Institute for History Annual Report 2010 - O - Universiteit Leiden

explained by the different ways in which the
vulnerability of (potential) migrant women and
men are constructed. Migrants themselves, their
families, immigrant communities, employers,
lawyers, governments, organizations and media
reports all play a role in the construction of this
vulnerability. The heuristic constructed
vulnerability model builds on recent research on
gendered assumptions about vulnerability in
migration discourses. The model also builds on
research into the social construction of risks,
acceptability of risk, and risk avoidance. Although
the model is thus firmly rooted in current research,
constructed vulnerability has not yet been used to
explain systematically gendered differences within
migration and settlement.
Since it is our aim to explain differences between
migrant men and women, it is important to note
that several authors have stressed that there is no
consensus as yet about what these differences are.
Various attempts have been made to take inventory
of differences between migrant men and
women, but researchers agree that the results have
been somewhat disappointing. The constructed
vulnerability model is based on what is now
known about differences between men and
women in migration. The differences that are
created do not (necessarily) result in a restriction
of the migration of women, but do cause women
to migrate via different routes, with different
agency. They are submitted to more social
monitoring and they seek to avoid (perceived)
risks. Immigrant women are (perceived to be)
more at risk and are (perceived to have) less
Institute for History
132
capacity to cope with hazards. The result is that
they are (perceived as) more vulnerable. Rights
and opportunities are different, as are the safety
nets to fall back on. As a result they set up and
make use of different networks than men.
The four projects that are part of this research are
described in more detail below.
In Between (Post-doctoral project)
Corrie van Eijl
Since the 1950’s the Netherlands changed from a
country with low numbers of immigrants into a
multicultural and multicoloured society. Yet there
is an increasing group of immigrants whose stay
has a provisional character, either by choice or out
of necessity. On the one hand there are ‘irregular
migrants’ who lack the necessary permits or
papers; on the other hand migrants who reside in
the country for a long period of time but who
maintain strong ties with their mother country and
intend to return or do return. In the context of this
project special attention will be drawn to state
policy, international developments and gender.
State policy contributed to the construction of this
‘home in between’ for immigrants and was a main
actor for changes. The construction of this
provisional situation is not restricted to the
Netherlands, and no more are the strict
immigration regulations and the actions against
illegal immigrants. Regulations and
implementations distinguish (directly and
indirectly) between men and women. Besides,
motives and possibilities to migrate to the
Netherlands, to stay there or to return are different