It not only looks into the transnational life of the migrant but also looks at the individual perceptions of the migrant towards his/her local life. Bringing these two different conceptualisations - the one broad, the other more specific - together in one study, could bring new insights into the interconnectedness between the transnational migrant and his/her local environment.

(12)

11 The question then becomes whether a migrants’ engagement with the socio-spatial environment of Amsterdam and Hong Kong is rather a product of a migrants’ own personal characteristics or the socio-spatial context. In other words, why do migrants become part of either the group of interested or indifference? Are highly skilled migrants indifferent due to personal traits or is the context of either Hong Kong or Amsterdam shaping their embeddedness within the locality? Or is it a rather a complex combination of the two? It could very well be that Hong Kong and Amsterdam are attracting different segments of skilled migrants in the first place, resulting in either more indifferent or interested transnational migrants. Looking into these questions gives insight into the reasons why migrants come to the city, what migrants find important in a city and to what extent they interact with locals in the city. Hence, to be able to answer the questions above, one needs to look into the context of global cities Hong Kong and Amsterdam, and the personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants.

1.2.4. In the Context of Global cities

Highly skilled migrants gravitate towards cities that are internationally well connected, and where many headquarters of multinational corporations are situated. These cities tend to have a high standard when it comes to infrastructure, liveability, research, economic growth, and technology (Beaverstock & Hall, 2012). Besides, the financial sector is well-integrated into the urban economy, and there is evidence that suggests that the inclusion of a socio-cultural diversity is desirable (Baumann, 2009). These urban aspects symptomise the economic strength of the respective urban areas, and their international competitiveness (Florida, 2002; EIUL, 2012).

These sociocultural and economic aspects are highly significant in attracting the global elite (i.e. highly skilled migrant), and are central in the global city research field (Sassen, 2001). Global cities are centres of command and control, and are strongly connected to the presence of a whole array of advanced producer services. Due to their inclusion of many headquarters - and branches - of major transnational companies, these cities attract the highly skilled. This has socio-demographic consequences, as the urban population develops itself into one with a significant share of highly skilled, served by a huge base of low skilled people. Taking New York, London and Tokyo as prime examples, Sassen (2001) describes this phenomenon as an ‘hourglass’ structure of the population. The middle class is losing out in this respect, whereas the lifestyle of the social upper tier - consisting of highly skilled - is facilitated by the urban economies’ inclusion of major companies, combined with the prevalence of a relatively large social lower-tier population, primarily consisting of low-skilled people.

Many research companies tried to provide a ranking of global cities. These are articulated in global cities indices of which a few are shown below. These indices can serve as a tool to indicate to what extent cities such as Amsterdam and Hong Kong are comparable in terms of their international competitiveness, and hence, are attractive to highly skilled migrants.

Considering the wide variety of indices, both Amsterdam and Hong Kong are highly appreciated in terms of their global and regional influence, although the latter is considered to be more influential, more competitive, and better integrated in the global economy than the former. In the 1998 index of the Globalization and World Cities Network (Beaverstock et al., 1999) - an index solely focussing on business - Hong Kong is recognised as an ‘Alpha+’ city, whereas Amsterdam is labelled to be ‘Alpha’. An Alpha+ city is considered to be almost as important as the prime cities such

(13)

12 as London and New York, whereas an Alpha city serves as a somewhat smaller node to link the global economy to major economic regions. So, Hong Kong complements the most significant cities, whereas Amsterdam is a highly significant node in linking up its hinterland (i.e. Western Europe) with the global economy. Confirming this notion, in the Global Cities Index 2012 (Kearney, 2012) - measuring a cities’ influence on the world regarding business activity, information exchange, and cultural experience - Hong Kong ranks fifth, whereas Amsterdam is to be found on the 26st place. Important to note here is the shared commonality in terms of business activity: both cities have a significant role in attracting headquarters of transnational companies. When it comes to cultural experience – measured in numbers of museums, performing-art venues and number of international travellers – Amsterdam outplays its Asian counterpart.

The only index where Amsterdam ranks higher (#7) than Hong Kong (#11) is the Power City Index 2013 configured by The More Memorial Foundation (2013). The main reason Amsterdam is outranking Hong Kong is due to the emphasis on liveability, culture and environment. Amsterdam scores higher on all these attributes, as it has a lower cost of living, enjoys a better working environment (liveability), has more museums, and many other cultural institutions (cultural), and has less pollution (environment). Hence, Hong Kong’s higher score on economy as compared to Amsterdam does not compensate these aspects.

