Introduction

Emigration was rediscovered by the global mainstream academic literature as a valid topic of research in the early 2000s. For over 80 years, migration studies have looked at the immigration side of the story, from the point of view of immigrant-receiving countries (Brettell and Hollifield 2000), paying no attention to the large body of mostly non-Anglophone literature produced in the countries that emigrants were leaving (Stola 1992; Okólski 2009). The re-introduction of the country-of-origin perspective in the 2000s was an important step in the further development of the migration studies field: migrants, after all, are people who come from somewhere. The importance of the countries and communities of origin has been especially brought to light by three streams of academic literature: sociologists and anthropologists focusing on transnationalism (Levitt etc.); political scientists debating the consequences of multiple citizenships and transnational political participation (Østergaard-Nielsen 2003; Bauböck 2010); and economists attempting to capture the impact of remittances (Ratha 2005). At the same time, the term 'diaspora', which indicates an outer group that is linked in some way with the homeland, has had an incredible trajectory: it left the narrow field of classic diaspora studies and went out to the wider world, changing the landscape of various fields of investigation: sociology, anthropology, political science and economics (Van Hear 2006; Bauböck and Faist 2010; Bilgili and Siegel 2013; Ragazzi 2014; Kshetri et al. 2015)

Splintering South: Ecologically Unequal Exchange Theory in a Fragmented Global Climate

The article examines the changing nature of politics in the United Nations climate negotiations through the lens of ecologically unequal exchange theory, focusing on the lead up to and aftermath of the 2015 Paris negotiations. We identify and discuss three areas of tension that have emerged within the G-77 coalition: tensions within the global semi-periphery, tensions between the semi-periphery and periphery, and tensions within the periphery. Together, these tensions challenge the main link of solidarity in the G-77 coalition: the idea that all countries in the global South share a common predicament in the global system, with the North solely to blame. Drawing upon this case, we offer three related insights to develop ecologically unequal exchange theory. First, theory and empirical work must better consider the role of the semi-periphery, and divisions within the semi-periphery, in reproducing ecologically unequal societies. Second, theory should account for how fragmentation between the periphery and semi-periphery may produce distinct challenges for peripheral states to resist governance forms which intensify ecologically unequal exchange. Third, theory should better account for the ways in which ecologically unequal exchange as mobilized as a collective action frame reflects and diverges from the real-world distribution of environmental goods and bads in the world system

A general model for the comparative analysis of social inequalities between Europe and Latin America

Production of INCASI Project H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015 GA 691004The chapter is an introduction to the book that places the research perspective for the comparative analysis of social inequalities between Europe and Latin America in a theoretical and methodological framework. Particularly, we present the INCASI project, the objectives, and discuss the concept of social inequalities in Latin American countries in comparison with European countries in order to create a dialogue that fills the knowledge gap between these two different traditions. To do so, we propose an Analytical Model on Social Inequalities and Trajectories (AMOSIT). Finally, the structure and general contents of the book are presented