Dynamics of Rural Transformation and Urban Migration in North Africa: A Socio-Ethnographic Study of Immigrant Socialization in Morocco

Dynamics of Rural Transformation and Urban Migration in North Africa: A Socio-Ethnographic Study of Immigrant Socialization in Morocco | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Dynamics of Rural Transformation and Urban Migration in North Africa: A Socio-Ethnographic Study of Immigrant Socialization in Morocco Lahoussine Sousan This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Recent extreme weather events in the last winter after the Afcon_25, including the severe floods that affected several regions in Morocco, have once again highlighted the structural vulnerabilities of rural livelihoods and the pressures that continue to shape internal migration dynamics. Against this backdrop, rural–urban migrants in North Africa navigate complex processes of socialization within urban environments marked by structural inequality and symbolic hierarchies, yet empirical research on their everyday integration experiences remains limited. Drawing on socio-ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Agadir City (Morocco), this study examines how rural migrants negotiate belonging, identity, and participation in urban social life. Using in-depth qualitative interviews and reflexive field observations, the analysis adopts a relational framework informed by socialization, grounded theory, and Bourdieusian perspectives on capital and habitus. The findings demonstrate that migrants engage in both adaptive and preservative strategies to manage urban life. Adaptive strategies include selective network formation, behavioural flexibility, and the strategic use of urban anonymity, while preservative strategies involve maintaining strong ties to rural communities as sources of recognition and moral legitimacy. Although these strategies facilitate survival and continuity, they also contribute to fragmented integration and structured ambivalence. Migrants frequently experience restricted mobility, limited participation in public life, and forms of structural alienation rooted in precarious labour conditions and unequal access to urban resources. The study argues that migrant integration should be understood as a negotiated and spatially contingent process rather than a linear transition. Addressing structural barriers to participation is essential for fostering inclusive urban environments in contexts of rapid social transformation. Morocco Rural–urban migration Socialization Urban integration Symbolic power Labour Quality of life Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Introduction In the context of current global developments, migration and social integration have emerged as inevitable and multifaceted phenomena (Barriga, 2013 ; IOM, 2018) that has long occupied a central place within the tradition of social sciences, attracting sustained scholarly attention since the early development of sociological thought (Burgess, 1925 ; Park, 1928 ; Petersen, 1958 ). The study of migration inevitably leads back to the earliest phases of human history, where population movements constituted a fundamental mechanism of social transformation (Greenwood & Hunt, 2003 ; Manning& Trimmer, 2020 ; Brettell & Hollifield, 2022 ). From the prehistoric dispersal of early hominins out of Africa to contemporary global migration flows, human mobility has consistently reshaped social structures, economic systems, and cultural configurations (Bellwood, 2015 ; Castles, de Haas, & Miller, 2013 ). Migration, as both a historical constant and a modern social phenomenon, cannot be reduced to mere population movement (Idemudia Boehnke, 2020; Peraldi, 2013 ; Perrot, 2017 ). Rather, it represents a complex social process embedded in relations of power, economic inequality, and cultural negotiation. As Brettell and Hollifield ( 2022 ) argue, migration should be understood as a multidimensional process shaped by political, economic, and social forces operating at local, national, and global levels. Historically, migration has evolved through distinct phases. In pre-modern societies, large-scale migrations played a decisive role in the formation of states and civilizations. During the modern period, particularly from the fifteenth century onwards, migration intensified through colonial expansion, the transatlantic slave trade, and labor mobility linked to industrialization. Contemporary migration, which accelerated after the Second World War (Mafukidze, 2006 ), is characterized by increased global interconnectedness, diversification of migration routes, and the growing importance of forced displacement due to conflict, political repression, and economic instability (Castles, de Haas & Miller, 2013 ). In the 1950s, approximately 250,000 migrants from North Africa—primarily from Algeria and to a lesser extent from Morocco and Tunisia—moved to France in response to the country’s postwar labor shortage (Malka, 2018 ). Currently, Europe represents the primary destination for migrants from Africa and the Middle East and faces increasing pressure at its external borders (Danaj et al., 2018 ; Dokos, 2017 ). Moroccan society has been profoundly shaped by migration throughout its history (Malka, 2018 ). Both internal and international migration have played a decisive role in structuring social relations, economic development, and spatial organization (Bilgili & Weyel, 2009 ). From the colonial period onwards, Morocco experienced significant migratory movements, particularly toward Europe. The French colonial administration (1912–1956) initiated organized labor migration to France, a process that intensified during the post-war economic boom in Western Europe (De Haas, 2007 ; Bhabha, 2014 ) Between 1962 and 1972, Moroccan labor migration expanded significantly due to bilateral recruitment agreements with France, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands. These movements were primarily driven by the demand for low-skilled labor in industrial sectors and marked the beginning of a long-term Moroccan presence in Europe (Berriane et al., 2010 ; Cortina & Ochoa-Reza, 2013 ; El Miri, 2021 ). Parallel to international migration, Morocco also experienced substantial internal migration, particularly from rural areas to urban centers such as Casablanca, Rabat, and Fez. These movements were closely linked to colonial land expropriation, rural impoverishment, and post-independence development policies that favored urban growth (Simon & Noin, 1972). Rural migration thus became a central mechanism of urban expansion and social transformation.[1] Theoretical Framework The rural–urban migration has been vastly discussed as a relational process of social repositioning within structured urban fields shaped by inequality, symbolic power, and spatial differentiation (de Haas, 2003 ; Safi, 2020 ). Rather than approaching migration as a linear transition from rural to urban life, the analysis treats it as a transformative process of socialization through which individuals renegotiate identity, belonging, and participation under conditions of structural constraint and uneven opportunity (Massey et al., 1993 ; Schiller & Çağlar, 2015 ). Evidently in migration research, however, classical migration theories—particularly neoclassical economic approaches—have often conceptualised migration primarily as the result of rational decision-making processes (Schmoll& Weber, 2023 ., Piguet, 2018 ; Piguet, 2013 ). These approaches assume that individuals move in response to economic incentives and structural inequalities between regions, seeking to maximise opportunities and improve their socio-economic conditions (Massey et al., 1993 ; Brettell & Hollifield, 2022 ). Migration can therefore be understood as a process that disrupts the alignment between embodied dispositions and the social structures in which they were formed. When individuals move across social and institutional contexts, they encounter new power relations, norms, and expectations that may challenge previously internalised dispositions. As a result, migrants are required to reinterpret their social position and continuously adapt their practices to changing institutional environments, social hierarchies, and regimes of recognition (Bourdieu, 1990 ; Giddens, 1991 ; de Haas, 2010 ). Within this perspective, socialization is understood as a context-dependent and negotiated process rather than a one-sided adaptation to dominant urban norms. Migrants do not passively adopt prevailing urban values; instead, they actively reinterpret social expectations and strategically use the resources available to them in order to navigate new social environments (Greiner & Sakdapolrak, 2013 ). Migration can also be understood through the concept of translocality, which highlights the socio-spatial connections that migrants maintain across different places (Greiner & Sakdapolrak, 2013 ). Rather than being confined to a single locality, migrants’ everyday practices, identities, and social relations often span multiple locations simultaneously. These translocal connections enable migrants to mobilize resources, knowledge, and social networks across different contexts. Consequently, socialization in migration contexts does not occur only within the host society but unfolds within interconnected social spaces that link places of origin and destination. This perspective aligns with research emphasizing migration as a process of ongoing positioning within translocal and transnational social fields (Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004 ; Faist, 2010 ). To capture these dynamics analytically, migrant practices are conceptualized along two interrelated orientations: adaptive integration practices and reproductive continuity practices. These orientations represent analytical dimensions rather than fixed behavioral categories and frequently coexist within everyday life. Adaptive integration practices refer to strategies through which migrants engage with urban institutions, labor markets, and spatial arrangements to secure recognition and material stability. Such practices include the expansion of weak social ties, acquisition of urban competencies, and strategic engagement with institutional structures. Empirical research demonstrates that access to diverse social networks and institutional knowledge significantly shapes migrants’ capacity to navigate urban environments and improve life chances (Granovetter, 1973 ; Ryan, 2011 ; Small, 2010 ). Studies of urban marginality further show that integration is structured by spatial and institutional inequalities that regulate access to housing, employment, and public participation (Wacquant, 2008 ; Desmond, 2016 ). Reproductive continuity practices, by contrast, refer to strategies that maintain moral frameworks, social identities, and relational structures rooted in the place of origin. Migrants frequently sustain dense kinship networks, symbolic attachments, and normative expectations derived from rural social worlds. These practices generate emotional security and social recognition while simultaneously structuring patterns of enclosure and segmented incorporation into urban life (Levitt, 2001 ; Carling & Erdal, 2014 ; Hage, 1998 ). Research on translocality demonstrates that connections to places of origin constitute an enduring and constitutive dimension of migrant social existence rather than a residual feature of incomplete integration (Mata-Codesal, 2018 ). Urban space itself functions as a structuring environment that shapes migrant socialization. Cities operate simultaneously as arenas of opportunity and mechanisms of stratification, producing differentiated spatial regimes that organize access to resources and recognition (Lefebvre, 1991 & 1996 ; Harvey, 2008 ; Robinson, 2006 ). Informality, spatial marginalization, and precarious labor incorporation are central mechanisms through which migrants experience urban inequality (Roy, 2009 ; Simone, 2004 ; Standing, 2019 ; RoyChowdhury, 2021 ). Ethnographic studies of everyday urban practices further show that migrants actively produce urban space through routine practices of navigation, appropriation, and survival (de Certeau, 1984 ; Low, 2016 ). Empirical research across diverse contexts consistently demonstrates that rural–urban migrants occupy intermediate social positions characterized by partial participation, constrained mobility, and ambivalent belonging (Portes & Zhou, 1993 ; Holston, 2008 ; Bayat, 2013 & 2022 ). Rather than producing full integration or exclusion, migration generates hybrid social formations shaped by structural inequality and strategic adaptation. This condition of structural ambivalence is reinforced by labor precarity, spatial concentration, and limited institutional inclusion (Auyero, 2012 ; Sassen, 2014 ). The Moroccan context provides a critical site for examining these processes. Rapid urbanization, regional disparities, and labor market informality structure the conditions under which rural migrants attempt to establish themselves in cities such as Agadir (de Haas, 2007 ; Bilgili & Weyel, 2009 ). Limited institutional support and restricted access to stable employment intensify reliance on informal networks while simultaneously constraining broader urban participation. Migrant trajectories therefore reflect the interaction between structural constraints and agentic practices embedded in everyday social life. By integrating practice theory, socialization theory, and urban sociology, this study advances an analytical framework that links micro-level experiences with macro-structural transformations. Migration is conceptualized as a continuous process of negotiated positioning within differentiated urban space rather than a transition between fixed social categories. This perspective enables a more nuanced understanding of how migrants construct belonging, mobilize resources, and navigate inequality in contemporary urban environments. Methodological approach Research Context This study adopts a qualitative research design aimed at exploring processes of socialization and pre-socialization and their influence on migrants’ behavior and social practices within the urban context. Particular attention is given to the ways in which rural migrants negotiate their integration into the city as a sociocultural space shaped by specific norms, values, and power relations (Wakil, Siddique & Wakil, 1981 ). The city is approached not merely as a geographical setting, but as a social field in which multiple identities interact, coexist, and sometimes conflict. The central research question guiding this study is the following: How do young rural migrants achieve social integration within the urban environment? This question emerges from the assumption that migrants bring with them cultural dispositions shaped by rural social structures, which are then confronted with the norms and expectations of urban life. The transition from village to city thus constitutes a critical moment of social and symbolic negotiation. This research does not aim to provide a statistically representative account of migration and integration in Morocco. Rather, it adopts an interpretative and exploratory perspective, limited in time and space, in order to gain in-depth insights into lived experiences (Ocejo, 2012 ; Shipman, 2014). The study follows an ethnographic qualitative logic, emphasizing understanding over measurement and interpretation over generalization (Yi’En, 2013 ). Consequently, the objective is not to quantify social phenomena but to grasp “the ‘dailyness’ of urban life and the meanings immigrants attribute to their experiences and social practices (Latham & McCormack, 2007 ). Given the complex and subjective nature of social integration, a qualitative methodological approach was deemed most appropriate. This approach allows for the exploration of perceptions, representations, and strategies through which individuals interpret and navigate their social realities (Ocejo, 2012 ). In line with interpretive social research, the study seeks to understand realities of social action from the actor’s point of view and to reconstruct meaning through close engagement with participants’ narratives (Isoke, Z. ( 2024 ). Sample and Sampling Procedure Fieldwork was carried out in the city of Agadir in Morocco (see Fig. 1 ), between November 2024 and February 2025. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling based on several criteria, including rural origin, a minimum of five years of residence in the urban area, and age. In total, 22 individuals participated in the study, comprising 14 men and 8 women (see Fig. 2 ). The study therefore employed theoretical sampling (Silverman & Marvasti, 2008 ) to include diverse profiles and capture perspectives from both migrants and individuals who remained in place. This diversity emerged organically during the recruitment process and enabled the inclusion of a wider range of perspectives. Data Collection Data were collected primarily through semi-structured, face-to-face interviews lasting between 45 and 90 minutes. Figure 2 gives an overview on the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants. The interviews focused on participants’ migration trajectories, experiences of urban life, social relations, and perceptions of integration (see Fig. 2 ). Most interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent. In addition, participant observation was employed as a complementary method, enabling the researcher to observe everyday interactions and shared living spaces, particularly among male migrants. The data were analyzed using the method of constant comparison, allowing for the identification of recurring themes, patterns, and conceptual categories. This analytical strategy facilitated the gradual construction of an interpretive framework grounded in empirical material while remaining sensitive to contextual and cultural specificities. Local languages To address both linguistic and ethical considerations, all interviews were conducted in the local languages predominantly spoken in the Sous-Massa region, namely Moroccan Arabic (Darija) and Tamazight (Tachelhit) [2] . Conducting interviews in participants’ native languages allows respondents to articulate their experiences more freely and accurately, thereby improving the authenticity and reliability of the data collected. The interviewer was fluent in both languages and possessed strong cultural familiarity with the research context. Data Analysis Urbanization and Social Transformation: Identity Crisis and the Reconfiguration of Social Ties The findings presented in this section address central questions related to the socialization of rural migrants in the urban environment: Where do migrants spend their time? (Hamermesh & Trejo, 2013 ; Ribar, 2013 ) How do they construct social relations? How do they relate to the urban space and to their village of origin? These questions are fundamental to understanding integration not as a fixed outcome, but as a dynamic and negotiated social process. The socialization process here is understood as a gradual and often fragile process through which migrants learn to navigate the urban environment, internalize new norms, and reconstruct their social identities. For rural migrants, the city initially appears as an unfamiliar and sometimes threatening space, producing feelings of hesitation, insecurity, and social distance. This experience is characteristic of what sociological literature describes as the “initial disorientation phase” of migration (Castles et al., 2014; Ryan et al., 2016 ). Constructing Social Ties in the City: Recreating the “Village” in Urban Contexts Social life is fundamentally structured through social relationships. From a sociological perspective, the absence of social ties signifies social marginalization, while their presence constitutes the basis of social integration (Hu & Cheung, 2024 ). Migration often disrupts established social networks and requires individuals to rebuild social ties within new structural contexts. In this process, social identity plays an important role, as it reflects the individual, interpersonal, and collective mechanisms through which people become embedded in social structures (Davis et al., 2019 ). In modern societies, traditional forms of solidarity based on kinship and locality have increasingly been replaced by more individualized and instrumental relations. However, this transformation is neither uniform nor universal. In many migration contexts, traditional solidarities persist and are reactivated as survival strategies (Small, 2010 ; Liu et al., 2024 ). For rural migrants in Moroccan cities, the first response to urban uncertainty is often the reconstruction of familiar social networks. Migrants actively seek relatives, acquaintances, or fellow villagers who can facilitate their entry into urban life. This strategy functions as a mechanism of protection, orientation, and social recognition. “When I came for the first time, I stayed with my older brother. I didn’t know anyone in the city, and I had very little money. My brother helped me find work in a dairy shop through someone he knew. Without him, I would probably have ended up homeless or working under very bad conditions.” (Interview P03) This statement illustrates the central role of kinship-based solidarity in mitigating the risks of urban marginalization. Similar patterns have been identified in migration studies emphasizing the importance of social capital in access to employment and housing (Zhang et al., 2024 ; Lőrincz & Németh, 2022 ; Ryan et al., 2016 ; Bourdieu, 1986 ). Another participant emphasized trust and familiarity as key elements in social relations: “I mostly deal with people from my village. In the city you never know who to trust. People here are different. With people from your village, you know their family, their background. That makes things easier.” (Interview P12) Trust emerges as a key factor structuring social interactions in urban contexts. In unfamiliar city environments, migrants often rely on what Robert D. Putnam ( 2000 ) conceptualizes as bonding social capital—close and dense networks that provide emotional security and practical support. Such locally embedded and relatively closed social structures help maintain norms, reciprocity, and trust, as emphasized by James S. Coleman ( 1988 , 1990 ). While these networks offer important resources for coping with uncertainty, they may simultaneously limit opportunities for broader social integration and the formation of more diverse social ties (Anthias, 2020 ). Gender also plays an important role in shaping these strategies. Male migrants often turn to village-based networks as sources of stability, solidarity, and economic opportunity. In contrast, some female migrants pursue different strategies. For them, distancing themselves from village-based social relations can represent a form of autonomy and a way out of discrimination and to negotiate greater independence from traditional norms and forms of social control (Ruyssen & Salomone, 2018 ). “I try to avoid people from my village. They watch you, talk about you, judge everything you do. In the city, with strangers, you can live more freely.” (Interview P06) Research in feminist migration studies suggests that the relative anonymity of urban environments can create opportunities for women to gain greater autonomy and exercise more self-determination (Ruyssen & Salomone, 2018 ). At the same time, migration decisions often differ between women and men. Studies indicate that men’s decisions to migrate are more frequently shaped by individual and economic motivations, whereas women’s migration is often connected to family-related considerations, such as supporting household members or joining family members abroad (Heering et al., 2004 ). However, women may also migrate in response to structural inequalities, including gender-based violence, discrimination, or limited opportunities in their place of origin (Afsar, 2009; UNFPA, 2006; van Dalen et al., 2005 ). The Village as a Symbolic and Social Anchor in the Immigrant Experience Although migrants physically relocate to the city, the village continues to function as a symbolic reference point. It represents familiarity, moral order, and social security. Migrants often attempt to “reproduce” the village within the city through shared language, customs, and everyday practices. “It’s easier to live with someone from your region. You know who he is, where he comes from, and what to expect. If you need something, he will help you.” (Interview P14) This confirms the argument that migration does not entail a complete rupture with the place of origin but rather leads to the formation of translocal identities (Levitt et al, 2004; Lin, de Meulder, & Wang, 2011 ). The village is socially reconstructed within the urban environment and continues to shape patterns of trust, cooperation, and belonging. However, this attachment can also generate tensions. While village-based networks offer protection, they