Envisioning futures at new destinations: geographical imaginaries and migration aspirations of Nepali migrants moving to Malta

ABSTRACT

Imagination is central to migration. Geographical imaginaries, often shaped by historical narratives and mainstream media, allow people to envision futures elsewhere and influence migration aspirations. Using interviews with Nepalis who migrated to Malta in recent years, this article seeks to uncover how people imagine new destinations about which they have limited or no prior knowledge, and how these imaginaries compare to those of established destinations. Through this lens, the article then examines participants’ aspirations to migrate to Malta. The analysis shows how participants contextualised the information they found about Malta by drawing extensively from imaginaries of better-known European destinations, in a mechanism I call spatial imaginary spillover. Participants moved to Malta seeking increased personal freedoms, rights and safety, economic stability and affluence, exploration and social prestige linked to migration to Western destinations. As such, Malta is part of a group of new European destinations for Nepalis that are more accessible than established destinations in the West, and which participants prefer over historical destinations for Nepali workers. This article provides novel insights into how imaginaries of new destinations and other unfamiliar places are produced, and how the lens of geographical imaginaries yields rich perspectives on migration aspirations and destination preferences.

KEYWORDS:

• Geographical imaginaries
• migration aspirations
• destination hierarchies
• Nepal
• Malta

Introduction

People hardly journey to terrae incognitae anymore these days but to destinations they already virtually “know” through the widely circulating imaginaries about them. (Salazar 2011, 577)

Imagination is central to migration. Scholars have emphasised how migration aspirations and decision-making are strongly influenced by socioculturally contextualised imaginaries of places (Salazar 2011; Thompson 2017). Often shaped by historical narratives and the media, they allow people to imagine and aspire to futures, even at distant places. However, not much has been written about how (would-be) migrants imagine new and unknown destinations about which limited narratives and media coverage exist, and how these imaginaries compare to those of more popular destinations, eventually shaping aspirations to migrate to new destinations. This article addresses these issues, using the case of new Nepali labour migration to Malta.

Geographical imaginaries – or imaginative geographies – are ‘representations of place, space and landscape that structure people’s understandings of the world’ (Driver 2014, 246). They are the result of individual and collective-interactive imagination processes (Hagen-Zanker and Hennessey 2021, 37), and can have environmental, cultural, economic, social and political qualities (Thompson 2017, 79). The increasing global flow of information, goods and people encourages imaginations of other places, including one’s potential futures in them, and inspires some to develop migration aspirations (Appadurai 1996).

Thus, when people have migration aspirations and consider potential destinations, geographical imaginaries are the mental representations upon which potential migrants evaluate ‘home’ or their current location to one or more alternative destinations (Thompson 2017). Together, they form landscapes of geographical imaginaries, of places broadly considered to live in or move to – which Belloni (2022) calls destination cosmologies. Such cosmologies possess built-in hierarchical qualities: Envisioning and comparing potential lives and identities at different locations, people construct destination hierarchies that represent ‘scales of preference with respect to possible destinations’ (Belloni 2022, 562; see also Paul 2011). Destination cosmologies and their inherent hierarchies are often collective constructs, shaped by historical and current migration patterns and the narratives around them (Hagen-Zanker and Hennessey 2021). Scholars have found that destination hierarchies tend to be widely shared within societies, notwithstanding smaller variations in individual preferences (Paul 2011; Pelican and Tatah 2009; Salazar 2011; Shaw 2010; Vammen 2019).

Some scholars have discussed potential shifts in geographical imaginaries and destination cosmologies, based on new information, narratives and cultural change (Pelican and Tatah 2009, 233–234). Yet, how do people imagine (themselves at) new destinations they have not heard of or know little about, and where few historical links and narratives exist? While there is a growing body of literature on migration along new routes (e.g. Kalir 2005; Minghuan 2012; Vammen 2019; for a review, see Winders 2014), little attention has been paid to the formative processes of the imaginaries preceding and imbuing such migration. Further, how do these new imaginaries compare to imaginaries of more established destinations – that is, how do they integrate with people’s broader destination cosmologies and hierarchies? This article tackles these questions, using qualitative data collected with Nepali migrants who recently moved to Malta – a novel, rapidly emerging labour migration route. By answering these questions, the paper also provides rich insights into the aspirations underlying their migration.

