The Temporary Migration Regime and Non-Integration Dynamics : Singapore’s Migrant Workers in (Post-)Pandemic Times — Keynote by Brenda Yeoh

Summary by Solène Brun, sociologist

Keynote by Brenda Yeoh, geogra­pher (National Univer­sity of Singapore)

Asia is a shif­ting kalei­do­scopic region with a long shared history of colo­nia­lism and post­co­lo­nial nation-buil­ding, charac­te­rized by immense socio-economic inequa­lity, deep-seated cultural diffe­rence and wide diver­gence in poli­tical regimes. As for inter­na­tional migra­tion, the conti­nent is the origin of 40 % of the world’s inter­na­tional migrants. Intra­re­gional migra­tion accounts for more than half of Asian migrants.

Large-scale labour migra­tion started in the 1970s when many Asian coun­tries were still in the process of nation-buil­ding. There­fore, Asian labour migra­tion system mini­mized chal­lenges to the fragile imagi­nary of the nation-state by ensu­ring to keep migra­tion tempo­rary. Most Asian recei­ving nation-states do not allow family reuni­fi­ca­tion or acqui­si­tion of citi­zen­ship for low-skilled migrants. Sending states, such as Philip­pines and Indo­nesia, also encou­rage tempo­ra­ri­ness and even­tual return of their citi­zens, in order to secure remit­tance flows.

« In the case of Singapore, where foreign workers on time-limited work contracts constitute 17% of the country’s population, workers are placed under constant surveillance. »

In order to make sense of the Singapore’s migrant workers’ expe­riences, it is useful to think of the spatial poli­tics of non-inte­gra­tion, that is the way in which spatial forma­tions feature the ephe­meral hold of tran­sient migrants on the city’s public space. In order to do this, the concep­tual focus must be put on what can be unders­tood as twin processes of encla­vi­sa­tion and enclo­sure. Encla­vi­sa­tion is the active spatial-temporal process by which tran­sient migrant popu­la­tions stake tempo­rary claims on the city’s public spaces to faci­li­tate migrant socia­lity and networ­king. The “weekend enclaves” or “migrant hot-spots” are an example of encla­vi­sa­tion. Enclo­sure refers to the construc­tion of borders (symbolic or mate­rial) that mark sepa­ra­tion and contain­ment of the migrant “other”, such as dormi­tory complexes, gated commu­ni­ties and confi­ne­ment camps.

In Singapore’s case, where foreign workers on time-limited work contracts consti­tute 17% of the country’s popu­la­tion, workers are placed under constant surveillance – spatial, physical, and even medical. The study of two groups of gendered tran­sient labour in Singa­pore (2013–2014) points to two sets of conjoined processes under­pin­ning the spatial poli­tics of non-inte­gra­tion in Singa­pore : a ground-driven encla­vi­sa­tion, through the forma­tion of weekend enclaves and gathe­ring grounds ; and state-driven enclo­sure, in the form of women workers’ confi­ne­ment to home-space.

For the male construc­tion workers, enclo­sure faci­li­tates care and secures compliance by segre­ga­ting and distan­cing migrant spaces, keeping migrants out of sight and under surveillance. For the women, spatial proxi­mity is unavoi­dable in enclosed home-spaces and gated commu­ni­ties and comes with close surveillance, both explicit and implicit.

Covid-19 not only trig­gered a new immo­bi­lity, but also tigh­tened surveillance of migrants. Ironi­cally, while the largely “unma­naged” weekend migrant enclaves were frowned upon as vectors of disease, it was the resul­ting confi­ne­ment to dormi­tory enclo­sure which hasten the spread of Covid-19.

Watch the entire keynote :