may also reinforce control mechanisms, particularly over women, and limit individual autonomy. Consequently, some migrants consciously distance themselves from these networks in search of greater independence. Socialization as a Relational and Stratified Process of Urban Positioning The findings indicate that socialization within the urban environment cannot be conceptualized as a linear trajectory toward integration. Rather, it constitutes a relational and stratified process shaped by unequal access to resources, symbolic recognition, and social networks. Urban incorporation is mediated by gendered expectations, educational trajectories, migration histories, and the distribution of social capital, all of which structure migrants’ opportunities for participation and belonging. Migrants do not passively adapt to the urban environment but actively negotiate their social positioning through selective engagement with institutional and informal networks. This negotiation reflects what scholars conceptualize as “translocational positionality,” in which individuals navigate multiple, shifting locations of power and belonging across social spaces (Anthias, 2002 ). The city thus emerges as a contested social field in which belonging is not granted but continuously produced through interaction, recognition, and boundary-making processes (Wimmer & Glick Schiller, 2002 ; Yuval-Davis et al., 2018 ). Integration should therefore be understood not as a stable outcome but as an ongoing, multidimensional process shaped by structural opportunities and constraints as well as by migrants’ agency. This perspective aligns with process-oriented frameworks of integration that emphasize social participation, access to resources, and relational embeddedness rather than cultural assimilation alone (Ager & Strang, 2008 ). Rural Attachments as Symbolic Capital: Continuity, Identity, and Translocal Belonging Urban migration does not constitute a rupture with the rural social world. Instead, migrants carry with them embodied dispositions, cultural meanings, and relational ties that continue to shape their practices and self-understandings after relocation. From a Bourdieusian perspective, migration involves not only spatial mobility but also the transposition of habitus and forms of capital into a new social field, where they may be revalued, marginalized, or strategically mobilized (Bourdieu, 1977 ; Bourdieu, 1990 ). The persistent orientation toward the village can be interpreted as a form of symbolic anchoring that stabilizes identity under conditions of social uncertainty. Rather than indicating incomplete integration, these attachments may function as resources of recognition, emotional security, and social legitimacy. Such dynamics resonate with transnational and translocal approaches to migration, which emphasize that migrants inhabit multiple social worlds simultaneously and maintain meaningful ties across spatial divides (Levitt & Glick Schiller, 2004 ). This continuity raises broader analytical questions regarding the relationship between mobility and belonging. Return practices, whether physical or symbolic, may represent strategies of self-affirmation and status negotiation within both urban and rural fields. The village thus remains a socially productive reference point through which migrants interpret urban experiences, negotiate identity, and reproduce social meaning across space. Rural Origin as a Structuring Horizon of Urban Life The Village as a Persistent Social Infrastructure of Belonging The empirical material demonstrates that rural origin continues to function as a durable social infrastructure shaping migrants’ practices, expectations, and identity claims. Material exchanges, emotional obligations, and moral recognition remain anchored in village-based relational networks that persist beyond spatial relocation. Rather than dissolving through migration, these ties are reconfigured across space and sustained through practices of periodic return, communication, and symbolic reaffirmation. “I go back to the village two or three times a year, especially during holidays. I visit my parents so they can pray for me. I see my relatives, stay a week or so, then I return to the city to work.” (Interview P05) This statement illustrates how return visits can thus be interpreted as mechanisms of relational maintenance that stabilize migrants’ membership within extended kinship structures and moral communities. Contemporary migration research conceptualizes such dynamics through the lens of translocality, emphasizing that social life unfolds across interconnected places rather than within bounded territories (Greiner & Sakdapolrak, 2013 ). The village remains a site of normative orientation, social memory, and moral evaluation even when daily practices are urban. Figure 3 (left) the workplace of participant P05 in Agadir, taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025). Another participant emphasized the strategic dimension of return: “The city? I’m just passing through it. I came to work, to survive. But I never forget my origins. I go back so my family knows I still exist. One day I might need my share of land or inheritance. The city isn’t ours—we’re only guests.” (Interview P21) This statement illustrates how return practices are not merely expressions of emotional attachment but also serve strategic and future-oriented purposes. Although migrants spend most of their time in urban areas due to work and economic demands, maintaining an active presence in the village remains crucial (see Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 ). Visibility within origin communities functions as a mechanism for securing access to future resources, including inheritance rights, social support, and protection. In this sense, rural attachment can be understood as a form of relational capital, embedded in long-term reciprocal obligations and expectations (Ryan, 2011 ). Return as Performance of Recognition and Social Worth Return migration is not merely a spatial movement but a socially structured performance of achievement and recognition. Migrants anticipate evaluation by village audiences and prepare their return accordingly through material displays, symbolic gestures, and narratives of success. One interviewee explained: “When you go back, people look at what you’re wearing, what you brought, whether you have a car or not. If you come back with nothing, they know you didn’t succeed.” (Interview P09) This dynamic aligns with recognition-theoretical perspectives that view social integration as dependent upon intersubjective validation and status attribution (Honneth, 1995 ). The migrant’s return becomes a moment in which claims to dignity, success, and adulthood are publicly negotiated. Material objects—clothing, gifts, consumption practices—function as visible markers of social mobility and competence. From a sociological perspective, such practices can be understood as processes of status signaling within stratified moral economies, where worth is measured through culturally specific criteria of achievement (Zelizer, 2010 ). Return visits thus operate as socially regulated moments of evaluation that reproduce hierarchies of prestige and belonging within the rural field. Rural Attachment as Resource and Constraint While village ties provide recognition and social security, they may simultaneously impose normative expectations and mechanisms of control. Migrants remain embedded in moral communities that regulate behavior through reputation, obligation, and surveillance across distance. Such dynamics illustrate that belonging is not inherently emancipatory but structured by power relations and gendered expectations. Gender-sensitive migration research demonstrates that translocal ties may reproduce unequal norms regarding autonomy, mobility, and family responsibility (Mahler & Pessar, 2006 ). Women in particular may experience rural attachment as both protection and restriction, negotiating belonging through selective engagement or strategic distancing. This ambivalence highlights that rural origin operates as a field of social regulation that migrants must continuously navigate, balancing autonomy with relational obligation. Oscillating Belonging and the Multiplicity of Social Fields The findings suggest that migrants inhabit a condition of oscillating belonging structured by simultaneous participation in urban and rural social fields. The city offers economic opportunity, anonymity, and individual mobility, whereas the village provides symbolic anchoring, recognition, and continuity. Rather than representing opposing spaces, these locations constitute interdependent arenas within which migrants construct biographies, identities, and strategies of advancement. Recent scholarship conceptualizes such experiences as multi-sited social embeddedness, where individuals operate within overlapping regimes of value, recognition, and opportunity (Faist, 2010 ; Schiller & Çağlar, 2015 ). This condition generates a productive tension that shapes migrants’ aspirations and practices. Belonging becomes neither territorially fixed nor singular but relational, situational, and continuously negotiated across social space.The migrant’s life unfolds in constant movement between these two poles: The city: a space of labor, anonymity, and material survival. The village: a space of recognition, memory, and social validation. Village and City: Moral Spatiality and the Sacred–Profane Order of Migration Human action unfolds within symbolic universes that organize meaning, legitimacy, and social expectation. These symbolic orders are historically produced and socially maintained through everyday practice and collective interpretation. Migration exposes individuals to multiple normative systems simultaneously, thereby rendering visible the moral structuring of space (Frederiks, 2015 ). Rather than being neutral containers of activity, places function as moral environments that regulate conduct through culturally embedded expectations and relational accountability. Within this perspective, the sacred–profane distinction can be understood as a sociological mechanism that organizes spatial morality. Sacred spaces are socially protected domains associated with legitimacy, continuity, and normative intensity, whereas profane spaces are characterized by flexibility, contingency, and reduced moral visibility. Importantly, sacredness is not limited to religious meaning but encompasses socially elevated norms, practices, and relationships that demand conformity and respect. In rural–urban migration, this distinction emerges not as an abstract dichotomy but as an experiential framework through which migrants interpret, inhabit, and negotiate space. The Village as a Sacred Moral Community Figure 5 (left) Photo showing the workplace of participant P15, who rents surfboards at the beach in Agadir. The photo was taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025). For rural migrants, the village is constructed as a morally saturated space structured by recognition, surveillance, and collective memory. Social relations are dense, reputational knowledge is widely shared, and behaviour is interpreted within a long-term moral horizon. The village therefore operates as a community of accountability in which individuals remain symbolically visible even in physical absence. As one respondent stated: “When I go back to the village, I stop everything. I don’t smoke, I don’t drink. My mother is there, the family is there. You have to behave properly.” (Interview P15) This statement illustrates how spatial relocation does not suspend normative obligation. Instead, migrants re-enter a moral order that demands conformity through embodied discipline and symbolic respect. While everyday life in the city is primarily structured by work routines and economic survival (see Fig. 5), it is simultaneously anchored in repetitive practices that stabilize daily life, such as shared meals and morning routines (see Fig. 6 ). The presence of kinship networks transforms the village into a space of heightened moral reflexivity in which everyday practices acquire ethical significance. Sociological research conceptualizes such environments as moral communities, where norms are reproduced through informal sanctions, reputation, and shared values (Chu & Lee, 2024 ; Alowais & Suliman, 2025 ). The durability of rural moral authority reflects the persistence of social memory and relational embeddedness across distance. Migrants remain accountable to a collective gaze that transcends physical co-presence. Furthermore, the normative intensity of village life can be understood through theories of social regulation in tightly knit communities, where honour, respectability, and conformity structure social belonging. Rural space thus acquires sacred qualities not through religious doctrine alone but through dense relational structures that elevate particular behaviours as morally binding. The City as a Space of Moral Indeterminacy In contrast, the city is experienced as a space of reduced normative density and increased situational autonomy. Social relations are more fragmented, anonymity is structurally enabled, and behaviour is less tightly monitored by stable communities of recognition. As one participant noted: “In the city, everything is allowed. You smoke, you drink, you do what you want. No one knows you. But in the village, you have to be careful. ” (Interview P22) Urban space here emerges as a domain of moral indeterminacy rather than moral absence. Migrants do not abandon normative frameworks but encounter plural and competing expectations that allow for selective adaptation. The city provides what urban sociology describes as conditions of situational freedom produced by weak ties, social heterogeneity, and spatial scale (Wirth, 1938 ). This transformation of moral visibility can be understood through theories of urban anonymity, which emphasize that social distance reduces reputational accountability and expands behavioural possibility (Lofland, 1998 ). The urban environment thereby enables experimentation with practices that would carry symbolic risk in the village. At the same time, urban freedom is not purely emancipatory. It is embedded in economic precarity, social fragmentation, and instrumental relations. The profane character of the city reflects not moral decline but the restructuring of social control under conditions of scale and differentiation. Moral Compartmentalization and Spatially Situated Conduct The migrant’s everyday life unfolds through continuous movement between these two moral orders. Behaviour is not governed by a single normative system but calibrated according to spatial context and relational audience. Migrants engage in what can be conceptualized as spatially situated morality, adjusting conduct in response to the symbolic expectations attached to specific places. The empirical pattern can be summarized as follows: Village: visibility, respectability, restraint, honour City: anonymity, flexibility, experimentation, pragmatism This duality reflects processes of moral compartmentalization, whereby individuals maintain multiple normative repertoires without perceiving them as contradictory. Contemporary sociological research demonstrates that migrants routinely navigate plural moral frameworks across translocal contexts, developing situational strategies of self-presentation and conduct (Levitt, 2001 ; Ley, 2004 ). Rather than indicating identity fragmentation, such negotiation constitutes a form of adaptive competence that allows migrants to maintain belonging in multiple social worlds simultaneously. The sacred–profane distinction therefore functions not as a rigid opposition but as a relational structure organizing behavioural expectations across space. The Immigrant and the City: Socialization or Alienation? Contemporary sociological research emphasizes that socialization is a context-dependent process shaped by institutional access, spatial positioning, and material conditions. Urbanization restructures socialization not merely by introducing new cultural references but by reorganizing the distribution of opportunities, recognition, and participation. Migration therefore constitutes not only a geographic transition but an entry into differentiated regimes of inclusion and exclusion that condition the possibility of belonging (Robinson, 2006 ; Simone, 2019 ). Rather than a linear process of integration, migrant socialization in the city unfolds under conditions of uncertainty, precarious incorporation, and partial participation. Individuals encounter new normative systems while simultaneously confronting structural barriers that restrict their ability to internalize and enact urban citizenship. Socialization and alienation thus emerge not as opposites but as coexisting processes within unequal urban environments. Alienation as a Structuring Experience of Urban Life In this study, alienation refers to a structurally produced condition of limited agency within urban space. Migrants frequently described their relationship to the city as instrumental and survival-oriented rather than participatory. The urban environment is experienced as external, demanding, and difficult to appropriate as a space of belonging. As one respondent explained: “It’s just work and home. I don’t have time to go out or discover anything. You want to live, like everyone else, but what can you do? Life defeats you.” (Interview P17) This narrative illustrates a form of constrained urban presence characterized by functional inclusion without social integration. Urban theory conceptualizes such conditions as marginal incorporation, where individuals are economically necessary yet socially peripheral (Sassen, 2014 ). Migrants participate in the urban economy but remain excluded from the symbolic and cultural dimensions of city life. Research on urban marginality further demonstrates that alienation is often produced through structural inequalities in housing, labour markets, and institutional access rather than through cultural distance alone (Wacquant, 2008 ). Migrants’ estrangement from urban life thus reflects broader processes of socio-spatial stratification embedded within contemporary cities. Restricted Mobility and the Uneven Right to Urban Space The empirical findings reveal that migrants’ movements within the city are highly constrained. Everyday life is organized around a limited circuit of residence, workplace, and essential services. This restricted spatial practice reflects structural pressures including economic precarity, time scarcity, and vulnerability within labour markets. One participant captured this reality succinctly: “Work to home, home to work. There’s no time for anything else.” (Interview P14) Urban sociological research conceptualizes such patterns as restricted urban navigation, where access to the city’s social and cultural infrastructure is unevenly distributed across social groups (Harvey, 2008 ). The capacity to use urban space as a resource depends on material security, time autonomy, and institutional inclusion — resources often unavailable to precarious migrants. Scholars of unequal urbanism argue that contemporary cities function as differentiated terrains of access rather than unified social environments (Marcuse, 1997 ). Physical presence in the city does not guarantee meaningful participation in urban life. Migrants therefore inhabit what may be described as partial urban citizenship, characterized by presence without full access. Social Enclaves and Protective Insulation Faced with uncertainty and exclusion, migrants rely heavily on dense social networks rooted in shared origin, kinship, or occupational proximity. These networks function as mechanisms of survival, facilitating access to employment, housing, and emotional support. However, they also produce bounded forms of belonging that limit broader social interaction. Empirical urban research conceptualizes such formations as migrant social infrastructures — informal systems of cooperation that compensate for institutional exclusion (Simone, 2004 ). These infrastructures enable everyday survival but may simultaneously reinforce social segmentation by concentrating interaction within homogeneous networks. As a result, migrants often reproduce familiar social structures within the urban environment. Rather than dissolving rural identities, migration reterritorializes them in new spatial contexts. Urban incorporation thus occurs through continuity as much as transformation. This dynamic raises a central analytical question: does urban residence generate integration, or does it produce parallel social worlds within the city? The findings suggest that migrants experience a form of segmented incorporation, characterized by economic participation combined with social distance from dominant urban institutions (Portes & Zhou, 1993 ). Alienation, Agency, and Conditional Belonging Despite structural constraints, migrants demonstrate adaptive agency in navigating urban life. They develop strategies of endurance, selective participation, and pragmatic adjustment. However, such agency operates within narrow structural limits and does not necessarily translate into recognition or full membership. Urban citizenship research highlights that belonging is enacted through everyday practices of presence, participation, and recognition (Holston, 2008 ). Migrants’ restricted access to these practices produces what may be conceptualized as conditional belonging — a form of inclusion dependent on economic function rather than social recognition. Urban alienation therefore emerges as a relational condition situated at the intersection of labour precarity, spatial inequality, and symbolic marginalization. Migrants occupy the city materially but remain socially peripheral, navigating an urban order that includes them functionally while excluding them normatively. Discussion Rural–urban migration cannot be understood simply as a spatial movement or as a purely economic adjustment strategy (Kuhnt, 2019 ; de Haas, 2011 ). Instead, it is shaped by different forms of capital, including social capital (relationships and networks), economic capital (material resources), and human capital (knowledge and skills), which significantly influence migration processes (de Haas, 2014 ). Migration should therefore be viewed as a relational and ongoing transformation that affects social positioning, identity formation, and everyday practices. Migrants do not arrive in urban areas as socially neutral actors; rather, they bring with them historically shaped dispositions, value systems, and patterns of social relations that have developed within rural social structures (de Haas, 2018 ). These inherited orientations continue to influence how individuals perceive, interpret, and navigate their new urban environment, even when the move involves a major spatial and social transition. Although the relative importance of the factors influencing migration decisions varies between individuals—whether migrants or refugees—the pursuit of improved living conditions and better opportunities remains a common underlying motivation (Özden & Wagner, 2018 ). Village-based socialization, which is characterized by dense interpersonal relationships, strong moral accountability, and collective forms of recognition, often continues to shape migrants’ perspectives and practices even after moving to the city (Miles & Ebrey, 2017 ). The findings suggest that migration does not simply dissolve these normative frameworks; rather, it transforms and reconfigures them within a new urban context. Consequently, social integration in the city should not be understood as a straightforward or linear process of incorporation. Instead, it develops through complex interactions shaped by migrants’ social networks, their access to resources, and their position within urban socio-spatial structures. Urban experiences are therefore interpreted through previously internalized social norms and cultural orientations, leading to diverse patterns of adaptation rather than a single, uniform pathway of integration. At the same time, prevailing village norms that encourage young people to move away from rural life and agricultural work can create tensions. As Clendenning ( 2022 ) argues, while such discourses push young people toward urban opportunities, their socially shaped dispositions and limited resources may constrain their available life trajectories. This contradiction can make future prospects particularly challenging for young people from lower-income rural households. The village remains a constitutive axis of belonging and symbolic legitimacy. Continued return practices, material exchanges, and affective ties sustain a translocal social existence in which rural and urban affiliations coexist. Migration thus functions as a strategy of continuity as much as transformation. Economic participation in the city often serves to reproduce social recognition in the village, indicating that urban incorporation and rural