Perhaps the most relevant index regarding the comparison of highly skilled migrants in Amsterdam and Hong Kong is the one which is stressing the attractiveness of these cities with regards to the global elite. This would be the Global Cities Competitiveness Index, assembled by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIUL, 2012). Among other attributes such as economic strength and cultural life, this index focusses primarily on the competitiveness of cities to attract the highly talented. Regarding this, both cities are in the top tier of cities that are able to attract talent: Amsterdam is ranked 17th, Hong Kong 4th. Again, the difference is largely due to the fact that Hong Kong has a larger financial sector as compared to Amsterdam. More importantly, looking at the aspect of ‘global appeal’ – measuring the international attractiveness of cities – Hong Kong and Amsterdam rank 6th and 7th respectively, showing that these two cities are both highly competitive in attracting the highly skilled.

Overall, then, Amsterdam and Hong Kong both can be considered to be global cities. They both outplay many other urban areas when it comes to infrastructure, and they include many headquarters of global firms. Also, the financial sector covers a significant share of their urban economy. All these aspects strengthen the notion that they are both very well able to attract the highly skilled migrant.

Amsterdam and Hong Kong and the highly skilled migrant

Getting exact numbers of the highly skilled in general seems to be highly problematic. Many statistical institutions claim that their ‘transient’ behaviour and their temporary stay are to blame (Expatcenter, 2012; HCSD, 2012; Kennedy, 2012). However, there is evidence which suggests that both cities enjoy an influx of highly skilled migrants. Currently, around 83,000 Western migrants aged in between 15 and 64 years live in Amsterdam (Stadsregio Amsterdam, 2011; O+S, 2013). This means that roughly 1 out of 10 of the Amsterdam population is a Western migrant. So, this is a significant part of the Amsterdam population, but does not say that much yet about the highly skilled. In general, Amsterdam has a highly educated population as compared to the Netherlands as a whole: 38 per cent as compared to 24 per cent (O+S, 2012a). Based on statistics of Onderzoek and Statistiek, it is safe to say that a large share of Amsterdam migrants is highly educated. Of the Western migrants

(14)

13 arriving in Amsterdam, 29 per cent has a college degree (O+S, 2012b) and, in addition another 16 per cent has a higher professional educational institution. This would imply that around 24,000 Western migrants are considered to be highly skilled. When looking at the influx of migrants The Amsterdam Expatcenter indicates that they welcome over 6,000 highly skilled expatriates on a yearly basis (Expatcenter, 2012). This includes partners and children, but as these are exclusively the highly skilled that make use of this publicly funded institution, it is not unimaginable that this figure of 6,000 is just a part of the whole highly skilled migrant population in Amsterdam coming in every year.

In Hong Kong, exact figures are not known either. Based on the Hong Kong Census of 2011 (HCSD, 2012), the population consists primarily of people with Chinese ethnicity (93 per cent or 6.62 million). This means that only 450,000 people are non-Chinese, of which the largest share is reserved to Filipinos and Indonesian (predominantly domestic workers). Only 12.2 per cent of the 450,000 is ‘White’, which means that only 54,450 are Western. The British, Americans and Australian form the largest groups (22,000, 13,000 and 12,000 respectively). These figures all include children, partners and elderly. More importantly it does not differentiate in terms of education, although there are signs that a significant share of Western immigrants received higher educated: almost 70 per cent with tertiary education, as compared to 8 per cent of other immigrants (Kennedy, 2012). Given this statistic, the number of highly skilled migrants in Hong Kong would lay around 38,000. Again, these figures serve merely as an indication of how large the group of expats is. However, what is important is that the group of expat workers is still rising, as is epitomised by the immigration of British expats, which increased by 45 per cent in between 2011 and 2012 (IMMD, 2012). With regards to both cities, it is striking to see that the absolute numbers do not differ that much, whereas relatively speaking, Amsterdam outplays Hong Kong.