The remainder of the article proceeds with an overview of migration patterns from Nepal, including the new labour corridor to Malta, and explains the immigration context in Malta. After elaborating on the methodology, the paper briefly illustrates the novelty of Malta as a destination for participants, and how they built initial knowledge of Malta. It then examines how participants imagined Malta before migration, and introduces the concept spatial imaginary spillover to better understand the imaginative processes which eventually informed their migration decisions. In the final part of the analysis, the article situates the imaginaries of Malta within the wider set of more established destinations for Nepalis, and through this lens examines participants’ migration aspirations and destination preferences. The paper concludes with a discussion of its contributions to the literature. In particular, it considers the theoretical potential of spatial imaginary spillover to better understand migration decision-making and the formation of geographical imaginaries, and connects the concept to wider debates on place representations in geography.

Migration in Nepal and the new migration to Malta

Labour migration is a ubiquitous element of Nepali society today. The 2011 census found that almost 50 percent of all Nepali households had at least one member who was abroad for work or had returned (IOM¹ 2019, 2), and more than half of all households received remittances (MOLESS² 2020, 93). International labour migration has a long tradition in Nepal and gained importance in the eighteenth century when Nepalis began to join the armies of the Sikh Empire and later the British Empire in today’s Pakistan and India (Seddon 2005). Until today, India remains a major destination for Nepali workers, since the open border between both countries and the historical, social, political and cultural ties make India a highly accessible destination (IOM 2019).

From the 1980s, declining agricultural production and limited other economic opportunities in Nepal prompted new labour migrations towards Malaysia and the Gulf, where rapidly growing economies produced a strong demand for cheap labour (Sharma 2011). Today, Malaysia and Gulf countries such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Kuwait continue to be the main destinations for Nepali labour migrants, (informal) movements to India aside (MOLESS 2020). Despite the commonly poor working conditions and rather limited economic returns, this trend continues due to dire job opportunities in Nepal, and a lack of accessible alternative destinations (Gardner 2012; Malla and Rosenbaum 2017; Sharma 2011, 10). In recent years however, student migration to Australia, Japan, North America or Europe has been on the rise among young, better-off Nepalis (IOM 2019). Rather than a temporary educational sojourn, many seem to view this as a ‘one-way ticket out of Nepal’, allowing them to enter highly desired destinations with strict entry policies, where they can later switch to work visas (Kandel 2018). Yet, such student migration entails prohibitively high costs and requires high educational credentials and language skills, making it only accessible to a small, selected group of Nepalis (Thieme 2017; Valentin 2015).

In Nepali culture, international migration is strongly connected to the pervasive discourse of development and progress (Thornton et al. 2022). Migration is not just perceived as a livelihood strategy through which young people can fulfil social obligations, but also as a source of social prestige and status (Sharma 2011, 9). International migration has thus become a rite of passage for young Nepalis, and a crucial part of identity formation (Sharma 2008; Thieme and Wyss 2005).

Kölbel (2020) discusses the sharp distinction in Nepali discourse between labour migration to Malaysia and the Gulf on the one hand, and student migration to Western countries³ and Japan on the other, which is linked to social segmentation by class and education levels. She finds a strong reluctance among the urban middle and upper class with high formal education levels to engage in labour migration to traditional destinations, which they associate with low social status. This link between class, type of migration and destination leaves those unable to access student migration, yet unwilling to move as labour migrants to traditional destinations, without clear options.

However, in recent years, there has been an increasing diversification of labour destinations among Nepali migrants (Figures 1 and 2). New, emerging destinations include West Asian countries such as Jordan and Turkey, but also the Maldives, China and Japan (on work visas), and European countries like Poland, Czech Republic, Germany, Romania, Cyprus and Malta (MOLESS 2020, 16, 28). The diversification of destinations is a central goal of the Nepali government, as it seeks to reduce the fiscal dependency on remittances from the few major destination countries. Nepal has recently engaged actively in bilateral labour migration negotiations with Japan, Mauritius, Jordan, South Korea and Israel, as well as Germany, Portugal, Poland and Turkey (Mandal 2018, 2019a, 2021; MOLESS 2020). Observers also emphasise declining economic opportunities at established destinations as a reason for the increasing diversification of destinations. For instance, volatile oil prices have slowed the economies of many Gulf states, while recent political initiatives in some of these countries aim to decrease the dependency on foreign labour and to privilege domestic workers (MOLESS 2020, 14–15; Mandal 2019b).