belonging are mutually constitutive rather than mutually exclusive. This dynamic reveals a structural paradox: urban residence is frequently instrumental, while rural belonging remains existential. The city functions as a site of labor, survival, and constrained opportunity, whereas the village retains symbolic authority as a space of recognition, identity affirmation, and moral order. Migrants’ everyday practices therefore unfold within a field of normative plurality characterized by competing expectations and context-dependent behavioural adjustments. The multidimensional nature of these processes—spanning social, economic, and symbolic domains—is summarized above (see Fig. 7 ). The findings support the conceptualization of migration as a process of dual or relational socialization. Migrants develop situational competencies that enable them to navigate heterogeneous normative environments by modulating behaviour across spatial contexts. This adaptive capacity reflects agency and social competence; however, it simultaneously produces tension, uncertainty, and partial inclusion. Belonging becomes segmented rather than cumulative. Migrants participate in multiple social worlds without achieving full incorporation into any single one. The empirical evidence further suggests that alienation and socialization should not be treated as mutually exclusive outcomes. Instead, they operate simultaneously within structurally unequal urban environments. Socialization occurs through work participation, network formation, and everyday urban routines, yet these processes unfold under conditions of limited access, restricted mobility, and precarious incorporation. Alienation therefore emerges not as a psychological anomaly but as a structurally produced condition rooted in the misalignment between inherited dispositions and the institutional logics of urban life. These findings challenge classical linear models of integration that presuppose gradual absorption into a unified social order. Rather than convergence toward a single normative framework, migrants experience pluralized and uneven incorporation across social domains. Identity, belonging, and participation are continuously negotiated across overlapping social fields structured by inequality, mobility constraints, and symbolic hierarchies. Ultimately, rural–urban dynamics of migration appears as an ongoing process of relational positioning within differentiated regimes of recognition and exclusion. Migrants inhabit the city materially while remaining anchored in rural moral economies, producing a form of conditional belonging that is situational, negotiated, and structurally bounded. The study therefore supports a processual understanding of migration in which socialization, alienation, continuity, and transformation are analytically inseparable dimensions of the same social experience. Limitations of the Study Despite its analytical contributions, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged: First, the research relies primarily on qualitative data drawn from a specific socio-cultural context. While this allows for in-depth analysis, it limits the generalizability of the findings to other migration settings or national contexts. Second, the study focuses mainly on male migration experiences, reflecting the demographic composition of the field. Future research should further explore gendered dimensions of migration, particularly the experiences of women, whose trajectories may involve different forms of constraint, agency, and negotiation. Third, the research captures a particular moment in the migratory experience but does not fully account for long-term trajectories or intergenerational dynamics. Longitudinal studies would provide valuable insights into how patterns of socialization and belonging evolve over time. Finally, the study does not extensively address institutional actors such as state agencies, local governments, or NGOs, whose role in shaping migrant integration deserves further investigation. Conclusion This study has examined the social trajectories of rural migrants in the urban context, focusing on processes of socialization, belonging, and everyday practice. Drawing on qualitative data and sociological theory, the analysis demonstrates that rural–urban migration is not merely a demographic or economic transition but a profoundly social and symbolic process that reconfigures identities, relationships, and modes of existence. The findings show that migrants do not simply shift from a rural to an urban way of life. Rather, they occupy a liminal social position marked by dual attachments and negotiated forms of belonging. The village persists as a powerful moral and symbolic reference point that continues to shape migrants’ values, aspirations, and self-understandings, even after prolonged urban residence. Simultaneously, urban life introduces structural constraints that demand adaptation, strategic flexibility, and emotional regulation. Instead of dissolving rural social structures, migration frequently reproduces them in transformed forms within the urban environment. Kinship-based and origin-based networks provide crucial material and emotional support, yet they also foster social enclosure and limit broader participation in urban society. Consequently, the city is often experienced not as a space of emancipation but as a domain of regulated mobility and constrained opportunity. The study further underscores the central role of labour in structuring migrants’ urban experience. Work functions not only as an economic necessity but as the primary organizing principle of everyday life. Long working hours, precarious employment conditions, and restricted access to urban resources contribute to a form of structural alienation embedded in spatial arrangements, labour relations, and unequal opportunities for participation. At a theoretical level, these findings challenge binary frameworks that oppose integration to exclusion, or rural tradition to urban modernity. Migration emerges instead as an ongoing process of negotiation across multiple social worlds. Migrants are neither fully incorporated nor entirely marginalized; they inhabit an intermediate social space shaped by continuity, adaptation, and structural constraint. This perspective calls for a relational and processual understanding of migration that foregrounds the interplay between social reproduction, spatial transformation, and lived experience. Declarations Acknowledgments The author would like to express his sincere gratitude to everyone who supported him in the process of completing this paper, took the time to read and review it, and provided valuable feedback that contributed to its improvement. Author contributions Not applicable (single-authored). Funding This research received no external funding. Data availability Data sharing is not applicable to this article as there are no datasets. Interview recordings and transcripts are confidential and shall not be shared. Ethics Approval Not applicable. Competing interests There are no potential conflicts of interest disclosed by the author(s) in connection with the research, authorship, and/or publication of this work. References Afsar, R. (2011). Contextualizing gender and migration in South Asia: Critical insights. Gender Technology and Development , 15 (3), 389–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/097185241101500304 Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies , 21 (2), 166–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen016 Alowais, A. A., & Suliman, A. S. (2025). When help hurts: Moral disengagement and the myth of the supportive migrant network. Social Sciences , 14 , 386. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14060386 Anthias, F. (2002). Where do I belong? Narrating collective identity and translocational positionality. Ethnicities , 2 (4), 491–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687968020020040301 Anthias, F. (2020). Transnational mobility, migration research and intersectionality. Nordic Journal of Migration Research , 10 (1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10202-011-0032-y Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization . University of Minnesota Press. Auyero, J. (2012). Patients of the state: The politics of waiting in Argentina . Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822395287 Barriga, W. (2013). Migration trends in the contemporary world. An Overview. Migration Policy Review, 5, 151–171. Retrieved from http://iminseisaku.org/top/pdf/journal/005/005_150.pdf Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity . Polity. Bayat, A. (2013). Life as politics: How ordinary people change the Middle East (2nd ed.). Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.29173/CJS8882 Bayat, A. (2022). Revolutionary life: The everyday of the Arab Spring . Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674269484 Bellwood, P. (2015). First migrants: Ancient migration in global perspective . Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774315000116 Berriane, M., Aderghal, M., Idrissi Janati, M., & Berriane, J. (2010). New mobilities around Morocco: A case study of the city of Fes (Final report for the MacArthur-funded project African Perspectives on Human Mobility) . Research Team for the Regions and Regionalisation, Université Mohammed V. https://www.migrationinstitute.org/files/completed-projects/morocco_2011-report.pdf Berry, J. W. (2024). Acculturation of rural–urban migrants in China: Strategies and determinants. International Journal of Intercultural Relations , 101 ., Article 101991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.101991 Bhabha, J. (2014). Child migration and human rights in a global age . Princeton University Press. Biehl, J., & Locke, P. (2017). Unfinished: The anthropology of becoming . Duke University Press. Bilgili, Ö., & Weyel, S. (2009). Migration in Morocco: History, current trends and future prospects . CARIM. Bonizzoni, P., & Leonini, L. (2020). Cross-Border Families and Social Issues: A Sociological Analysis. In I. Viarengo & F. C. Villata (Eds.), Planning the Future of Cross Border Families: A Path Through Coordination (pp. 23–30). Hart Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509919895.ch-002 Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice . Cambridge University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice . Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power . Harvard University Press. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology . University of Chicago Press. Brettell, C. B., & Hollifield, J. F. (Hrsg.) (2022). Migration theory: Talking across disciplines (4. Aufl.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003121015 Brickell, K., & Datta, A. (2011). Translocal geographies: Spaces, places, connections. Ashgate. https://simonbriercliffe.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/0f7fd-katherinebrickellandayonadatta28201129translocalgeographiese28093spaces2cplaces2cconnections.pdf Burgess, E. W. (1925). The growth of the city. In R. Park, E. W. Burgess, & R. McKenzie (Eds.), The city (pp. 47–62). University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203543047-4 Carling, J., & Erdal, M. B. (2014). Return migration and transnationalism. International Migration , 52 (6), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12180 Castles, S., de Haas, H., & Miller, M. J. (2013). The age of migration (5th ed.). The Guilford Press. Castles, S., Miller, M. J., & Ammendola, G. (2005). The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World: New York: The Guilford Press, (2003), $ 30.00, 338 pages. American Foreign Policy Interests, 27(6), 537–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803920500434037 Chen, H., Zhu, Z., & Chang, J. (2020). The effects of social integration and hometown identity on the life satisfaction of Chinese rural migrants. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes , 18 ., Article 171. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01415-y Chu, J., & Lee, S. (2024). How Americans judge: A topology of moral communities. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation. Journal of the Social Sciences , 10 (5), 141–164. https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2024.10.5.06 Clendenning, J. (2022). Between the village and the city: The in-betweenness of rural young people in East Indonesia. International Development Planning Review , 45 (1). https://doi.org/10.3828/idpr.2022.3 Cohen, S. (2011). Folk devils and moral panics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828250 Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology , 94 , S95–S120. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory . Belknap. Cortina, J., & Ochoa-Reza, E. (2013). New perspectives on international migration and development . Columbia University. Danaj, A., Lazányi, K., & Bilan, Y. (2018). Perceptions and implications of immigration in France— Economic, social, political and cultural perspectives. Economics and Sociology , 11 (3), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-3/14 Davis, J. L., Love, T. P., & Fares, P. (2019). Collective social identity: synthesizing identity theory and social identity theory using digital data. Soc Psychol Q , 82 , 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272519851025 de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life . University of California Press. https://monoskop.org/images/2/2a/De_Certeau_Michel_The_Practice_of_Everyday_Life.pdf de Haas, H. (2003). Migration and development in southern Morocco: The disparate socio-economic impacts of out-migration on the Todgha Oasis Valley (Doctoral dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen). https://heindehaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/de-haas-2003-phd-thesis-migration-and-development-in-southern-morocco-the-disparate-socio-economic-impacts-of-out-migration-on-the-todgha-oasis-valley.pdf de Haas, H. (2007). Morocco’s migration experience: A transitional perspective. International Migration , 45 (4), 39–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2435.2007.00419.x de Haas, H. (2010). Migration transitions: A theoretical and empirical inquiry. International Migration Institute Working Paper. de Haas, H. (2011). The determinants of international migration: Conceptualising policy, origin and destination effects (Vol. 32/2011). International Migration Institute (IMI). de Haas, H. (2014). Migration theory: Quo vadis? (Vol. 100). International Migration Institute (IMI). de Haas, H. (2018). European migrations: Dynamics, drivers, and the role of policies . Publications Office of the European Union. Desmond, M. (2016). Evicted: Poverty and profit in the American city. Crown. Dokos, T. (2017). Migration and globalization—forms, patterns and effects. Trilogue Salzburg, 102–114. Retrieved from https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/Faktencheck/Leaders__Dialogues/Salzburger_Trilog_2017/7_Migration_and_Globalization.pdf Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo . Routledge. El Miri, M. (2021). La migration internationale des jeunes et des mineurs: Un désir de « l’ailleurs » pour se réaliser. In M. Armagnague-Roucher, I. Rigoni, C. Cossée, S. Tersigni, & M. El Miri(Hrsg.) Les enfants migrants à l’école . Le Bord de l’Eau. Faist, T. (2010). Towards transnational studies: World theories, transnationalisation and changing institutions. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 36 (10), 1665–1687. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2010.489365 Frederiks, M. T. (2015). Religion, migration and identity: A conceptual and theoretical exploration. Mission Studies , 32 (2), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1163/15733831-12341400 Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures . Basic Books. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity . Stanford University Press. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology , 78 (6), 1360–1380. Greenwood, M. J., & Hunt, G. L. (2003). The early history of migration research. International Regional Science Review , 26 (1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160017602238 Greiner, C., & Sakdapolrak, P. (2013). Translocality: Concepts, applications and emerging research perspectives. Geography Compass , 7 (5), 373–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12048 Hage, G. (1998). White nation: Fantasies of white supremacy in a multicultural society . Routledge. Hamermesh, D. S., & Trejo, S. J. (2013). How do immigrants spend their time? The process of assimilation. Journal of Population Economics , 26 (2), 507–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-012-0440-x Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review , 53 , 23–40. Haut-Commissariat au Plan (HCP). (2025). Migration interne selon les résultats du recensement général de la population et de l’habitat de 2024 . HCP. https://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/ Heering, L., van der Erf, R., & van Wissen, L. (2004). The role of family networks and migration culture in the continuation of Moroccan emigration: A gender perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 30 (2), 323–337. http://doi.org/10.1080/1369183042000200722 Holston, J. (2008). Insurgent citizenship: Disjunctions of democracy and modernity in Brazil . Princeton University Press. Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts . Polity. Hu, J., & Cheung, C. K. J. (2024). Social identity and social integration: A meta-analysis exploring the relationship between social identity and social integration. Frontiers in Psychology , 15 , 1361163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1361163 Idemudia, E., & Boehnke, K. (2020). Patterns and current trends in African migration to Europe. In E. Idemudia & K. Boehnke (Hrsg.), Psychosocial experiences of African migrants in six European countries (S. 15–31). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48347-0_2 Isin, E. F., & Nielsen, G. M. (Eds.). (2008). Acts of citizenship . Zed Books. Isoke, Z. (2024). Urban ethnography and everyday life. In L. Peake, A. Datta, & G. Adeniyi-Ogunyankin (Eds.), Handbook on gender and cities (pp. 459–468). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786436139.00060 Jodelet, D. (1989). Les représentations sociales . Presses Universitaires de France. Khellil, M. (2008). La sociologie de l’intégration (2nd ed.). Presses Universitaires de France. King, R. (2000). Generalizations from the history of return migration. In B. Ghosh (Ed.), Return migration (pp. 7–55). Routledge. Kuhnt, J. (2019). Literature review: Drivers of migration. Why do people leave their homes? Is there an easy answer? A structured overview of migratory determinants (Discussion Paper No. 9/2019). Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE). https://doi.org/10.23661/dp9.2019 Latham, A., & McCormack, D. (2007). Developing real world methods in urban geography fieldwork. Planet , 18 , 25–27. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space . Blackwell. Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities . Blackwell. Levitt, P. (2001). The transnational villagers . University of California Press. Levitt, P., & Glick Schiller, N. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field perspective on society. International Migration Review , 38 (3), 1002–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00227.x Ley, D. (2004). Transnational spaces and everyday lives. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers , 29 (2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00122.x Li, C., & Zhao, H. (2022). From hometown to the host city? Cities, 122, Article 103567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103567 Lin, Y., de Meulder, B., & Wang, S. (2011). Understanding the ‘village in the city’ in Guangzhou: Economic integration and development issues and their implications for the urban migrant. Urban Studies , 48 (16), 3583–3598. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010396239 Liu, X., Wang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2024). How does choice of residential community affect the social integration of rural migrants. BMC Psychology , 12 ., Article 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9 Lofland, L. H. (1998). The public realm: Exploring the city’s quintessential social territory . Aldine de Gruyter. Lőrincz, L., & Németh, B. (2022). How social capital is related to migration between communities? European Journal of Population , 38 , 1119–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-022-09642-3 Low, S. M. (2016). Spatializing culture. American Ethnologist , 44 (3), 493–506. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315671277 Mafukidze, J. (2006). A discussion of migration and migration patterns and flows in Africa. In C. Cross, D. Gelderblom, N. Roux, & J. Mafukidze (Eds.), Views of migration in sub-Saharan Africa . HSRC. Mahler, S. J., & Pessar, P. R. (2006). Gender matters: Ethnographers bring gender from the periphery toward the core of migration studies. International Migration Review , 40 (1), 27–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2006.00002.x Malka, H. (2018). Destination Maghreb. Changing migration patterns in North Africa. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic & International Studies. Retrieved from https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/180502_Malka_DestinationMaghreb_Web.pdf Manning, P., & Trimmer, T. (2020). Migration in World History (3rd ed.). Routledge. Marcuse, P. (1997). The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: What has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city. Urban Affairs Review , 33 (2), 228–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/107808749703300206 Marx, K. (1978). In R. Tucker (Ed.), Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844 . W. W. Norton. (Original work published 1844). Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and Development Review , 19 (3), 431–466. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938462 Mata-Codesal, D. (2018). Is it simpler to leave or to stay put? Population. Space and Place , 24 (1), e2125. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2127 Mazzella, S. (2011). Sociologie des migrations . Presses Universitaires de France. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review , 3 (5), 672–682. Miles, A., & Ebrey, J. (2017). The village in the city: Participation and cultural value on the urban periphery. Cultural Trends , 26 (1), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2017.1274360 Moscovici, S. (1997). Psychologie sociale . Presses Universitaires de France. Ocejo, R. E. (Ed.). (2012). Ethnography and the city: Readings on doing urban fieldwork . Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203723807 Özden, C., & Wagner, M. (2018). Moving for prosperity . World Bank. Park, R. E. (1928). Human migration and the marginal man. American Journal of Sociology , 33 (6), 881–893. Peraldi, M. (Hrsg.) (2013). Les mineurs migrants non accompagnés: Un défi pour les pays européens . Karthala. Perrot, A. (2017). Les « mineurs » exilés à l’épreuve du jugement: Une ethnographie des frontières d’âges et de statuts (Dissertation). École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS). Petersen, W. (1958). A General Typology of Migration. American Sociological Review , 23 (3), 256–266. Piguet, E. (2018). Theories of voluntary and forced migration. In book: Routledge Handbook of Environmental Displacement and Migration, Edited by Robert McLeman and François Gemenne. Routledge, London (pp.17–28). Piguet, É. (2013). Les théories des migrations. Synthèse de la prise de décision individuelle (Vol. 29, pp. 141–161). Université de Poitiers. 3. Portes, A., & Zhou, M. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 530 (1), 74–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716293530001006 Portes, A. (1998). Social capital. Annual Review of Sociology , 24 , 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Culture and Politics (pp. 223–234). Springer. International Organization of Migration (IOM) (2013). World migration report 2013: Migrant wellbeing and development. Retrieved from https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr2013_en.pdf Ribar, D. C. (2013). Immigrants’ time use: A survey of methods and evidence. In A. F. Constant & K. F. Zimmermann (Eds.), International handbook on the economics of migration (pp. 373–392). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782546078.00029 Robinson, J. (2006). Ordinary cities: Between modernity and development . Routledge. Roy, A. (2009). Why India cannot plan its cities: Informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanization. Planning Theory , 8 (1), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095208099299 RoyChowdhury, S. (2021). City of shadows: Slums and informal work in Bangalore . Cambridge University Press. Ruyssen, I., & Salomone, S. (2018). Female migration: A way out of discrimination? Journal of Development Economics , 130 , 224–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.010 Ryan, L. (2011). Migrants’ social networks and weak ties: Accessing resources and constructing relationships post-migration. Sociological Review , 59 (4), 707–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2011.02030.x Ryan, L., Erel, U., & D’Angelo, A. (2016). Migrant capital. Sociology, 49(1), 1–18. https://www.research gate.net/publication/289372765_Introdu ction_Understanding_'MIgrant_Capital'_Lo uise_Ryan_Umut_Erel_Alessio_D'Angelo Safi, M. (2020). Migration and inequality . Polity. Sassen, S. (2014). Expulsions: Brutality and complexity in the global economy. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wpqz2 Sayad, A. (1999). La double absence . Seuil. Sayad, A. (2004). The suffering of the immigrant . Polity. Schmoll, C., & Weber, S. (2023). The Employment Relationship at the Junction between Migration Policies and Economic Policies. Revue européenne des migrations internationales , 37 (1), 2. Schnapper, D. (2007). Qu’est-ce que l’intégration? Gallimard. Schiller, N. G., & Çağlar, A. (2015). Displacement, emplacement and migrant newcomers: rethinking urban sociabilities within multiscalar power, Identities Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2015.1016520 Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review , 24 (6), 783–791. Silverman, D., & Marvasti, A. (2008). Doing qualitative research: A comprehensive guide . Sage. Simmel, G. (1903). The metropolis and mental life. The sociology of Georg Simmel . Free. Simone, A. (2004). For the city yet to come: Changing African life in four cities . Duke University Press. Simone, A. (2019). Improvised lives: Rhythms of endurance in an urban South . Polity. Small, M. L. (2010). Unanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life . Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0021 Standing, G. (2019). The precariat: The new dangerous class (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury. Turner, V. (1969). The ritual process . Aldine. UN-Habitat. (2020). World cities report 2020: The value of sustainable urbanization . United Nations Human Settlements Programme. https://unhabitat.org UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund). (2006). Women on the move . Author. van Dalen, H. P., Groenewold, G., & Schoorl, J. J. (2005). Out of Africa: What drives the pressure to emigrate? Journal of Population Economics , 18 (4), 741–778. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-005-0003-5 Wacquant, L. (2008). Urban outcasts: A comparative sociology of advanced marginality . Polity. Wakil, S. P., Siddique, C. M., & Wakil, F. A. (1981). Between two cultures: A study in socialization of children of immigrants. Journal of Marriage and the Family , 43 (4), 929–940. https://doi.org/10.2307/351349 Wimmer, A., & Glick Schiller, N. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation-state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks , 2 (4), 301–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0374.00043 Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology , 44 (1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1086/217913 Yeoh, B. S. A., Somaiah, B. C., Lam, T., & Acedera, K. F. (2020). Doing family in times of migration: Care temporalities and gender politics in Southeast Asia. Annals of the American Association of Geographers , 110 (6), 1709–1725. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020.1723397 Yi’En, C. (2013). Telling stories of the city: Walking ethnography, affective materialities, and mobile encounters. Space and Culture , 17 (3), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331213499468 Yuval-Davis, N., Wemyss, G., & Cassidy, K. (2018). Everyday bordering, belonging and the reorientation of British immigration legislation. Sociology , 52 (2), 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038517702599 Zhang, X., Lu, X., Huang, C., Liu, W., & Wang, G. (2024). The impact of social capital on migrants’ social integration: Evidence from China. Sustainability , 16 (13), 5564. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135564 Zelizer, V. A. (2010). Economic lives: How culture shapes the economy . Princeton University Press. Zhao, Q., Wu, G., Wang, H., & Aziz, N. (2024). How does choice of residential community affect the social integration of rural migrants: Insights from China. BMC Psychology , 12 ., Article 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9 Footnotes According to the results of the 2024 General Census of Population and Housing (RGPH) published by the Moroccan High Commission for Planning (HCP), internal migration in Morocco is increasingly urban and feminized. More than half of internal migration flows occur between urban areas (around 52–54% between 2014 and 2024), reflecting the growing attraction of cities due to employment opportunities, housing, and improved living conditions. Rural-to-urban migration represents roughly one quarter of internal movements, confirming the persistence of rural exodus, while urban-to-rural migration remains relatively limited. Women now account for more than half of internal migrants, indicating their increasing participation in education, employment, and family-related mobility within the country (HCP, 2025). For an overview of internal mobility patterns in Morocco, including the increasing urbanization and feminization of migration flows, see also HCP (2025). See the report of the Moroccan High Commission for Planning (HCP), Migration interne selon les résultats du recensement général de la population et de l’habitat de 2024. Available at: https://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/ Accessed: 13.11.2025. Moroccan Arabic (Darija) is the everyday spoken dialect used by most Moroccans, whereas Tamazight refers to the indigenous Amazigh language family; Tachelhit is one of its major regional varieties spoken mainly in southwestern Morocco. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9115344","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":622509434,"identity":"7995ff0b-5c2e-40f5-a500-04155ef4b48d","order_by":0,"name":"Lahoussine Sousan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Université Ibn Zohr","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lahoussine","middleName":"","lastName":"Sousan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-03-13 13:39:03","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":106857573,"identity":"0789bc8e-74ed-434a-9567-6fd20cb769da","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-14 07:43:49","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":937393,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eLocalization of the city of Agadir in Morocco. (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/1a0a198ab9ca7ef6dd3e023c.png"},{"id":106961838,"identity":"19ece19b-00d5-45aa-85ca-f87bafa76da0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-15 09:27:14","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":917834,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eOverview of Participants and Socio-demographic characteristics of participants \u0026nbsp;(Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/3ab418dc9f1f6e4f71fa69a2.png"},{"id":106961839,"identity":"30aabacf-ebb0-4f60-a93f-fbbd5febe638","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-15 09:27:14","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":3714936,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(left) the workplace of participant P05 in Agadir, taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/fcda36a3c2b837fd0f647b9b.png"},{"id":106857575,"identity":"53f7f0a4-ce7c-42e3-8153-dcd4a0bc1af8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-14 07:43:49","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":4555167,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(right) the workplace of participant P21 in Agadir, taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/9ace09394aad31fc98ce58e7.png"},{"id":106961188,"identity":"37ee635c-10f1-4df5-843b-751b85d3b744","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-15 09:24:38","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":2457719,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(left) Photo showing the workplace of participant P15, who rents surfboards at the beach in Agadir. The photo was taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/401443a129a8d948c4516aed.png"},{"id":106960717,"identity":"d05c6aa4-129c-4d86-827c-76481a93482b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-15 09:22:48","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":2783765,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e(right) Photo showing the daily breakfast of P15 before the beginning of the working day. The photo was taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/91abefe9e8562581787407a2.png"},{"id":106857578,"identity":"e030079d-38b2-4479-b7f0-c2420321806f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-14 07:43:49","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":496948,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDimensions of Rural-Urban Migration (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/a0493eeadbccd609fb87ab81.png"},{"id":106994412,"identity":"24f1cc79-17e9-4910-87c1-2a2efcd0d1ef","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-15 15:08:23","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":17169452,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9115344/v1/d2e76c5f-7f36-4ec1-928b-2fb55e05a85d.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Dynamics of Rural Transformation and Urban Migration in North Africa: A Socio-Ethnographic Study of Immigrant Socialization in Morocco","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn the context of current global developments, migration and social integration have emerged as inevitable and multifaceted phenomena (Barriga, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; IOM, 2018) that has long occupied a central place within the tradition of social sciences, attracting sustained scholarly attention since the early development of sociological thought (Burgess, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1925\u003c/span\u003e; Park, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR98\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1928\u003c/span\u003e; Petersen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1958\u003c/span\u003e). The study of migration inevitably leads back to the earliest phases of human history, where population movements constituted a fundamental mechanism of social transformation (Greenwood \u0026amp; Hunt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e ; Manning\u0026amp; Trimmer, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Brettell \u0026amp; Hollifield, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). From the prehistoric dispersal of early hominins out of Africa to contemporary global migration flows, human mobility has consistently reshaped social structures, economic systems, and cultural configurations (Bellwood, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Castles, de Haas, \u0026amp; Miller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMigration, as both a historical constant and a modern social phenomenon, cannot be reduced to mere population movement (Idemudia Boehnke, 2020; Peraldi, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e ; Perrot, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Rather, it represents a complex social process embedded in relations of power, economic inequality, and cultural negotiation. As Brettell and Hollifield (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) argue, migration should be understood as a multidimensional process shaped by political, economic, and social forces operating at local, national, and global levels.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHistorically, migration has evolved through distinct phases. In pre-modern societies, large-scale migrations played a decisive role in the formation of states and civilizations. During the modern period, particularly from the fifteenth century onwards, migration intensified through colonial expansion, the transatlantic slave trade, and labor mobility linked to industrialization. Contemporary migration, which accelerated after the Second World War (Mafukidze, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR84\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e), is characterized by increased global interconnectedness, diversification of migration routes, and the growing importance of forced displacement due to conflict, political repression, and economic instability (Castles, de Haas \u0026amp; Miller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). In the 1950s, approximately 250,000 migrants from North Africa\u0026mdash;primarily from Algeria and to a lesser extent from Morocco and Tunisia\u0026mdash;moved to France in response to the country\u0026rsquo;s postwar labor shortage (Malka, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCurrently, Europe represents the primary destination for migrants from Africa and the Middle East and faces increasing pressure at its external borders (Danaj et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Dokos, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Moroccan society has been profoundly shaped by migration throughout its history (Malka, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Both internal and international migration have played a decisive role in structuring social relations, economic development, and spatial organization (Bilgili \u0026amp; Weyel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). From the colonial period onwards, Morocco experienced significant migratory movements, particularly toward Europe. The French colonial administration (1912\u0026ndash;1956) initiated organized labor migration to France, a process that intensified during the post-war economic boom in Western Europe (De Haas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Bhabha, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBetween 1962 and 1972, Moroccan labor migration expanded significantly due to bilateral recruitment agreements with France, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands. These movements were primarily driven by the demand for low-skilled labor in industrial sectors and marked the beginning of a long-term Moroccan presence in Europe (Berriane et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Cortina \u0026amp; Ochoa-Reza, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; El Miri, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Parallel to international migration, Morocco also experienced substantial internal migration, particularly from rural areas to urban centers such as Casablanca, Rabat, and Fez. These movements were closely linked to colonial land expropriation, rural impoverishment, and post-independence development policies that favored urban growth (Simon \u0026amp; Noin, 1972). Rural migration thus became a central mechanism of urban expansion and social transformation.[1]\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn1\" id=\"#FNLinkFn1\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Theoretical Framework","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe rural–urban migration has been vastly discussed as a relational process of social repositioning within structured urban fields shaped by inequality, symbolic power, and spatial differentiation (de Haas, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Safi, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Rather than approaching migration as a linear transition from rural to urban life, the analysis treats it as a transformative process of socialization through which individuals renegotiate identity, belonging, and participation under conditions of structural constraint and uneven opportunity (Massey et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Schiller \u0026amp; Çağlar, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvidently in migration research, however, classical migration theories—particularly neoclassical economic approaches—have often conceptualised migration primarily as the result of rational decision-making processes (Schmoll\u0026amp; Weber, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e., Piguet, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Piguet, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). These approaches assume that individuals move in response to economic incentives and structural inequalities between regions, seeking to maximise opportunities and improve their socio-economic conditions (Massey et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Brettell \u0026amp; Hollifield, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Migration can therefore be understood as a process that disrupts the alignment between embodied dispositions and the social structures in which they were formed. When individuals move across social and institutional contexts, they encounter new power relations, norms, and expectations that may challenge previously internalised dispositions. As a result, migrants are required to reinterpret their social position and continuously adapt their practices to changing institutional environments, social hierarchies, and regimes of recognition (Bourdieu, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e; Giddens, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e; de Haas, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWithin this perspective, socialization is understood as a context-dependent and negotiated process rather than a one-sided adaptation to dominant urban norms. Migrants do not passively adopt prevailing urban values; instead, they actively reinterpret social expectations and strategically use the resources available to them in order to navigate new social environments (Greiner \u0026amp; Sakdapolrak, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Migration can also be understood through the concept of translocality, which highlights the socio-spatial connections that migrants maintain across different places (Greiner \u0026amp; Sakdapolrak, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Rather than being confined to a single locality, migrants’ everyday practices, identities, and social relations often span multiple locations simultaneously. These translocal connections enable migrants to mobilize resources, knowledge, and social networks across different contexts. Consequently, socialization in migration contexts does not occur only within the host society but unfolds within interconnected social spaces that link places of origin and destination.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis perspective aligns with research emphasizing migration as a process of ongoing positioning within translocal and transnational social fields (Levitt \u0026amp; Glick Schiller, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Faist, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). To capture these dynamics analytically, migrant practices are conceptualized along two interrelated orientations: adaptive integration practices and reproductive continuity practices. These orientations represent analytical dimensions rather than fixed behavioral categories and frequently coexist within everyday life.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdaptive integration practices refer to strategies through which migrants engage with urban institutions, labor markets, and spatial arrangements to secure recognition and material stability. Such practices include the expansion of weak social ties, acquisition of urban competencies, and strategic engagement with institutional structures. Empirical research demonstrates that access to diverse social networks and institutional knowledge significantly shapes migrants’ capacity to navigate urban environments and improve life chances (Granovetter, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e; Ryan, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Small, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Studies of urban marginality further show that integration is structured by spatial and institutional inequalities that regulate access to housing, employment, and public participation (Wacquant, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Desmond, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eReproductive continuity practices, by contrast, refer to strategies that maintain moral frameworks, social identities, and relational structures rooted in the place of origin. Migrants frequently sustain dense kinship networks, symbolic attachments, and normative expectations derived from rural social worlds. These practices generate emotional security and social recognition while simultaneously structuring patterns of enclosure and segmented incorporation into urban life (Levitt, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Carling \u0026amp; Erdal, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Hage, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). Research on translocality demonstrates that connections to places of origin constitute an enduring and constitutive dimension of migrant social existence rather than a residual feature of incomplete integration (Mata-Codesal, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Urban space itself functions as a structuring environment that shapes migrant socialization. Cities operate simultaneously as arenas of opportunity and mechanisms of stratification, producing differentiated spatial regimes that organize access to resources and recognition (Lefebvre, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1991\u003c/span\u003e \u0026amp; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e; Harvey, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Robinson, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Informality, spatial marginalization, and precarious labor incorporation are central mechanisms through which migrants experience urban inequality (Roy, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; Simone, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e; Standing, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; RoyChowdhury, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Ethnographic studies of everyday urban practices further show that migrants actively produce urban space through routine practices of navigation, appropriation, and survival (de Certeau, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1984\u003c/span\u003e; Low, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpirical research across diverse contexts consistently demonstrates that rural–urban migrants occupy intermediate social positions characterized by partial participation, constrained mobility, and ambivalent belonging (Portes \u0026amp; Zhou, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e; Holston, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Bayat, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e \u0026amp; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Rather than producing full integration or exclusion, migration generates hybrid social formations shaped by structural inequality and strategic adaptation. This condition of structural ambivalence is reinforced by labor precarity, spatial concentration, and limited institutional inclusion (Auyero, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Sassen, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Moroccan context provides a critical site for examining these processes. Rapid urbanization, regional disparities, and labor market informality structure the conditions under which rural migrants attempt to establish themselves in cities such as Agadir (de Haas, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e; Bilgili \u0026amp; Weyel, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Limited institutional support and restricted access to stable employment intensify reliance on informal networks while simultaneously constraining broader urban participation. Migrant trajectories therefore reflect the interaction between structural constraints and agentic practices embedded in everyday social life. By integrating practice theory, socialization theory, and urban sociology, this study advances an analytical framework that links micro-level experiences with macro-structural transformations. Migration is conceptualized as a continuous process of negotiated positioning within differentiated urban space rather than a transition between fixed social categories. This perspective enables a more nuanced understanding of how migrants construct belonging, mobilize resources, and navigate inequality in contemporary urban environments.