Author: Kevin M. Dunn.

This paper sets out a case for the adoption of a transnationalism paradigm for population, specifically for the study of migration. The canon of transnationalism research is reviewed, along with key discontents, and recent trends in the field. Four definitions of transnationalism are introduced: activities, relations, social fields and subjectivity. Three sets of categorizations of the field are also identified. Five identifiable critiques of the transnationalism concept are explored. These critiques involve some very sound definitional observations on how transnational activities and relations are not so novel. Transnationalism retains its greatest possibility as a new conceptual approach, which can trouble traditional understandings of unidirectional movement and the expectation of assimilation. As a paradigm, transnationalism facilitates a holistic examination of the forms of mobility and communication. It also facilitates stronger theoretical attention to the relation between movement and identity. Some of the gaps of the emergent field are identified, and ways forward suggested.