With regards to socioeconomic, political and cultural aspects of global cities, Amsterdam and Hong Kong show several differences. Hong Kong is considered to be more advanced than Amsterdam in terms of absolute economic figures, whereas Amsterdam has a wider diversity regarding cultural amenities, and is recognised to be more liveable than Hong Kong. As a consequence, it may very well be that different segments of migrants are attracted to these cities. Amsterdam expats may be motivated by the fact that the city includes many cultural institutions, which may result in them knowing more about the city and having more interaction with locals. For instance, in research done by Sako Musterd and Alan Murie (2010), cultural aspects of the historical cityscape were mentioned as being one of the main drivers of the city’s image. Besides, migrants were motivated to move to the Netherlands because of the pleasant working environment and the liveable city. In other words, these aspects could make these transmigrants part of the group of interested.

Whereas in Hong Kong, expats may be more involved in the financial sector and live a less cultural life: being part of the group of indifference. It may also affect the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants on another level. The socio-spatial context may affect the attitudes of the transnational migrants during their stay. Regarding their socio-cultural differences, their score on liveability, and the presence of cultural industries, Hong Kong and Amsterdam might either stimulate or hamper interest or indifference among highly skilled migrants. It is to be seen to what extent the context affects the individual migrants’ attitude towards developing a local social network in the city.

(15)

14

1.2.5. Personal characteristics: Highly skilled migrant

Besides the socio-spatial context of Amsterdam and Hong Kong, the personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants might affect the way they interact with the local environment. Highly skilled migrants – in this thesis interchangeably referred to as ‘talent migrant’ (Ewers, 2007) ‘transnational migrant’, ‘transmigrant’ or ‘expat’ (Beaverstock, 2011), is the upper segment of migrants and of special interest because they allegedly have fewer constraints and more opportunities to move beyond transnational borders than lower skilled migrants (Beaverstock, 2011). Supposedly, this could influences their transnational movement (Ley, 2004), which then could influence their ways of being and belonging (Glick Schiller and Levitt, 2004) and their interest in or indifference towards Hong Kong and Amsterdam (Brenda, Yeoh and Willis, 2005). Regarding the extent to which personal characteristics affect the interest and indifference of highly skilled migrants, it is important to outline the existing definitions within the field of migration studies.

Findlay et al. (1996) use the term skilled expatriates and describe it from a transnationalism from above perspective. Expatriates are seen as objects that are shaped by the production of space which is largely driven by transnational companies and institutions. Companies attract them as they need specific skills in their transnational branches. As they already have the expertise within their company, companies rather transfer this human capital than invest in locals. In their research on Hong Kong they refer to expatriates as ‘non-Chinese […] people holding foreign passports’ (51). This definition does not only include Western migrants, but for instance also the large base of Filipino domestic workers. To overcome this, they define ‘skilled’ as being an expert in a certain field, filling up the gaps of what companies need. In their definition, they leave little room for the agency part of transnationalism (transnationalism from below) and rather see structures as the driving force of transnationalism (transnationalism from above).

Two scholars who are more into a ‘transnationalism from below’ approach are Khalid Koser and John Salt (1997). They see highly-skilled migrants as being strongly connected to the notion and emergence of temporary migration. They define them as ‘[p]eople who have a tertiary educational qualification or its equivalent and have a certain level of expertise’ (287). The sociologist Steven Vertovec agrees with this definition by stating (2002: 2) ‘skilled migrants – most broadly defined as those in possession of a tertiary degree or extensive specialized work experience – include architects, accountants and financial experts, engineers, technicians, researchers, scientists, chefs, teachers, health professionals, and – increasingly – specialists in information technology.’ In their definition, they leave professional sportsmen - that are able to move transnationally according to their skills in a particular sport (Bruce & Wheaton, 2009). In both definitions however, being highly-skilled is either (or both) skill-based as well as qualification based. Vertovec as well as Koser and Salt state that these migrants tend to stay on short-term contracts, and are predominantly characterised by their lack of intention to settle in the destination country. Other scholars subscribe to this characterisation of highly skilled migrants as being ‘highly-mobile, highly paid and highly skilled’ (Walsh, 2012) and living a transient life (Brenda, Yeoh & Willis, 2005).