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Methodological approach","content":"\u003ch2\u003eResearch Context\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study adopts a qualitative research design aimed at exploring processes of socialization and pre-socialization and their influence on migrants’ behavior and social practices within the urban context. Particular attention is given to the ways in which rural migrants negotiate their integration into the city as a sociocultural space shaped by specific norms, values, and power relations (Wakil, Siddique \u0026amp; Wakil, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1981\u003c/span\u003e). The city is approached not merely as a geographical setting, but as a social field in which multiple identities interact, coexist, and sometimes conflict.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe central research question guiding this study is the following: \u003cb\u003eHow do young rural migrants achieve social integration within the urban environment?\u003c/b\u003e This question emerges from the assumption that migrants bring with them cultural dispositions shaped by rural social structures, which are then confronted with the norms and expectations of urban life. The transition from village to city thus constitutes a critical moment of social and symbolic negotiation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research does not aim to provide a statistically representative account of migration and integration in Morocco. Rather, it adopts an interpretative and exploratory perspective, limited in time and space, in order to gain in-depth insights into lived experiences (Ocejo, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Shipman, 2014). The study follows an ethnographic qualitative logic, emphasizing understanding over measurement and interpretation over generalization (Yi’En, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, the objective is not to quantify social phenomena but to grasp “the ‘dailyness’ of urban life and the meanings immigrants attribute to their experiences and social practices (Latham \u0026amp; McCormack, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e). Given the complex and subjective nature of social integration, a qualitative methodological approach was deemed most appropriate. This approach allows for the exploration of perceptions, representations, and strategies through which individuals interpret and navigate their social realities (Ocejo, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). In line with interpretive social research, the study seeks to understand realities of social action from the actor’s point of view and to reconstruct meaning through close engagement with participants’ narratives (Isoke, Z. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch3\u003eSample and Sampling Procedure\u003c/h3\u003e\u003cp\u003eFieldwork was carried out in the city of Agadir in Morocco (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), between November 2024 and February 2025. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling based on several criteria, including rural origin, a minimum of five years of residence in the urban area, and age. In total, 22 individuals participated in the study, comprising 14 men and 8 women (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The study therefore employed theoretical sampling (Silverman \u0026amp; Marvasti, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e) to include diverse profiles and capture perspectives from both migrants and individuals who remained in place. This diversity emerged organically during the recruitment process and enabled the inclusion of a wider range of perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch3\u003eData Collection\u003c/h3\u003e\u003cp\u003eData were collected primarily through semi-structured, face-to-face interviews lasting between 45 and 90 minutes. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e gives an overview on the socio-demographic characteristics of the participants. The interviews focused on participants’ migration trajectories, experiences of urban life, social relations, and perceptions of integration (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Most interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent. In addition, participant observation was employed as a complementary method, enabling the researcher to observe everyday interactions and shared living spaces, particularly among male migrants. The data were analyzed using the method of constant comparison, allowing for the identification of recurring themes, patterns, and conceptual categories. This analytical strategy facilitated the gradual construction of an interpretive framework grounded in empirical material while remaining sensitive to contextual and cultural specificities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch3\u003eLocal languages\u003c/h3\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo address both linguistic and ethical considerations, all interviews were conducted in the local languages predominantly spoken in the Sous-Massa region, namely Moroccan Arabic \u003cem\u003e(Darija)\u003c/em\u003e and Tamazight \u003cem\u003e(Tachelhit)\u003c/em\u003e[2]\u003ca class=\"FNLink\" href=\"#Fn2\" id=\"#FNLinkFn2\"\u003e\u003c/a\u003e. Conducting interviews in participants’ native languages allows respondents to articulate their experiences more freely and accurately, thereby improving the authenticity and reliability of the data collected. The interviewer was fluent in both languages and possessed strong cultural familiarity with the research context.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003ch2\u003eUrbanization and Social Transformation: Identity Crisis and the Reconfiguration of Social Ties\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings presented in this section address central questions related to the socialization of rural migrants in the urban environment: Where do migrants spend their time? (Hamermesh \u0026amp; Trejo, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Ribar, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) How do they construct social relations? How do they relate to the urban space and to their village of origin? These questions are fundamental to understanding integration not as a fixed outcome, but as a dynamic and negotiated social process. The socialization process here is understood as a gradual and often fragile process through which migrants learn to navigate the urban environment, internalize new norms, and reconstruct their social identities. For rural migrants, the city initially appears as an unfamiliar and sometimes threatening space, producing feelings of hesitation, insecurity, and social distance. This experience is characteristic of what sociological literature describes as the “initial disorientation phase” of migration (Castles et al., 2014; Ryan et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch3\u003eConstructing Social Ties in the City: Recreating the “Village” in Urban Contexts\u003c/h3\u003e\u003cp\u003eSocial life is fundamentally structured through social relationships. From a sociological perspective, the absence of social ties signifies social marginalization, while their presence constitutes the basis of social integration (Hu \u0026amp; Cheung, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Migration often disrupts established social networks and requires individuals to rebuild social ties within new structural contexts. In this process, social identity plays an important role, as it reflects the individual, interpersonal, and collective mechanisms through which people become embedded in social structures (Davis et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In modern societies, traditional forms of solidarity based on kinship and locality have increasingly been replaced by more individualized and instrumental relations. However, this transformation is neither uniform nor universal. In many migration contexts, traditional solidarities persist and are reactivated as survival strategies (Small, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Liu et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor rural migrants in Moroccan cities, the first response to urban uncertainty is often the reconstruction of familiar social networks. Migrants actively seek relatives, acquaintances, or fellow villagers who can facilitate their entry into urban life. This strategy functions as a mechanism of protection, orientation, and social recognition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“When I came for the first time, I stayed with my older brother. I didn’t know anyone in the city, and I had very little money. My brother helped me find work in a dairy shop through someone he knew. Without him, I would probably have ended up homeless or working under very bad conditions.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P03)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis statement illustrates the central role of kinship-based solidarity in mitigating the risks of urban marginalization. Similar patterns have been identified in migration studies emphasizing the importance of social capital in access to employment and housing (Zhang et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Lőrincz \u0026amp; Németh, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Ryan et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Bourdieu, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother participant emphasized trust and familiarity as key elements in social relations:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“I mostly deal with people from my village. In the city you never know who to trust. People here are different. With people from your village, you know their family, their background. That makes things easier.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P12)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTrust emerges as a key factor structuring social interactions in urban contexts. In unfamiliar city environments, migrants often rely on what Robert D. Putnam (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e) conceptualizes as bonding social capital—close and dense networks that provide emotional security and practical support. Such locally embedded and relatively closed social structures help maintain norms, reciprocity, and trust, as emphasized by James S. Coleman (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). While these networks offer important resources for coping with uncertainty, they may simultaneously limit opportunities for broader social integration and the formation of more diverse social ties (Anthias, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender also plays an important role in shaping these strategies. Male migrants often turn to village-based networks as sources of stability, solidarity, and economic opportunity. In contrast, some female migrants pursue different strategies. For them, distancing themselves from village-based social relations can represent a form of autonomy and a way out of discrimination and to negotiate greater independence from traditional norms and forms of social control (Ruyssen \u0026amp; Salomone, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“I try to avoid people from my village. They watch you, talk about you, judge everything you do. In the city, with strangers, you can live more freely.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P06)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch in feminist migration studies suggests that the relative anonymity of urban environments can create opportunities for women to gain greater autonomy and exercise more self-determination (Ruyssen \u0026amp; Salomone, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). At the same time, migration decisions often differ between women and men. Studies indicate that men’s decisions to migrate are more frequently shaped by individual and economic motivations, whereas women’s migration is often connected to family-related considerations, such as supporting household members or joining family members abroad (Heering et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). However, women may also migrate in response to structural inequalities, including gender-based violence, discrimination, or limited opportunities in their place of origin (Afsar, 2009; UNFPA, 2006; van Dalen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Village as a Symbolic and Social Anchor in the Immigrant Experience\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough migrants physically relocate to the city, the village continues to function as a symbolic reference point. It represents familiarity, moral order, and social security. Migrants often attempt to “reproduce” the village within the city through shared language, customs, and everyday practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“It’s easier to live with someone from your region. You know who he is, where he comes from, and what to expect. If you need something, he will help you.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis confirms the argument that migration does not entail a complete rupture with the place of origin but rather leads to the formation of translocal identities (Levitt et al, 2004; Lin, de Meulder, \u0026amp; Wang, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). The village is socially reconstructed within the urban environment and continues to shape patterns of trust, cooperation, and belonging. However, this attachment can also generate tensions. While village-based networks offer protection, they may also reinforce control mechanisms, particularly over women, and limit individual autonomy. Consequently, some migrants consciously distance themselves from these networks in search of greater independence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSocialization as a Relational and Stratified Process of Urban Positioning\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings indicate that socialization within the urban environment cannot be conceptualized as a linear trajectory toward integration. Rather, it constitutes a relational and stratified process shaped by unequal access to resources, symbolic recognition, and social networks. Urban incorporation is mediated by gendered expectations, educational trajectories, migration histories, and the distribution of social capital, all of which structure migrants’ opportunities for participation and belonging.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMigrants do not passively adapt to the urban environment but actively negotiate their social positioning through selective engagement with institutional and informal networks. This negotiation reflects what scholars conceptualize as “translocational positionality,” in which individuals navigate multiple, shifting locations of power and belonging across social spaces (Anthias, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). The city thus emerges as a contested social field in which belonging is not granted but continuously produced through interaction, recognition, and boundary-making processes (Wimmer \u0026amp; Glick Schiller, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Yuval-Davis et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e ).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIntegration should therefore be understood not as a stable outcome but as an ongoing, multidimensional process shaped by structural opportunities and constraints as well as by migrants’ agency. This perspective aligns with process-oriented frameworks of integration that emphasize social participation, access to resources, and relational embeddedness rather than cultural assimilation alone (Ager \u0026amp; Strang, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRural Attachments as Symbolic Capital: Continuity, Identity, and Translocal Belonging\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban migration does not constitute a rupture with the rural social world. Instead, migrants carry with them embodied dispositions, cultural meanings, and relational ties that continue to shape their practices and self-understandings after relocation. From a Bourdieusian perspective, migration involves not only spatial mobility but also the transposition of habitus and forms of capital into a new social field, where they may be revalued, marginalized, or strategically mobilized (Bourdieu, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e; Bourdieu, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe persistent orientation toward the village can be interpreted as a form of symbolic anchoring that stabilizes identity under conditions of social uncertainty. Rather than indicating incomplete integration, these attachments may function as resources of recognition, emotional security, and social legitimacy. Such dynamics resonate with transnational and translocal approaches to migration, which emphasize that migrants inhabit multiple social worlds simultaneously and maintain meaningful ties across spatial divides (Levitt \u0026amp; Glick Schiller, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis continuity raises broader analytical questions regarding the relationship between mobility and belonging. Return practices, whether physical or symbolic, may represent strategies of self-affirmation and status negotiation within both urban and rural fields. The village thus remains a socially productive reference point through which migrants interpret urban experiences, negotiate identity, and reproduce social meaning across space.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRural Origin as a Structuring Horizon of Urban Life\u003c/h2\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Village as a Persistent Social Infrastructure of Belonging\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe empirical material demonstrates that rural origin continues to function as a durable social infrastructure shaping migrants’ practices, expectations, and identity claims. Material exchanges, emotional obligations, and moral recognition remain anchored in village-based relational networks that persist beyond spatial relocation. Rather than dissolving through migration, these ties are reconfigured across space and sustained through practices of periodic return, communication, and symbolic reaffirmation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“I go back to the village two or three times a year, especially during holidays. I visit my parents so they can pray for me. I see my relatives, stay a week or so, then I return to the city to work.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P05)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis statement illustrates how return visits can thus be interpreted as mechanisms of relational maintenance that stabilize migrants’ membership within extended kinship structures and moral communities. Contemporary migration research conceptualizes such dynamics through the lens of translocality, emphasizing that social life unfolds across interconnected places rather than within bounded territories (Greiner \u0026amp; Sakdapolrak, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The village remains a site of normative orientation, social memory, and moral evaluation even when daily practices are urban.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFigure\u0026nbsp;3\u003c/b\u003e (left) the workplace of participant P05 in Agadir, taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother participant emphasized the strategic dimension of return:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“The city? I’m just passing through it. I came to work, to survive. But I never forget my origins. I go back so my family knows I still exist. One day I might need my share of land or inheritance. The city isn’t ours—we’re only guests.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P21)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis statement illustrates how return practices are not merely expressions of emotional attachment but also serve strategic and future-oriented purposes. Although migrants spend most of their time in urban areas due to work and economic demands, maintaining an active presence in the village remains crucial (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;3 and Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Visibility within origin communities functions as a mechanism for securing access to future resources, including inheritance rights, social support, and protection. In this sense, rural attachment can be understood as a form of relational capital, embedded in long-term reciprocal obligations and expectations (Ryan, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eReturn as Performance of Recognition and Social Worth\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eReturn migration is not merely a spatial movement but a socially structured performance of achievement and recognition. Migrants anticipate evaluation by village audiences and prepare their return accordingly through material displays, symbolic gestures, and narratives of success.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne interviewee explained:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“When you go back, people look at what you’re wearing, what you brought, whether you have a car or not. If you come back with nothing, they know you didn’t succeed.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P09)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis dynamic aligns with recognition-theoretical perspectives that view social integration as dependent upon intersubjective validation and status attribution (Honneth, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e). The migrant’s return becomes a moment in which claims to dignity, success, and adulthood are publicly negotiated. Material objects—clothing, gifts, consumption practices—function as visible markers of social mobility and competence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom a sociological perspective, such practices can be understood as processes of status signaling within stratified moral economies, where worth is measured through culturally specific criteria of achievement (Zelizer, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Return visits thus operate as socially regulated moments of evaluation that reproduce hierarchies of prestige and belonging within the rural field.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRural Attachment as Resource and Constraint\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile village ties provide recognition and social security, they may simultaneously impose normative expectations and mechanisms of control. Migrants remain embedded in moral communities that regulate behavior through reputation, obligation, and surveillance across distance. Such dynamics illustrate that belonging is not inherently emancipatory but structured by power relations and gendered expectations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eGender-sensitive migration research demonstrates that translocal ties may reproduce unequal norms regarding autonomy, mobility, and family responsibility (Mahler \u0026amp; Pessar, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Women in particular may experience rural attachment as both protection and restriction, negotiating belonging through selective engagement or strategic distancing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis ambivalence highlights that rural origin operates as a field of social regulation that migrants must continuously navigate, balancing autonomy with relational obligation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eOscillating Belonging and the Multiplicity of Social Fields\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings suggest that migrants inhabit a condition of oscillating belonging structured by simultaneous participation in urban and rural social fields. The city offers economic opportunity, anonymity, and individual mobility, whereas the village provides symbolic anchoring, recognition, and continuity. Rather than representing opposing spaces, these locations constitute interdependent arenas within which migrants construct biographies, identities, and strategies of advancement. Recent scholarship conceptualizes such experiences as multi-sited social embeddedness, where individuals operate within overlapping regimes of value, recognition, and opportunity (Faist, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Schiller \u0026amp; Çağlar, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis condition generates a productive tension that shapes migrants’ aspirations and practices. Belonging becomes neither territorially fixed nor singular but relational, situational, and continuously negotiated across social space.The migrant’s life unfolds in constant movement between these two poles:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe city: a space of labor, anonymity, and material survival.