Figure 1. New labour exit permits issued by Nepal, by destination region, by year. Data: Department of Foreign Employment, Nepal (2016–2023). Note: South Asia excludes India, as no exit permits are required for India. Student migration numbers are not available, as no exit permits are required for student migration.

Figure 2. New labour exit permits issued by Nepal per destination region in percent, by year. Data: Department of Foreign Employment, Nepal (2016–2023). Note: South Asia excludes India, as no exit permits are required for India. Student migration numbers are not available, as no exit permits are required for student migration.

Migration to Malta and the Maltese context

One of the most recent destinations for Nepali labour migrants is Malta. Within 8 years, the number of Nepalis holding a valid residence permit in Malta has increased from 10 in 2014 to 7743 in 2022 (Eurostat 2023a). The overwhelming majority of first residence permits issued to Nepalis in the last years were for work purposes, though it seems Nepali migration to Malta began with a small number of migrants arriving on student visas, thus preceding the rapid rise of work-related permits (Figure 3).

Figure 3. First residence permits issued by Malta to Nepali citizens, by reason, by year. Data: Eurostat (2023b).

The rise of Nepali migration to Malta is part of a general increase in labour immigration of ‘third-country nationals’ (TCNs),⁴ particularly from Asia and European non-EU/non-Schengen countries. This trend echoes new and increasing labour migration from South Asia to other countries in Southern and Eastern Europe (Mendoza, Florczak, and Nepal 2020).

Malta, a Mediterranean island state with a population of approximately half a million people, has been facing severe labour shortages caused by an ageing society and high economic growth in recent decades (Suban and Zammit 2011). To increase the recruitment of foreign labour, a new labour party administration introduced policy changes from 2013 onwards that simplified, digitalised and accelerated application procedures for TCNs (Bonnici 2018; Malta Independent 2017; Martin 2017). However, unlike other European states, Malta does not seem to have engaged in bilateral labour migration initiatives or negotiations with Nepal.

Methodology

The article is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 Nepali migrants living in Malta, conducted between September and December 2021. Participants were recruited through snowball sampling and all signed an informed consent form. While 10 interviews were conducted individually, 17 participants were interviewed in a collective setting (2–5 participants), which often felt more comfortable for participants. Since the interviews focused on individual biographies, experiences and perspectives related to their migrations, participants were usually sequentially prompted about these aspects in collective settings. Nevertheless, participants often began to interact and discuss questions beyond personal experiences, occasionally shifting the interviews towards a focus group format. This provided rich additional insights about collectively harboured imaginaries and social structures. Participants in collective settings also supported each other with translations, as all interviews were carried out in English. To validate key findings and ensure that the data was not biased through group pressure, I occasionally held informal follow-up conversations with interviewees. Individual interviews generally allowed for deeper engagement with participants and removed potential group conformity bias. Thus, combining both methods provided different insights and helped include participants otherwise unwilling or unable to participate. The interview data was transcribed and thematically analysed in an iterative coding process in ATLAS.ti 8.

All interviewees had moved to Malta between 2014 and 2021. This temporal range permits me to trace how pre-migration imaginaries may have differed between earlier and recently arrived migrants. Retrospective data may introduce recall bias – that is, inaccurate recollections – which tends to increase for less tangible domains such as values or attitudes (Dex 1995). However, 23 of the 27 interviewees had arrived in 2018 or thereafter, and thus had a limited recall time. Still, the retrospective nature of the study warrants caution in the interpretation of the data.

The sample includes 18 women and 9 men, aged between 22 and 39 years (median = 28). Participants came from rural and urban backgrounds across different regions in Nepal. They were from a variety of ethnic groups and castes, in middle or upper positions in Nepal’s traditional caste hierarchy. Nevertheless, participants had a diverse socioeconomic background: while most had completed the upper high school degree (grade 12), among which a few had also begun or completed a university degree, some participants had attained no or only a lower high school degree (grade 10). Interviewees had previously worked in Nepal as assistants in hotels, hospitals or offices, as small-holder farmers and teachers, or had helped run family-owned businesses. Almost all participants had come to Malta on visas linked to temporary work permits, which require annual renewal. At the time of interview, all were employed in low-paying jobs, mostly in the service industry.