Jonathan Beaverstock (2005:246), a leading scholar in the field of highly skilled migrants, complements this scientific discussion by stating the following: ‘Transnational corporations [create] new patterns of contemporary international migration, [with a] preference for frequent short-term/non-permanent circulation over long-term/permanent migration. [In effect, this] has produced a ‘transient’ pattern of migration and established a highly-mobile, cross-border transnational managerial elite.’ In his statement, it seems he is clearly using an approach that emphasises the

(16)

15 structural role corporations have in shaping novel ways of living such as being highly mobile. In other words, he is using a ‘transnationalism from above’ perspective. However, he does recognise the transnational managerial elite as central actors that shape the transnational interconnectedness of global cities. As a result, he concludes that ‘the traditional expatriate is disappearing, to be replaced by the ‘nomadic worker’ whose ultimate international mobility meets the challenges of international business in globalisation (Beaverstock, 2005: 246).’

Among others, Beaverstock (2005; 2011) outlines important similarities among the highly skilled migrant. Apart from them staying predominantly short-term in the city of destination, transmigrants are able to move between cities with little personal dislocation (apart from feelings of loneliness and social isolation as part of their movement). They are able to adapt easily to their new habitat in terms of finding a place to stay (many times provided by the company that hired them), developing a social network and having a job (as that is part of their movement in the first place). These aspects make them a politically, socially and economically acceptable – and highly appreciated – migrant group. Given these reasons, Beaverstock sometimes refers to this group of migrants as the ‘invisible’ group; a group that does not seem to affect the local socio-political life and political upheaval as much as the lower segments of migrants.

Interestingly however, in terms of social networks and living in world cities, migrants seem to be ‘invariably disembedded from the local, [maintaining] close-knit relationships with very-similarly educated persons of the same or other ‘Western’ nationalities (Beaverstock, 2011: 712).’ This means that their social networks primarily revolve around the workplace, whereby expatriate co-workers become close friends. The notion of them being disembedded also seems to be spatially manifested. Highly skilled migrants come together in specific meeting places such as the financial district’s milieu of wine bars, public houses, restaurants, gyms, clubs, conference centres, and hotels. Beaverstock refers to these places as translocalities or transnational social spaces: local places that are integrated and part of the local-global existence of transnational (social) networks as skilled migrants from different countries on the globe are interacting with each other. In his research on New York (2005), he observes that expatriates generally do gravitate towards affluent neighbourhoods such as Upper East or West Side (Manhattan). On the one hand, this is a consequence of their high wages, as well as their motivation to live near the city centre and enjoy the ‘nicer’ neighbourhoods. This point is subscribed by many other research findings, as for instance Walsh (2012) describes the gated communities in Dubai where English migrants live. However, what is different and is a consequence of the locality of Dubai is that these English migrants see their ‘whiteness’ as of huge significance with regards to social interaction. Another example, is the expat bubble of Western expatriates in Hong Kong as Jacques (2012), Forrest et al. (2004) and Brenda, Yeoh & Willis (2005) describe, and where ‘being white’ is significant in terms of social interaction with locals (Jacques, 2012). In Amsterdam, highly skilled migrants predominantly are coming for a job in Amsterdam, or via their personal network (Musterd & Murie, 2010). While being in Amsterdam they find it difficult to integrate in the city, and getting in contact with local (Dutch) people (Expatcenter Amsterdam, 2013). Highly skilled migrants appreciate the cultural life of Amsterdam in particular (Musterd & Murie, 2010; Expatcenter Amsterdam, 2013). These differences in experience of highly skilled migrants show the influence of locality.

So, on the one hand, they adapt easily to the city in terms of housing, work and developing a social network, but they are simultaneously disembedded in social terms by their lack of connection to local people and in spatial terms by gravitating towards gated communities or areas in the city that are labelled as ‘expat bubbles’. In other words, they seem to adapt to a more expatriate world

(17)

16 within the city, rather than actually embedding with the local, by not connecting to local people and, as Beaverstock states, living as expats in urban enclaves.

Connected to their disembeddedness of the local, Beaverstock emphasises that highly skilled migrants are in marked contrast strongly embedded within transnational social networks, maintaining strong social ties to global cities around the world. The lives of skilled expatriates therefore, seem to be highly spatialised in so-called transnational social spaces of the city, where skilled expatriates meet, while simultaneously linking up to a wider network that spans globally.

Personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants such as staying temporary, being highly mobile, moving for career prospects, being socially embedded within a Western community, and being spatially embedded within certain expat enclaves may very well affect the extent to which they are interested in or indifferent towards Hong Kong and Amsterdam. At first glance, these personal characteristics predominantly point towards the finding that highly skilled migrants are rather indifferent than interested. However, it remains to be seen to what extent the personal characteristics of these migrants are interdependent with the socio-spatial context of Amsterdam and Hong Kong.

1.3. Aim of Research

This research focusses on the individual perceptions and experiences of highly skilled migrants in Hong Kong and Amsterdam. In the light of transnationalism, the context of global cities and the personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants, it is important to emphasise the way highly skilled migrants relate themselves to the local environment. To what extent are they involved in local social networks and invest in a process of integration in the city? Or to what extent are they disembedded from the socio-spatial locality of Hong Kong and Amsterdam? And what is influencing their (dis)integration? Are either the personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants crucial in understanding their interest or indifference or should the focus be on the socio-spatial context of the global city? The main question this research wants to delve into is: To what extent are personal characteristics and the context of Amsterdam and Hong Kong affecting the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants?

Firstly, to answer this question, it is essential to consider the influence of Amsterdam and Hong Kong in attracting particular segment of highly skilled migrants (subquestion 1). Secondly, it is important to get insight into the personal characteristics of the individual migrant to identify his/her interest in or indifference to the city (subquestion 2). Thirdly, it is essential to delve into the extent to which the urban context is affecting the interest or indifference of the highly skilled migrant during their stay (subquestion 3).

1. What is the influence of the socio-spatial context of Hong Kong and Amsterdam in attracting either interested or indifferent highly skilled migrants?

This question looks into the contextual influence on the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants. It focusses on the motivations of the talent migrants to move to Amsterdam or Hong Kong. Based on the global city literature and the characteristics of Hong Kong and that of Amsterdam, it is expected that Hong Kong will attract more indifferent migrants than interested migrants. In this city, most migrants will be attracted by the financial sector and relate their

(18)

17 movement to their job career. In this sense, they show similarities with the New York migrants in the research of Beaverstock (2011).

Amsterdam, however, will attract more interested and less indifferent migrants. It is expected that migrants will be attracted by Amsterdam’s cultural industries and the high quality of life. In comparison to Hong Kong, they will relate their movement to their job career to a lesser extent. Highly skilled migrants coming to Amsterdam will be making this choice more for the city itself, in combination with career possibilities.

2. What is the influence of personal characteristics on the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants?

This sub question delves into personal characteristics as the explanatory factor of the personal motivations of migrants with regards to getting involved in a local social network (interested) or be disembedded from the local (indifferent). In contrast to sub question 1, this question analyses the way migrants set up and maintain their social network in Hong Kong and Amsterdam.

Migrants that primarily move for their career trajectory, will be rather indifferent, than be interested. They do not make a choice for the city in particular, but rather for the job. Where the job is located is of less importance to them. Consequently, they will not be inclined in investing in a local social network. They will belong to the group of indifference. Other than motivation, the occupation of highly skilled migrants might affect their ways of being and belonging as well. It is expected that expats that have occupations that are more connected to the city (e.g. cultural industries, local entrepreneurs etcetera), may be more interested in the city, than expats that do not have such an locally specific occupation (e.g. finance, consultancy etcetera.)

Migrants that move not solely for the job, but also for the city, will be more inclined to integrate into the local environment and will therefore belong to the group of interested.

3. What is the influence of context of Hong Kong and Amsterdam on the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants during their stay?

The last sub question considers the socio-spatial context of Amsterdam and Hong Kong as being explanatory factors with regards to the interest or indifference of highly skilled migrants. In contrast with the first sub question, this question looks at the influence of context during a migrants’ stay in the city.

Western highly skilled migrants who are interested will have a harder time to stay interested in Hong Kong as compared to Amsterdam. Due to the cultural distance between Chinese and Westerners, the surrounding environment will be harder to adapt to than is the case in Amsterdam.

Western highly skilled migrants will find less difficulty in being interested in Amsterdam. They will experience less cultural distance with locals. Also, Amsterdam is known for its wide presence of cultural industries, which is rather welcoming to the interested migrants.