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe village: a space of recognition, memory, and social validation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e\u003ch2\u003eVillage and City: Moral Spatiality and the Sacred–Profane Order of Migration\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eHuman action unfolds within symbolic universes that organize meaning, legitimacy, and social expectation. These symbolic orders are historically produced and socially maintained through everyday practice and collective interpretation. Migration exposes individuals to multiple normative systems simultaneously, thereby rendering visible the moral structuring of space (Frederiks, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Rather than being neutral containers of activity, places function as moral environments that regulate conduct through culturally embedded expectations and relational accountability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWithin this perspective, the sacred–profane distinction can be understood as a sociological mechanism that organizes spatial morality. Sacred spaces are socially protected domains associated with legitimacy, continuity, and normative intensity, whereas profane spaces are characterized by flexibility, contingency, and reduced moral visibility. Importantly, sacredness is not limited to religious meaning but encompasses socially elevated norms, practices, and relationships that demand conformity and respect. In rural–urban migration, this distinction emerges not as an abstract dichotomy but as an experiential framework through which migrants interpret, inhabit, and negotiate space.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Village as a Sacred Moral Community\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eFigure\u0026nbsp;5\u003c/b\u003e (left) Photo showing the workplace of participant P15, who rents surfboards at the beach in Agadir. The photo was taken during fieldwork (Source: Author, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor rural migrants, the village is constructed as a morally saturated space structured by recognition, surveillance, and collective memory. Social relations are dense, reputational knowledge is widely shared, and behaviour is interpreted within a long-term moral horizon. The village therefore operates as a community of accountability in which individuals remain symbolically visible even in physical absence.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs one respondent stated:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“When I go back to the village, I stop everything. I don’t smoke, I don’t drink. My mother is there, the family is there. You have to behave properly.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P15)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis statement illustrates how spatial relocation does not suspend normative obligation. Instead, migrants re-enter a moral order that demands conformity through embodied discipline and symbolic respect. While everyday life in the city is primarily structured by work routines and economic survival (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;5), it is simultaneously anchored in repetitive practices that stabilize daily life, such as shared meals and morning routines (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). The presence of kinship networks transforms the village into a space of heightened moral reflexivity in which everyday practices acquire ethical significance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSociological research conceptualizes such environments as moral communities, where norms are reproduced through informal sanctions, reputation, and shared values (Chu \u0026amp; Lee, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Alowais \u0026amp; Suliman, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The durability of rural moral authority reflects the persistence of social memory and relational embeddedness across distance. Migrants remain accountable to a collective gaze that transcends physical co-presence. Furthermore, the normative intensity of village life can be understood through theories of social regulation in tightly knit communities, where honour, respectability, and conformity structure social belonging. Rural space thus acquires sacred qualities not through religious doctrine alone but through dense relational structures that elevate particular behaviours as morally binding.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe City as a Space of Moral Indeterminacy\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn contrast, the city is experienced as a space of reduced normative density and increased situational autonomy. Social relations are more fragmented, anonymity is structurally enabled, and behaviour is less tightly monitored by stable communities of recognition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs one participant noted:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“In the city, everything is allowed. You smoke, you drink, you do what you want. No one knows you. But in the village, you have to be careful.\u003c/em\u003e” (Interview P22)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban space here emerges as a domain of moral indeterminacy rather than moral absence. Migrants do not abandon normative frameworks but encounter plural and competing expectations that allow for selective adaptation. The city provides what urban sociology describes as conditions of situational freedom produced by weak ties, social heterogeneity, and spatial scale (Wirth, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1938\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis transformation of moral visibility can be understood through theories of urban anonymity, which emphasize that social distance reduces reputational accountability and expands behavioural possibility (Lofland, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). The urban environment thereby enables experimentation with practices that would carry symbolic risk in the village.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAt the same time, urban freedom is not purely emancipatory. It is embedded in economic precarity, social fragmentation, and instrumental relations. The profane character of the city reflects not moral decline but the restructuring of social control under conditions of scale and differentiation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMoral Compartmentalization and Spatially Situated Conduct\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe migrant’s everyday life unfolds through continuous movement between these two moral orders. Behaviour is not governed by a single normative system but calibrated according to spatial context and relational audience. Migrants engage in what can be conceptualized as spatially situated morality, adjusting conduct in response to the symbolic expectations attached to specific places.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe empirical pattern can be summarized as follows:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eVillage: visibility, respectability, restraint, honour\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eCity: anonymity, flexibility, experimentation, pragmatism\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis duality reflects processes of moral compartmentalization, whereby individuals maintain multiple normative repertoires without perceiving them as contradictory. Contemporary sociological research demonstrates that migrants routinely navigate plural moral frameworks across translocal contexts, developing situational strategies of self-presentation and conduct (Levitt, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Ley, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRather than indicating identity fragmentation, such negotiation constitutes a form of adaptive competence that allows migrants to maintain belonging in multiple social worlds simultaneously. The sacred–profane distinction therefore functions not as a rigid opposition but as a relational structure organizing behavioural expectations across space.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eThe Immigrant and the City: Socialization or Alienation?\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eContemporary sociological research emphasizes that socialization is a context-dependent process shaped by institutional access, spatial positioning, and material conditions. Urbanization restructures socialization not merely by introducing new cultural references but by reorganizing the distribution of opportunities, recognition, and participation. Migration therefore constitutes not only a geographic transition but an entry into differentiated regimes of inclusion and exclusion that condition the possibility of belonging (Robinson, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Simone, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRather than a linear process of integration, migrant socialization in the city unfolds under conditions of uncertainty, precarious incorporation, and partial participation. Individuals encounter new normative systems while simultaneously confronting structural barriers that restrict their ability to internalize and enact urban citizenship. Socialization and alienation thus emerge not as opposites but as coexisting processes within unequal urban environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAlienation as a Structuring Experience of Urban Life\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this study, alienation refers to a structurally produced condition of limited agency within urban space. Migrants frequently described their relationship to the city as instrumental and survival-oriented rather than participatory. The urban environment is experienced as external, demanding, and difficult to appropriate as a space of belonging.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs one respondent explained:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“It’s just work and home. I don’t have time to go out or discover anything. You want to live, like everyone else, but what can you do? Life defeats you.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P17)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis narrative illustrates a form of constrained urban presence characterized by functional inclusion without social integration. Urban theory conceptualizes such conditions as marginal incorporation, where individuals are economically necessary yet socially peripheral (Sassen, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Migrants participate in the urban economy but remain excluded from the symbolic and cultural dimensions of city life.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch on urban marginality further demonstrates that alienation is often produced through structural inequalities in housing, labour markets, and institutional access rather than through cultural distance alone (Wacquant, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Migrants’ estrangement from urban life thus reflects broader processes of socio-spatial stratification embedded within contemporary cities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eRestricted Mobility and the Uneven Right to Urban Space\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe empirical findings reveal that migrants’ movements within the city are highly constrained. Everyday life is organized around a limited circuit of residence, workplace, and essential services. This restricted spatial practice reflects structural pressures including economic precarity, time scarcity, and vulnerability within labour markets.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne participant captured this reality succinctly:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003e“Work to home, home to work. There’s no time for anything else.”\u003c/em\u003e (Interview P14)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban sociological research conceptualizes such patterns as restricted urban navigation, where access to the city’s social and cultural infrastructure is unevenly distributed across social groups (Harvey, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The capacity to use urban space as a resource depends on material security, time autonomy, and institutional inclusion — resources often unavailable to precarious migrants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eScholars of unequal urbanism argue that contemporary cities function as differentiated terrains of access rather than unified social environments (Marcuse, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e). Physical presence in the city does not guarantee meaningful participation in urban life. Migrants therefore inhabit what may be described as partial urban citizenship, characterized by presence without full access.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSocial Enclaves and Protective Insulation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFaced with uncertainty and exclusion, migrants rely heavily on dense social networks rooted in shared origin, kinship, or occupational proximity. These networks function as mechanisms of survival, facilitating access to employment, housing, and emotional support. However, they also produce bounded forms of belonging that limit broader social interaction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmpirical urban research conceptualizes such formations as migrant social infrastructures — informal systems of cooperation that compensate for institutional exclusion (Simone, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). These infrastructures enable everyday survival but may simultaneously reinforce social segmentation by concentrating interaction within homogeneous networks.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs a result, migrants often reproduce familiar social structures within the urban environment. Rather than dissolving rural identities, migration reterritorializes them in new spatial contexts. Urban incorporation thus occurs through continuity as much as transformation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis dynamic raises a central analytical question: does urban residence generate integration, or does it produce parallel social worlds within the city?\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings suggest that migrants experience a form of segmented incorporation, characterized by economic participation combined with social distance from dominant urban institutions (Portes \u0026amp; Zhou, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAlienation, Agency, and Conditional Belonging\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite structural constraints, migrants demonstrate adaptive agency in navigating urban life. They develop strategies of endurance, selective participation, and pragmatic adjustment. However, such agency operates within narrow structural limits and does not necessarily translate into recognition or full membership.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban citizenship research highlights that belonging is enacted through everyday practices of presence, participation, and recognition (Holston, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Migrants’ restricted access to these practices produces what may be conceptualized as conditional belonging — a form of inclusion dependent on economic function rather than social recognition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUrban alienation therefore emerges as a relational condition situated at the intersection of labour precarity, spatial inequality, and symbolic marginalization. Migrants occupy the city materially but remain socially peripheral, navigating an urban order that includes them functionally while excluding them normatively.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eRural\u0026ndash;urban migration cannot be understood simply as a spatial movement or as a purely economic adjustment strategy (Kuhnt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; de Haas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Instead, it is shaped by different forms of capital, including social capital (relationships and networks), economic capital (material resources), and human capital (knowledge and skills), which significantly influence migration processes (de Haas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Migration should therefore be viewed as a relational and ongoing transformation that affects social positioning, identity formation, and everyday practices.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMigrants do not arrive in urban areas as socially neutral actors; rather, they bring with them historically shaped dispositions, value systems, and patterns of social relations that have developed within rural social structures (de Haas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). These inherited orientations continue to influence how individuals perceive, interpret, and navigate their new urban environment, even when the move involves a major spatial and social transition. Although the relative importance of the factors influencing migration decisions varies between individuals\u0026mdash;whether migrants or refugees\u0026mdash;the pursuit of improved living conditions and better opportunities remains a common underlying motivation (\u0026Ouml;zden \u0026amp; Wagner, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR97\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eVillage-based socialization, which is characterized by dense interpersonal relationships, strong moral accountability, and collective forms of recognition, often continues to shape migrants\u0026rsquo; perspectives and practices even after moving to the city (Miles \u0026amp; Ebrey, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The findings suggest that migration does not simply dissolve these normative frameworks; rather, it transforms and reconfigures them within a new urban context. Consequently, social integration in the city should not be understood as a straightforward or linear process of incorporation. Instead, it develops through complex interactions shaped by migrants\u0026rsquo; social networks, their access to resources, and their position within urban socio-spatial structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrban experiences are therefore interpreted through previously internalized social norms and cultural orientations, leading to diverse patterns of adaptation rather than a single, uniform pathway of integration. At the same time, prevailing village norms that encourage young people to move away from rural life and agricultural work can create tensions. As Clendenning (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) argues, while such discourses push young people toward urban opportunities, their socially shaped dispositions and limited resources may constrain their available life trajectories. This contradiction can make future prospects particularly challenging for young people from lower-income rural households.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe village remains a constitutive axis of belonging and symbolic legitimacy. Continued return practices, material exchanges, and affective ties sustain a translocal social existence in which rural and urban affiliations coexist. Migration thus functions as a strategy of continuity as much as transformation. Economic participation in the city often serves to reproduce social recognition in the village, indicating that urban incorporation and rural belonging are mutually constitutive rather than mutually exclusive. This dynamic reveals a structural paradox: urban residence is frequently instrumental, while rural belonging remains existential. The city functions as a site of labor, survival, and constrained opportunity, whereas the village retains symbolic authority as a space of recognition, identity affirmation, and moral order. Migrants\u0026rsquo; everyday practices therefore unfold within a field of normative plurality characterized by competing expectations and context-dependent behavioural adjustments. The multidimensional nature of these processes\u0026mdash;spanning social, economic, and symbolic domains\u0026mdash;is summarized above (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings support the conceptualization of migration as a process of dual or relational socialization. Migrants develop situational competencies that enable them to navigate heterogeneous normative environments by modulating behaviour across spatial contexts. This adaptive capacity reflects agency and social competence; however, it simultaneously produces tension, uncertainty, and partial inclusion. Belonging becomes segmented rather than cumulative. Migrants participate in multiple social worlds without achieving full incorporation into any single one.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe empirical evidence further suggests that alienation and socialization should not be treated as mutually exclusive outcomes. Instead, they operate simultaneously within structurally unequal urban environments. Socialization occurs through work participation, network formation, and everyday urban routines, yet these processes unfold under conditions of limited access, restricted mobility, and precarious incorporation. Alienation therefore emerges not as a psychological anomaly but as a structurally produced condition rooted in the misalignment between inherited dispositions and the institutional logics of urban life.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings challenge classical linear models of integration that presuppose gradual absorption into a unified social order. Rather than convergence toward a single normative framework, migrants experience pluralized and uneven incorporation across social domains. Identity, belonging, and participation are continuously negotiated across overlapping social fields structured by inequality, mobility constraints, and symbolic hierarchies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUltimately, rural\u0026ndash;urban dynamics of migration appears as an ongoing process of relational positioning within differentiated regimes of recognition and exclusion. Migrants inhabit the city materially while remaining anchored in rural moral economies, producing a form of conditional belonging that is situational, negotiated, and structurally bounded. The study therefore supports a processual understanding of migration in which socialization, alienation, continuity, and transformation are analytically inseparable dimensions of the same social experience.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec29\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations of the Study\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite its analytical contributions, this study has several limitations that should be acknowledged:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, the research relies primarily on qualitative data drawn from a specific socio-cultural context. While this allows for in-depth analysis, it limits the generalizability of the findings to other migration settings or national contexts. Second, the study focuses mainly on male migration experiences, reflecting the demographic composition of the field. Future research should further explore gendered dimensions of migration, particularly the experiences of women, whose trajectories may involve different forms of constraint, agency, and negotiation. Third, the research captures a particular moment in the migratory experience but does not fully account for long-term trajectories or intergenerational dynamics. Longitudinal studies would provide valuable insights into how patterns of socialization and belonging evolve over time. Finally, the study does not extensively address institutional actors such as state agencies, local governments, or NGOs, whose role in shaping migrant integration deserves further investigation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study has examined the social trajectories of rural migrants in the urban context, focusing on processes of socialization, belonging, and everyday practice. Drawing on qualitative data and sociological theory, the analysis demonstrates that rural\u0026ndash;urban migration is not merely a demographic or economic transition but a profoundly social and symbolic process that reconfigures identities, relationships, and modes of existence. The findings show that migrants do not simply shift from a rural to an urban way of life. Rather, they occupy a liminal social position marked by dual attachments and negotiated forms of belonging. The village persists as a powerful moral and symbolic reference point that continues to shape migrants\u0026rsquo; values, aspirations, and self-understandings, even after prolonged urban residence. Simultaneously, urban life introduces structural constraints that demand adaptation, strategic flexibility, and emotional regulation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstead of dissolving rural social structures, migration frequently reproduces them in transformed forms within the urban environment. Kinship-based and origin-based networks provide crucial material and emotional support, yet they also foster social enclosure and limit broader participation in urban society. Consequently, the city is often experienced not as a space of emancipation but as a domain of regulated mobility and constrained opportunity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study further underscores the central role of labour in structuring migrants\u0026rsquo; urban experience. Work functions not only as an economic necessity but as the primary organizing principle of everyday life. Long working hours, precarious employment conditions, and restricted access to urban resources contribute to a form of structural alienation embedded in spatial arrangements, labour relations, and unequal opportunities for participation. At a theoretical level, these findings challenge binary frameworks that oppose integration to exclusion, or rural tradition to urban modernity. Migration emerges instead as an ongoing process of negotiation across multiple social worlds. Migrants are neither fully incorporated nor entirely marginalized; they inhabit an intermediate social space shaped by continuity, adaptation, and structural constraint. This perspective calls for a relational and processual understanding of migration that foregrounds the interplay between social reproduction, spatial transformation, and lived experience.