Legal Identity Formation Among Diaspora Communities: Culture, Recognition, and Belonging
Keywords:
legal identity, diaspora communities, recognition, belonging, cultural identity, migration, qualitative research, TehranAbstract
This study aimed to explore how members of diaspora communities in Tehran construct, negotiate, and reinterpret legal identity through cultural attachment, institutional recognition, and experiences of social belonging. This qualitative study was conducted using an exploratory phenomenological design. Participants included 24 adult members of diaspora communities residing in Tehran, selected through purposive and snowball sampling. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews focused on migration history, legal documentation, institutional encounters, cultural belonging, and perceptions of recognition. Interviews continued until theoretical saturation was achieved; saturation was reached after the twenty-first interview, and three additional interviews were conducted to confirm thematic stability. All interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize transcripts, generate initial codes, compare emerging categories, and develop final themes. Credibility was enhanced through member checking, peer review, prolonged engagement with the data, and maintenance of an audit trail. Analysis generated four main categories: legal identity as negotiated status, cultural memory and hybrid self-identification, institutional recognition and misrecognition, and belonging as conditional membership. Participants described legal identity not merely as citizenship, residence permits, or documentation, but as a lived and relational process shaped by bureaucratic encounters, family narratives, language, cultural practices, labor-market access, education, and everyday social interactions. While some participants viewed legal documents as a source of protection and legitimacy, others experienced them as fragile, temporary, or insufficient for social acceptance. The study suggests that legal identity formation among diaspora communities is a dynamic process situated between formal law, cultural continuity, social recognition, and affective belonging. Legal status alone does not guarantee belonging; rather, belonging emerges when institutional recognition is accompanied by social respect, cultural inclusion, and meaningful participation in public life.
Downloads
References
Anthias, F. (2008). Thinking through the lens of translocational positionality: An intersectionality frame for understanding identity and belonging. Translocations: Migration and Social Change, 4(1), 5–20.
Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge.
Bloemraad, I. (2006). Becoming a citizen: Incorporating immigrants and refugees in the United States and Canada. University of California Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brubaker, R. (2005). The “diaspora” diaspora. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141987042000289997
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Cohen, R. (2008). Global diasporas: An introduction (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Ewick, P., & Silbey, S. S. (1998). The common place of law: Stories from everyday life. University of Chicago Press.
Fraser, N. (2000). Rethinking recognition. New Left Review, 3, 107–120.
Glick Schiller, N., Basch, L., & Szanton Blanc, C. (1995). From immigrant to transmigrant: Theorizing transnational migration. Anthropological Quarterly, 68(1), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.2307/3317464
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Hall, S. (1990). Cultural identity and diaspora. In J. Rutherford (Ed.), Identity: Community, culture, difference (pp. 222–237). Lawrence & Wishart.
Honneth, A. (1995). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflicts (J. Anderson, Trans.). MIT 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
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class and other essays. Cambridge University Press.
Menjívar, C., & Abrego, L. J. (2012). Legal violence: Immigration law and the lives of Central American immigrants. American Journal of Sociology, 117(5), 1380–1421. https://doi.org/10.1086/663575
Merry, S. E. (1990). Getting justice and getting even: Legal consciousness among working-class Americans. University of Chicago Press.
Portes, A., Guarnizo, L. E., & Landolt, P. (1999). The study of transnationalism: Pitfalls and promise of an emergent research field. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 22(2), 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/014198799329468
Safran, W. (1991). Diasporas in modern societies: Myths of homeland and return. Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies, 1(1), 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1353/dsp.1991.0004
Soysal, Y. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe. University of Chicago Press.
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research: A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Vertovec, S. (2009). Transnationalism. Routledge.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(3), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313220600769331
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