(19)

18

1.4. Social and Scientific relevance

The relevance of this research can be separated into two different parts: social and scientific relevance. This research is socially relevant as highly skilled migrants are more and more recognised as significant contributors to a country’s or a city’s global competitiveness (Sklair, 2002; Ewers, 2007). As a result, many national and urban governments gear their migration policies to recruit the highly skilled (OECD, 2013). This makes them a group of migrants that is economically appreciated and politically accepted. The question however is how highly skilled migrants relate themselves to the city they live in and to what extent they actually try to integrate in the city. What kind of connection do highly skilled migrants have with the locality they live in (here Amsterdam and Hong Kong)? As most migration studies focus on the less affluent migrants and their supposed lack of integration (Baumann, 2009), this research diverts the focus towards the more affluent migrants and therefore problematises the supposed ‘economically appreciated and politically accepted’ form of migration. It tries to do so, by delving into the highly skilled migrants’ personal narratives.

In terms of scientific relevance, highly skilled migrants are mainly discussed from a macro-level perspective, resulting in notions such as them being footloose and unaffected by place. As the research field of transnationalism is relatively young, this research wants to divert the focus from the macro-level towards the micro-level. In other words, this research can contribute to the research field emphasising the individual perceptions of the highly migrant while connecting it to notion of space. As a result, this research focusses on the qualitative characteristics of a migrants’ mobility, rather than the available quantitative research findings. Especially with regards to Amsterdam and Hong Kong, where there is almost a lack of qualitative research on the personal experiences and narratives of highly skilled migrants, in comparison to the rich data on the low skilled migrants within these cities.

(20)

(21)

20

2. Methods

2.1. Research Design

This research is a comparative

case study. It compares two global cities: Amsterdam and Hong Kong. With regards to Gerring’s (2008) typology, the research design used here is the spatial comparison. It focusses on crucial differences in spatial terms regarding expat

experiences between

Amsterdam and Hong Kong. How does the socio-spatial context of the two cities affect the interest or indifference of

highly skilled migrants? As is mentioned in the propositions, both cases are spatially different and might have a different effect on the units of analysis (highly skilled migrants). Besides that, it takes into account the personal characteristics of highly skilled migrants as an explanatory factor in the interest or indifference of the research group.

2.2. Case selection

Amsterdam and Hong Kong are both considered to be global cities (Sassen, 2001; Beaverstock et al., 2012; TMMF, 2013). This means that both cities are important nodes in the global economy. As a consequence, they attract many highly skilled migrants. These transnational migrants are attracted by headquarters of transnational corporations, highly developed infrastructure and good urban facilities (TMMF, 2013).

The interest for this comparison stems from their particular socio-spatial context. This so-called ‘locality’ might affect the individual experiences of highly skilled migrants in two ways. In the first place, the city itself might attract a different kind of migrant, as the city has different things to offer. Whereas Hong Kong is a prime destination for bankers (Jacques, 2012), Amsterdam has more to offer in terms of cultural industries (O+S Amsterdam, 2012b). Secondly, the environment itself might either stimulate or block highly skilled migrants’ intention to be either interested or indifferent. In this case, Amsterdam’s cultural industry might stimulate the group of interested, whereas Hong Kong’s financial centre might stimulate the group of indifference. The choice for Amsterdam and Hong Kong is therefore a choice for a socio-spatial approach.

observation

cases

population

Western Highly Skilled Migrants Hong Kong In-depth interviews Participatory observation Amsterdam In-depth interviews Participatory observation

(22)

21

2.3. Operationalising concepts

In order to get a better understanding of the relationship between the locality of the city and the individual experiences of highly skilled migrants, the following concepts are used: ways of being and belonging (Levitt and Glick Schiller, 2004), group of interested and group of indifference (Brenda, Yeoh and Willis, 2005). The way these concepts are understood in this particular research is discussed below.

Table 2.1. Illustration of most important aspects of Group of Interested and Indifference

2.3.1. Group of interested

The group of interested is based on the categorisation of Brenda, Yeoh and Willis (2005), named culturalists. Highly skilled migrants are considered to be part of this group when they see their new environment as a new cultural challenge to explore. Migrants are interested in the new cultural environment and stress that interest by interacting with locals. In terms of ways of being, highly skilled migrants are part of this group when they maintain social connections with locals, learn the local language, integrate certain local lifestyle choices in their lives, and want to live in a neighbourhood where locals live. In terms of ways of belonging, highly skilled migrants stress the difference between their own interest in the local culture and the indifference of other highly skilled migrants. In this way, they signify their belonging to the group of highly skilled migrants, but simultaneously show their interest into a more local lifestyle. Also, the migrants’ intention to stay in either Amsterdam or Hong Kong signifies one’s interest or indifference. If the migrant intends to stay, he is part of the group of interested. Besides, the migrants that are very interested might even align their identity with locals in terms of lifestyle, although this is not necessary.