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eThe author would like to express his sincere gratitude to everyone who supported him in the process of completing this paper, took the time to read and review it, and provided valuable feedback that contributed to its improvement.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable (single-authored).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eThis research received no external funding.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eData sharing is not applicable to this article as there are no datasets. Interview recordings and transcripts are confidential and shall not be shared.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNot applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eThere are no potential conflicts of interest disclosed by the author(s) in connection with the research, authorship, and/or publication of this work.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAfsar, R. (2011). Contextualizing gender and migration in South Asia: Critical insights. \u003cem\u003eGender Technology and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e(3), 389\u0026ndash;410. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/097185241101500304\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/097185241101500304\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAger, A., \u0026amp; Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Refugee Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e21\u003c/em\u003e(2), 166\u0026ndash;191. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fen016\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1093/jrs/fen016\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlowais, A. A., \u0026amp; Suliman, A. S. (2025). When help hurts: Moral disengagement and the myth of the supportive migrant network. \u003cem\u003eSocial Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e, 386. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/socsci14060386\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/socsci14060386\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnthias, F. (2002). Where do I belong? Narrating collective identity and translocational positionality. \u003cem\u003eEthnicities\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(4), 491\u0026ndash;514. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/14687968020020040301\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/14687968020020040301\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnthias, F. (2020). Transnational mobility, migration research and intersectionality. \u003cem\u003eNordic Journal of Migration Research\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;17. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2478/v10202-011-0032-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2478/v10202-011-0032-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAppadurai, A. (1996). \u003cem\u003eModernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization\u003c/em\u003e. University of Minnesota Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAuyero, J. (2012). \u003cem\u003ePatients of the state: The politics of waiting in Argentina\u003c/em\u003e. Duke University Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1215/9780822395287\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1215/9780822395287\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarriga, W. (2013). Migration trends in the contemporary world. An Overview. Migration Policy Review, 5, 151\u0026ndash;171. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://iminseisaku.org/top/pdf/journal/005/005_150.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://iminseisaku.org/top/pdf/journal/005/005_150.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBauman, Z. (2000). \u003cem\u003eLiquid modernity\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBayat, A. (2013). Life as politics: How ordinary people change the Middle East (2nd ed.). Stanford University Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.29173/CJS8882\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.29173/CJS8882\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBayat, A. (2022). \u003cem\u003eRevolutionary life: The everyday of the Arab Spring\u003c/em\u003e. Harvard University Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4159/9780674269484\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4159/9780674269484\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBellwood, P. (2015). \u003cem\u003eFirst migrants: Ancient migration in global perspective\u003c/em\u003e. Wiley-Blackwell. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774315000116\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0959774315000116\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerriane, M., Aderghal, M., Idrissi Janati, M., \u0026amp; Berriane, J. (2010). \u003cem\u003eNew mobilities around Morocco: A case study of the city of Fes (Final report for the MacArthur-funded project African Perspectives on Human Mobility)\u003c/em\u003e. Research Team for the Regions and Regionalisation, Universit\u0026eacute; Mohammed V. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.migrationinstitute.org/files/completed-projects/morocco_2011-report.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.migrationinstitute.org/files/completed-projects/morocco_2011-report.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBerry, J. W. (2024). Acculturation of rural\u0026ndash;urban migrants in China: Strategies and determinants. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Intercultural Relations\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e101\u003c/em\u003e., Article 101991. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.101991\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ijintrel.2024.101991\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBhabha, J. (2014). \u003cem\u003eChild migration and human rights in a global age\u003c/em\u003e. Princeton University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBiehl, J., \u0026amp; Locke, P. (2017). \u003cem\u003eUnfinished: The anthropology of becoming\u003c/em\u003e. Duke University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBilgili, \u0026Ouml;., \u0026amp; Weyel, S. (2009). \u003cem\u003eMigration in Morocco: History, current trends and future prospects\u003c/em\u003e. CARIM.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBonizzoni, P., \u0026amp; Leonini, L. (2020). Cross-Border Families and Social Issues: A Sociological Analysis. In I. Viarengo \u0026amp; F. C. Villata (Eds.), Planning the Future of Cross Border Families: A Path Through Coordination (pp. 23\u0026ndash;30). Hart Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5040/9781509919895.ch-002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5040/9781509919895.ch-002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdieu, P. (1977). \u003cem\u003eOutline of a theory of practice\u003c/em\u003e. Cambridge University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241\u0026ndash;258). Greenwood.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdieu, P. (1990). \u003cem\u003eThe logic of practice\u003c/em\u003e. Stanford University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdieu, P. (1991). \u003cem\u003eLanguage and symbolic power\u003c/em\u003e. Harvard University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBourdieu, P., \u0026amp; Wacquant, L. (1992). \u003cem\u003eAn invitation to reflexive sociology\u003c/em\u003e. University of Chicago Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrettell, C. B., \u0026amp; Hollifield, J. F. (Hrsg.) (2022). Migration theory: Talking across disciplines (4. Aufl.). Routledge. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9781003121015\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9781003121015\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrickell, K., \u0026amp; Datta, A. (2011). Translocal geographies: Spaces, places, connections. Ashgate. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://simonbriercliffe.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/0f7fd-katherinebrickellandayonadatta28201129translocalgeographiese28093spaces2cplaces2cconnections.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://simonbriercliffe.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/0f7fd-katherinebrickellandayonadatta28201129translocalgeographiese28093spaces2cplaces2cconnections.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBurgess, E. W. (1925). The growth of the city. In R. Park, E. W. Burgess, \u0026amp; R. McKenzie (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe city\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 47\u0026ndash;62). University of Chicago Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203543047-4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203543047-4\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarling, J., \u0026amp; Erdal, M. B. (2014). Return migration and transnationalism. \u003cem\u003eInternational Migration\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(6), 2\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12180\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/imig.12180\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCastles, S., de Haas, H., \u0026amp; Miller, M. J. (2013). \u003cem\u003eThe age of migration\u003c/em\u003e (5th ed.). The Guilford Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCastles, S., Miller, M. J., \u0026amp; Ammendola, G. (2005). The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in the Modern World: New York: The Guilford Press, (2003), \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e30.00, 338 pages. American Foreign Policy Interests, 27(6), 537\u0026ndash;542. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10803920500434037\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10803920500434037\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen, H., Zhu, Z., \u0026amp; Chang, J. (2020). The effects of social integration and hometown identity on the life satisfaction of Chinese rural migrants. \u003cem\u003eHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e., Article 171. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01415-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s12955-020-01415-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChu, J., \u0026amp; Lee, S. (2024). How Americans judge: A topology of moral communities. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e10\u003c/em\u003e(5), 141\u0026ndash;164. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2024.10.5.06\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.7758/RSF.2024.10.5.06\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eClendenning, J. (2022). Between the village and the city: The in-betweenness of rural young people in East Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Development Planning Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3828/idpr.2022.3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3828/idpr.2022.3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCohen, S. (2011). Folk devils and moral panics. Routledge. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203828250\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203828250\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColeman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e94\u003c/em\u003e, S95\u0026ndash;S120.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eColeman, J. S. (1990). \u003cem\u003eFoundations of social theory\u003c/em\u003e. Belknap.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCortina, J., \u0026amp; Ochoa-Reza, E. (2013). \u003cem\u003eNew perspectives on international migration and development\u003c/em\u003e. Columbia University.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDanaj, A., Laz\u0026aacute;nyi, K., \u0026amp; Bilan, Y. (2018). Perceptions and implications of immigration in France\u0026mdash; Economic, social, political and cultural perspectives. \u003cem\u003eEconomics and Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3), 226\u0026ndash;247. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-3/14\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-3/14\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavis, J. L., Love, T. P., \u0026amp; Fares, P. (2019). Collective social identity: synthesizing identity theory and social identity theory using digital data. \u003cem\u003eSoc Psychol Q\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e82\u003c/em\u003e, 254\u0026ndash;273. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0190272519851025\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0190272519851025\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Certeau, M. (1984). \u003cem\u003eThe practice of everyday life\u003c/em\u003e. University of California Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://monoskop.org/images/2/2a/De_Certeau_Michel_The_Practice_of_Everyday_Life.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://monoskop.org/images/2/2a/De_Certeau_Michel_The_Practice_of_Everyday_Life.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2003). Migration and development in southern Morocco: The disparate socio-economic impacts of out-migration on the Todgha Oasis Valley (Doctoral dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://heindehaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/de-haas-2003-phd-thesis-migration-and-development-in-southern-morocco-the-disparate-socio-economic-impacts-of-out-migration-on-the-todgha-oasis-valley.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://heindehaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/de-haas-2003-phd-thesis-migration-and-development-in-southern-morocco-the-disparate-socio-economic-impacts-of-out-migration-on-the-todgha-oasis-valley.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2007). Morocco\u0026rsquo;s migration experience: A transitional perspective. \u003cem\u003eInternational Migration\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e45\u003c/em\u003e(4), 39\u0026ndash;70. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2435.2007.00419.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1468-2435.2007.00419.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2010). Migration transitions: A theoretical and empirical inquiry. International Migration Institute Working Paper.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2011). \u003cem\u003eThe determinants of international migration: Conceptualising policy, origin and destination effects\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 32/2011). International Migration Institute (IMI).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2014). \u003cem\u003eMigration theory: Quo vadis?\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 100). International Migration Institute (IMI).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Haas, H. (2018). \u003cem\u003eEuropean migrations: Dynamics, drivers, and the role of policies\u003c/em\u003e. Publications Office of the European Union.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDesmond, M. (2016). Evicted: Poverty and profit in the American city. Crown.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDokos, T. (2017). Migration and globalization\u0026mdash;forms, patterns and effects. Trilogue Salzburg, 102\u0026ndash;114. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/Faktencheck/Leaders__Dialogues/Salzburger_Trilog_2017/7_Migration_and_Globalization.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/Faktencheck/Leaders__Dialogues/Salzburger_Trilog_2017/7_Migration_and_Globalization.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDouglas, M. (1966). \u003cem\u003ePurity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEl Miri, M. (2021). La migration internationale des jeunes et des mineurs: Un d\u0026eacute;sir de \u0026laquo; l\u0026rsquo;ailleurs \u0026raquo; pour se r\u0026eacute;aliser. In M. Armagnague-Roucher, I. Rigoni, C. Coss\u0026eacute;e, S. Tersigni, \u0026amp; M. El Miri(Hrsg.) \u003cem\u003eLes enfants migrants \u0026agrave; l\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;cole\u003c/em\u003e. Le Bord de l\u0026rsquo;Eau.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFaist, T. (2010). Towards transnational studies: World theories, transnationalisation and changing institutions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Ethnic and Migration Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(10), 1665\u0026ndash;1687. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2010.489365\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1369183X.2010.489365\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFrederiks, M. T. (2015). Religion, migration and identity: A conceptual and theoretical exploration. \u003cem\u003eMission Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 181\u0026ndash;202. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1163/15733831-12341400\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1163/15733831-12341400\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeertz, C. (1973). \u003cem\u003eThe interpretation of cultures\u003c/em\u003e. Basic Books.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGiddens, A. (1991). \u003cem\u003eModernity and self-identity\u003c/em\u003e. Stanford University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGranovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e78\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1360\u0026ndash;1380.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGreenwood, M. J., \u0026amp; Hunt, G. L. (2003). The early history of migration research. \u003cem\u003eInternational Regional Science Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;37. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0160017602238\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0160017602238\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGreiner, C., \u0026amp; Sakdapolrak, P. (2013). Translocality: Concepts, applications and emerging research perspectives. \u003cem\u003eGeography Compass\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e7\u003c/em\u003e(5), 373\u0026ndash;384. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12048\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/gec3.12048\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHage, G. (1998). \u003cem\u003eWhite nation: Fantasies of white supremacy in a multicultural society\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHamermesh, D. S., \u0026amp; Trejo, S. J. (2013). How do immigrants spend their time? The process of assimilation. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Population Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(2), 507\u0026ndash;530. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-012-0440-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00148-012-0440-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. \u003cem\u003eNew Left Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e53\u003c/em\u003e, 23\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHaut-Commissariat au Plan (HCP). (2025). \u003cem\u003eMigration interne selon les r\u0026eacute;sultats du recensement g\u0026eacute;n\u0026eacute;ral de la population et de l\u0026rsquo;habitat de 2024\u003c/em\u003e. HCP. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHeering, L., van der Erf, R., \u0026amp; van Wissen, L. (2004). The role of family networks and migration culture in the continuation of Moroccan emigration: A gender perspective. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Ethnic and Migration Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(2), 323\u0026ndash;337. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://doi.org/10.1080/1369183042000200722\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1369183042000200722\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolston, J. (2008). \u003cem\u003eInsurgent citizenship: Disjunctions of democracy and modernity in Brazil\u003c/em\u003e. Princeton University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHonneth, A. (1995). \u003cem\u003eThe struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHu, J., \u0026amp; Cheung, C. K. J. (2024). Social identity and social integration: A meta-analysis exploring the relationship between social identity and social integration. \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e15\u003c/em\u003e, 1361163. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1361163\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1361163\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIdemudia, E., \u0026amp; Boehnke, K. (2020). Patterns and current trends in African migration to Europe. In E. Idemudia \u0026amp; K. Boehnke (Hrsg.), Psychosocial experiences of African migrants in six European countries (S. 15\u0026ndash;31). Springer. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48347-0_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-030-48347-0_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIsin, E. F., \u0026amp; Nielsen, G. M. (Eds.). (2008). \u003cem\u003eActs of citizenship\u003c/em\u003e. Zed Books.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIsoke, Z. (2024). Urban ethnography and everyday life. In L. Peake, A. Datta, \u0026amp; G. Adeniyi-Ogunyankin (Eds.), Handbook on gender and cities (pp. 459\u0026ndash;468). Edward Elgar Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4337/9781786436139.00060\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4337/9781786436139.00060\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJodelet, D. (1989). \u003cem\u003eLes repr\u0026eacute;sentations sociales\u003c/em\u003e. Presses Universitaires de France.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKhellil, M. (2008). \u003cem\u003eLa sociologie de l\u0026rsquo;int\u0026eacute;gration\u003c/em\u003e (2nd ed.). Presses Universitaires de France.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKing, R. (2000). Generalizations from the history of return migration. In B. Ghosh (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eReturn migration\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 7\u0026ndash;55). Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuhnt, J. (2019). Literature review: Drivers of migration. Why do people leave their homes? Is there an easy answer? A structured overview of migratory determinants (Discussion Paper No. 9/2019). Deutsches Institut f\u0026uuml;r Entwicklungspolitik (DIE). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.23661/dp9.2019\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.23661/dp9.2019\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLatham, A., \u0026amp; McCormack, D. (2007). Developing real world methods in urban geography fieldwork. \u003cem\u003ePlanet\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e, 25\u0026ndash;27.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLefebvre, H. (1991). \u003cem\u003eThe production of space\u003c/em\u003e. Blackwell.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLefebvre, H. (1996). \u003cem\u003eWritings on cities\u003c/em\u003e. Blackwell.