Research
In my dissertation project, I take up the challenge of theorizing borderlands as unique geopolitical spaces and local populations as central actors. Knowledge about the macro-level causes and effects of border hardening is abundant, but little is understood about its “on-the-ground” politics. Local communities are unique in their opportunity to engage with people, goods, and institutions across the border. These communities also directly experience changes in how borders are governed.
Given this position, how are local communities navigating the global trend toward hardened borders? I answer this question on three axes: (1) the conditions under which local communities oppose border hardening, (2) how people in local communities psychologically adapt to changing borders, and (3) how bottom-up demands influence the content of border policy. The multi-method project encompasses global quantitative analyses with an original geospatial measure of local transnational ties across borders, qualitative fieldwork at the United States–Mexico border, and both observational and experimental survey tests.
Working Papers
The Local Politics of Border Control: Transnational Communities and Resistance PDF
States are increasingly hardening borders. Scholars have dedicated substantial attention to this phenomenon, but little is known about its local politics. This study takes up the challenge of theorizing borderlands as unique geopolitical spaces and the communities therein as central actors. Transnational communities with cross-border ties depend on mobility, which disposes them to contest border hardening. This theory is tested and expanded via a mixed-methods design leveraging the coronavirus pandemic context in which most states closed their borders. Global quantitative analysis finds that transnationality predicts local protest against border closures. Interviews in two outlier communities that are highly transnational but did not resist a border closure show that its accommodation of border-related industries forestalled discontent. This indicates that selective border hardening, which accounts for local flows, is less likely to spark conflict. The findings point to local communities as a key actor in border politics deserving more attention.