2.3.2. Group of indifference

As is stated in the former chapter, the group of indifference is based on the categorisations of Brenda, Yeoh and Willis (2005), called the colonialists and imperialists. They are defined by highly skilled migrants that are not interacting with locals. They stress the large differences of locals and themselves and recognise these differences as barriers for social interaction. In terms of ways of being, they do not maintain social connections with locals (or to a rather small extent). Their living space is defined as an area where more expats reside or perhaps is even described as an ‘expat bubble’. In terms of ways of belonging, they stress their belonging to an expat community and their transnational social network and emphasise the large cultural differences between themselves and locals.

Group of Interested Group of Indifference Ways of being Social network of locals

Speaking/Learning local language Live among locals

Social network of Western expats No intention to learn language Live in expat enclaves

Ways of belonging Intention to stay

Contrast themselves with group of indifference

Transnationally connected

Intention to move

Indifferent about local culture Transnational life dominant

(23)

22

2.3.3. Ways of being and belonging

The concepts ways of being and belonging are constructed by Levitt and Glick Schiller (2004: 1010) and are closely related. Both concepts focus on the social connections a highly skilled migrant maintains as well as the socio-spatial practices one undertakes. Whereas ways of being describes these socio-spatial activities, ways of belonging looks at the connection between these socio-spatial activities and identity. When a respondent actively relates its activities to his/her identity, then this activity is part of his/her ways of belonging. If the activity is not defined as resembling his/her identity, the activity is part of his/her ways of being.

Questions that are asked in the interviews are: ‘with whom does one interact?’ ‘How would one describe one’s social connections: are these strong relationships or are they rather superficial?’ ‘With regards to working space, does the migrant interact with any co-worker or are most interactions with expatriate co-workers?’ ‘With whom does the expatriate interact during leisure time?’ ‘To what extent does the respondent stay in contact with people abroad?’ ‘Which social group(s) is one involved in?’ ‘Are these particular expatriate groups or are these intermingled with locals?’ ‘Do they, to their own understanding, differ from what Amsterdam or Hong Kong locals would do?’ And question that related to the socio-spatial practices: ‘Where does one live?’ ‘Where does one hang out?’ ‘What social activities is one practicing?’

To distinguish ways of being from ways of belonging, it is important to look at the reasons for particular socio-spatial practices of the highly skilled migrant. So, the socio-spatial practices of respondents are ways of being, but they only are part of ways of belonging when the respondent links his socio-spatial practices with his identity. Whereas ways of being is more descriptive, ways of belonging emphasises the reasons of socio-spatial practices articulated in one’s identity. [Table 2.1. shows the analytical framework of the concept and how respondents are clustered according to their personal narratives]

2.4. Choice of Methods

The explorative research is using an ethnographic approach. Ethnography literally means ‘writing culture’ (Baumann, 2009) and focusses on the social context of certain groups in a particular setting. It is especially suitable for an explorative research such as this one, as it leaves space for the respondents’ input without framing the major issues beforehand. With regards to this study, the ethnographic approach allows the researcher to delve into the individual experiences of highly skilled migrants to better grasp their subjectivities in a transnational setting. Consequently, two qualitative research methods are used: participatory observation and in-depth interviews.

Participatory observation is a method where the researcher participates with the social groups that it wants to study (Hoyle et al., 2002). As part of this methodology, I participated in the expatriate life in Hong Kong and Amsterdam. This data collection method enabled me to interact on a daily basis with highly skilled migrants and get acquainted with their everyday life issues and their lifestyle choices. In other words, it enabled me to get a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of their individual perceptions and views with regards to their life in Hong Kong and Amsterdam.

In-depth interviewing is a qualitative research method whereby the researcher may interview the respondent for a consecutive amount of time (Hoyle et al., 2002). Usually, the interviews that were conducted for this research took - on average - one and a half hour. The advantage of using this