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLevitt, P. (2001). \u003cem\u003eThe transnational villagers\u003c/em\u003e. University of California Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLevitt, P., \u0026amp; Glick Schiller, N. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field perspective on society. \u003cem\u003eInternational Migration Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e(3), 1002\u0026ndash;1039. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00227.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00227.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLey, D. (2004). Transnational spaces and everyday lives. \u003cem\u003eTransactions of the Institute of British Geographers\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(2), 151\u0026ndash;164. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00122.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00122.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, C., \u0026amp; Zhao, H. (2022). From hometown to the host city? Cities, 122, Article 103567. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103567\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.cities.2022.103567\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLin, Y., de Meulder, B., \u0026amp; Wang, S. (2011). Understanding the \u0026lsquo;village in the city\u0026rsquo; in Guangzhou: Economic integration and development issues and their implications for the urban migrant. \u003cem\u003eUrban Studies\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(16), 3583\u0026ndash;3598. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010396239\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0042098010396239\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu, X., Wang, Y., \u0026amp; Zhang, Z. (2024). How does choice of residential community affect the social integration of rural migrants. \u003cem\u003eBMC Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e., Article 119. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLofland, L. H. (1998). \u003cem\u003eThe public realm: Exploring the city\u0026rsquo;s quintessential social territory\u003c/em\u003e. Aldine de Gruyter.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLőrincz, L., \u0026amp; N\u0026eacute;meth, B. (2022). How social capital is related to migration between communities? \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Population\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e38\u003c/em\u003e, 1119\u0026ndash;1143. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-022-09642-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10680-022-09642-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLow, S. M. (2016). Spatializing culture. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Ethnologist\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(3), 493\u0026ndash;506. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9781315671277\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9781315671277\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMafukidze, J. (2006). A discussion of migration and migration patterns and flows in Africa. In C. Cross, D. Gelderblom, N. Roux, \u0026amp; J. Mafukidze (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eViews of migration in sub-Saharan Africa\u003c/em\u003e. HSRC.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMahler, S. J., \u0026amp; Pessar, P. R. (2006). Gender matters: Ethnographers bring gender from the periphery toward the core of migration studies. \u003cem\u003eInternational Migration Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e40\u003c/em\u003e(1), 27\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2006.00002.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1747-7379.2006.00002.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMalka, H. (2018). Destination Maghreb. Changing migration patterns in North Africa. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic \u0026amp; International Studies. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/180502_Malka_DestinationMaghreb_Web.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/180502_Malka_DestinationMaghreb_Web.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eManning, P., \u0026amp; Trimmer, T. (2020). \u003cem\u003eMigration in World History\u003c/em\u003e (3rd ed.). Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarcuse, P. (1997). The enclave, the citadel, and the ghetto: What has changed in the post-Fordist U.S. city. \u003cem\u003eUrban Affairs Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(2), 228\u0026ndash;264. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/107808749703300206\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/107808749703300206\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarx, K. (1978). In R. Tucker (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eEconomic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844\u003c/em\u003e. W. W. Norton. (Original work published 1844).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMassey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., \u0026amp; Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. \u003cem\u003ePopulation and Development Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(3), 431\u0026ndash;466. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/2938462\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/2938462\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMata-Codesal, D. (2018). Is it simpler to leave or to stay put? Population. \u003cem\u003eSpace and Place\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(1), e2125. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2127\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1002/psp.2127\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMazzella, S. (2011). \u003cem\u003eSociologie des migrations\u003c/em\u003e. Presses Universitaires de France.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMerton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Sociological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(5), 672\u0026ndash;682.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiles, A., \u0026amp; Ebrey, J. (2017). The village in the city: Participation and cultural value on the urban periphery. \u003cem\u003eCultural Trends\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e26\u003c/em\u003e(1), 58\u0026ndash;69. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2017.1274360\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/09548963.2017.1274360\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoscovici, S. (1997). \u003cem\u003ePsychologie sociale\u003c/em\u003e. Presses Universitaires de France.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOcejo, R. E. (Ed.). (2012). \u003cem\u003eEthnography and the city: Readings on doing urban fieldwork\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203723807\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4324/9780203723807\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Ouml;zden, C., \u0026amp; Wagner, M. (2018). \u003cem\u003eMoving for prosperity\u003c/em\u003e. World Bank.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePark, R. E. (1928). Human migration and the marginal man. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e33\u003c/em\u003e(6), 881\u0026ndash;893.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeraldi, M. (Hrsg.) (2013). \u003cem\u003eLes mineurs migrants non accompagn\u0026eacute;s: Un d\u0026eacute;fi pour les pays europ\u0026eacute;ens\u003c/em\u003e. Karthala.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePerrot, A. (2017). Les \u0026laquo; mineurs \u0026raquo; exil\u0026eacute;s \u0026agrave; l\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;preuve du jugement: Une ethnographie des fronti\u0026egrave;res d\u0026rsquo;\u0026acirc;ges et de statuts (Dissertation). \u0026Eacute;cole des Hautes \u0026Eacute;tudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePetersen, W. (1958). A General Typology of Migration. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Sociological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e23\u003c/em\u003e(3), 256\u0026ndash;266.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePiguet, E. (2018). Theories of voluntary and forced migration. In book: Routledge Handbook of Environmental Displacement and Migration, Edited by Robert McLeman and Fran\u0026ccedil;ois Gemenne. Routledge, London (pp.17\u0026ndash;28).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePiguet, \u0026Eacute;. (2013). \u003cem\u003eLes th\u0026eacute;ories des migrations. Synth\u0026egrave;se de la prise de d\u0026eacute;cision individuelle\u003c/em\u003e (Vol. 29, pp. 141\u0026ndash;161). Universit\u0026eacute; de Poitiers. 3.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePortes, A., \u0026amp; Zhou, M. (1993). The new second generation: Segmented assimilation and its variants. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e530\u003c/em\u003e(1), 74\u0026ndash;96. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0002716293530001006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0002716293530001006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePortes, A. (1998). Social capital. \u003cem\u003eAnnual Review of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;24. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePutnam, R. D. (2000). \u003cem\u003eBowling alone: America\u0026rsquo;s declining social capital. Culture and Politics\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 223\u0026ndash;234). Springer.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInternational Organization of Migration (IOM) (2013). World migration report 2013: Migrant wellbeing and development. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr2013_en.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/wmr2013_en.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRibar, D. C. (2013). Immigrants\u0026rsquo; time use: A survey of methods and evidence. In A. F. Constant \u0026amp; K. F. Zimmermann (Eds.), International handbook on the economics of migration (pp. 373\u0026ndash;392). Edward Elgar Publishing. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4337/9781782546078.00029\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4337/9781782546078.00029\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRobinson, J. (2006). \u003cem\u003eOrdinary cities: Between modernity and development\u003c/em\u003e. Routledge.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoy, A. (2009). Why India cannot plan its cities: Informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanization. \u003cem\u003ePlanning Theory\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(1), 76\u0026ndash;87. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1473095208099299\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1473095208099299\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRoyChowdhury, S. (2021). \u003cem\u003eCity of shadows: Slums and informal work in Bangalore\u003c/em\u003e. Cambridge University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRuyssen, I., \u0026amp; Salomone, S. (2018). Female migration: A way out of discrimination? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Development Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e130\u003c/em\u003e, 224\u0026ndash;241. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.010\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jdeveco.2017.10.010\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyan, L. (2011). Migrants\u0026rsquo; social networks and weak ties: Accessing resources and constructing relationships post-migration. \u003cem\u003eSociological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e59\u003c/em\u003e(4), 707\u0026ndash;724. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2011.02030.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1467-954X.2011.02030.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyan, L., Erel, U., \u0026amp; D\u0026rsquo;Angelo, A. (2016). Migrant capital. Sociology, 49(1), 1\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.research\ngate.net/publication/289372765_Introdu\nction_Understanding_'MIgrant_Capital'_Lo\nuise_Ryan_Umut_Erel_Alessio_D'Angelo\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289372765_Introduction_Understanding_'MIgrant_Capital'_Louise_Ryan_Umut_Erel_Alessio_D'Angelo\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSafi, M. (2020). \u003cem\u003eMigration and inequality\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSassen, S. (2014). Expulsions: Brutality and complexity in the global economy. Harvard University Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wpqz2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/j.ctt6wpqz2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSayad, A. (1999). \u003cem\u003eLa double absence\u003c/em\u003e. Seuil.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSayad, A. (2004). \u003cem\u003eThe suffering of the immigrant\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchmoll, C., \u0026amp; Weber, S. (2023). The Employment Relationship at the Junction between Migration Policies and Economic Policies. \u003cem\u003eRevue europ\u0026eacute;enne des migrations internationales\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e37\u003c/em\u003e(1), 2.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchnapper, D. (2007). Qu\u0026rsquo;est-ce que l\u0026rsquo;int\u0026eacute;gration? Gallimard.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchiller, N. G., \u0026amp; \u0026Ccedil;ağlar, A. (2015). Displacement, emplacement and migrant newcomers: rethinking urban sociabilities within multiscalar power, Identities Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 1\u0026ndash;18. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1070289X.2015.1016520\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/1070289X.2015.1016520\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSeeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Sociological Review\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(6), 783\u0026ndash;791.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSilverman, D., \u0026amp; Marvasti, A. (2008). \u003cem\u003eDoing qualitative research: A comprehensive guide\u003c/em\u003e. Sage.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimmel, G. (1903). The metropolis and mental life. \u003cem\u003eThe sociology of Georg Simmel\u003c/em\u003e. Free.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimone, A. (2004). \u003cem\u003eFor the city yet to come: Changing African life in four cities\u003c/em\u003e. Duke University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimone, A. (2019). \u003cem\u003eImprovised lives: Rhythms of endurance in an urban South\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmall, M. L. (2010). \u003cem\u003eUnanticipated gains: Origins of network inequality in everyday life\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford University Press. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2010.0021\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1353/sof.2010.0021\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStanding, G. (2019). The precariat: The new dangerous class (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTurner, V. (1969). \u003cem\u003eThe ritual process\u003c/em\u003e. Aldine.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUN-Habitat. (2020). \u003cem\u003eWorld cities report 2020: The value of sustainable urbanization\u003c/em\u003e. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://unhabitat.org\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://unhabitat.org\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNFPA (United Nations Population Fund). (2006). \u003cem\u003eWomen on the move\u003c/em\u003e. Author.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evan Dalen, H. P., Groenewold, G., \u0026amp; Schoorl, J. J. (2005). Out of Africa: What drives the pressure to emigrate? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Population Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e18\u003c/em\u003e(4), 741\u0026ndash;778. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-005-0003-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s00148-005-0003-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWacquant, L. (2008). \u003cem\u003eUrban outcasts: A comparative sociology of advanced marginality\u003c/em\u003e. Polity.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWakil, S. P., Siddique, C. M., \u0026amp; Wakil, F. A. (1981). Between two cultures: A study in socialization of children of immigrants. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Marriage and the Family\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e43\u003c/em\u003e(4), 929\u0026ndash;940. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2307/351349\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2307/351349\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWimmer, A., \u0026amp; Glick Schiller, N. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation-state building, migration and the social sciences. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Networks\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e(4), 301\u0026ndash;334. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0374.00043\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1471-0374.00043\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. \u003cem\u003eAmerican Journal of Sociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e44\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;24. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1086/217913\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1086/217913\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYeoh, B. S. A., Somaiah, B. C., Lam, T., \u0026amp; Acedera, K. F. (2020). Doing family in times of migration: Care temporalities and gender politics in Southeast Asia. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of the American Association of Geographers\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e110\u003c/em\u003e(6), 1709\u0026ndash;1725. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2020.1723397\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/24694452.2020.1723397\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYi\u0026rsquo;En, C. (2013). Telling stories of the city: Walking ethnography, affective materialities, and mobile encounters. \u003cem\u003eSpace and Culture\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(3), 211\u0026ndash;223. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1206331213499468\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1206331213499468\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYuval-Davis, N., Wemyss, G., \u0026amp; Cassidy, K. (2018). Everyday bordering, belonging and the reorientation of British immigration legislation. \u003cem\u003eSociology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(2), 228\u0026ndash;244. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/0038038517702599\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/0038038517702599\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang, X., Lu, X., Huang, C., Liu, W., \u0026amp; Wang, G. (2024). The impact of social capital on migrants\u0026rsquo; social integration: Evidence from China. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(13), 5564. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su16135564\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su16135564\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZelizer, V. A. (2010). \u003cem\u003eEconomic lives: How culture shapes the economy\u003c/em\u003e. Princeton University Press.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhao, Q., Wu, G., Wang, H., \u0026amp; Aziz, N. (2024). How does choice of residential community affect the social integration of rural migrants: Insights from China. \u003cem\u003eBMC Psychology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e12\u003c/em\u003e., Article 119. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/s40359-024-01617-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e According to the results of the 2024 General Census of Population and Housing (RGPH) published by the Moroccan High Commission for Planning (HCP), internal migration in Morocco is increasingly urban and feminized. More than half of internal migration flows occur between urban areas (around 52\u0026ndash;54% between 2014 and 2024), reflecting the growing attraction of cities due to employment opportunities, housing, and improved living conditions. Rural-to-urban migration represents roughly one quarter of internal movements, confirming the persistence of rural exodus, while urban-to-rural migration remains relatively limited. Women now account for more than half of internal migrants, indicating their increasing participation in education, employment, and family-related mobility within the country (HCP, 2025).\u003c/span\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Par8\" class=\"Para\"\u003eFor an overview of internal mobility patterns in Morocco, including the increasing urbanization and feminization of migration flows, see also HCP (2025). See the report of the Moroccan High Commission for Planning (HCP), Migration interne selon les r\u0026eacute;sultats du recensement g\u0026eacute;n\u0026eacute;ral de la population et de l\u0026rsquo;habitat de 2024. Available at: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.hcp.ma/file/245649/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e Accessed: 13.11.2025.\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Moroccan Arabic (Darija) is the everyday spoken dialect used by most Moroccans, whereas Tamazight refers to the indigenous Amazigh language family; Tachelhit is one of its major regional varieties spoken mainly in southwestern Morocco.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Morocco, Rural–urban migration, Socialization, Urban integration, Symbolic power, Labour, Quality of life","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eRecent extreme weather events in the last winter after the Afcon_25, including the severe floods that affected several regions in Morocco, have once again highlighted the structural vulnerabilities of rural livelihoods and the pressures that continue to shape internal migration dynamics. Against this backdrop, rural\u0026ndash;urban migrants in North Africa navigate complex processes of socialization within urban environments marked by structural inequality and symbolic hierarchies, yet empirical research on their everyday integration experiences remains limited. Drawing on socio-ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Agadir City (Morocco), this study examines how rural migrants negotiate belonging, identity, and participation in urban social life. Using in-depth qualitative interviews and reflexive field observations, the analysis adopts a relational framework informed by socialization, grounded theory, and Bourdieusian perspectives on capital and habitus. The findings demonstrate that migrants engage in both adaptive and preservative strategies to manage urban life. Adaptive strategies include selective network formation, behavioural flexibility, and the strategic use of urban anonymity, while preservative strategies involve maintaining strong ties to rural communities as sources of recognition and moral legitimacy. Although these strategies facilitate survival and continuity, they also contribute to fragmented integration and structured ambivalence. Migrants frequently experience restricted mobility, limited participation in public life, and forms of structural alienation rooted in precarious labour conditions and unequal access to urban resources. The study argues that migrant integration should be understood as a negotiated and spatially contingent process rather than a linear transition. Addressing structural barriers to participation is essential for fostering inclusive urban environments in contexts of rapid social transformation.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Dynamics of Rural Transformation and Urban Migration in North Africa: A Socio-Ethnographic Study of Immigrant Socialization in Morocco","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-14 07:43:44","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9115344/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a012a196-0f10-4fba-acc6-bd1e58dfc435","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 14th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-14T07:43:44+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-14 07:43:44","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9115344","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9115344","identity":"rs-9115344","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}