Imagining Malta

‘What is Malta?’ Knowledge and information about a new destination

Before, we didn’t know, what Malta is, where Malta is. … The first time I heard about it was when I came here. (I2, female)⁵

The overwhelming majority of participants had never heard of Malta until they first came across it as a potential destination – often suggested to them by a migration broker, friend or relative. In fact, ‘what is Malta?’ became an almost iconic phrase throughout fieldwork, as interviewees recalled their initial bafflement when being introduced to opportunities there.

We didn’t know anything. We just came … without any planning, we just knew it’s Malta. It’s Europe. And it’s a small island. (I14, female)

Before discovering Malta as a potential destination, some interviewees were already harbouring strong aspirations to leave Nepal. Some had even undertaken unsuccessful attempts to move to Western destinations such as Australia or the US, usually via student visas. Other participants, however, often with lower socioeconomic status, had not concretely considered migration until stumbling across the opportunity to move to a small, unknown country in Europe called Malta. Given the restrictive and segmented emigration opportunities in Nepal, such news about a potentially affordable European destination was rare. Intrigued, participants then often started researching specific aspects of Malta they deemed particularly relevant for a potential move, such as Malta’s EU and Schengen membership, English language use, and the duration of their work contracts and permits. Some women among the interviewees also researched crime and safety, as well as public services in Malta. Participants pooled this information from various sources, including friends, acquaintances and family networks, agents who brokered their journey, and the internet.

And then we looked, we searched where Malta is … and … in which union it comes. Is it European European? Or outside of the EU, only Europe. … And then we found a lot of information, like, it’s safe, it’s good, you know, it’s a tourist country. … Every day, we were searching for new ideas, you know? Like, ah, there, the hospital is free! And if you have children, even education is free. (I1, female)

The use of different information sources allowed migrants to cross-check information. This was particularly relevant given the notorious reputation of brokers to often scam potential migrants: ‘Whatever he told us about [Malta], the process of coming here, I always [checked] on the internet. I did a lot of research! … But whatever he said, it was all true’ (I14, female).

Most participants reported they had also used the internet and social media to view videos or pictures of Malta. These were often tourist videos glamorously showing off Malta’s historic sites or famous nightlife. One interviewee described the vlogs she had watched, created by other migrants in Malta: ‘We looked at YouTube. Like, videos of Malta, and … people living in Malta and doing vlogs. They are showing their daily routine. … Filipinos and other nationals’ (I1, female). Another participant said she was almost obsessed with YouTube videos about Malta while waiting for her applications to be processed, getting increasingly excited: ‘I searched on YouTube. How is Malta. How much money do you earn in Malta. … So much YouTube! Day by day, I searched on YouTube. That’s why I wanted to come here’ (I18, female).

Together, these pieces of information allowed participants to begin constructing an imaginary of Malta. To complement these imaginaries and contextualise new information they gathered, participants drew extensively from knowledge and imaginaries of other, better-known European countries, subsuming them and Malta under one ‘imaginative roof’: Europe.

‘Malta is Europe’: the concept of spatial imaginary spillover

“Which place is Malta”, I asked [my friend]. “Malta is a European country”, he told me. And oh, I got very excited! “Okay, I have to come to Malta”. (I23, male)

For most interviewees, the single most important piece of information about Malta was that ‘it is Europe’. To them, Europe was not a clearly delineated political or geographical term. Instead, it represented an idea of a space associated with particular characteristics. Interviewees had built this imaginary of Europe in various ways. Many mentioned relatives or friends who were living in European countries – particularly Western and Northern Europe – or had lived there in the past.

My grandfather was in the UK army. So, he had been to Hong Kong, England. … And my cousin’s brother, he’s still in the UK. … Not only now Nepalese people travel a lot, but from ancient times. (I1, female)

Because so many friends, they are going to Europe, to Germany, France. (I2, female)

Through their contacts’ occasional visits back to Nepal, as well as communication through messengers and social media, participants formed images of these destinations and the lives their friends and relatives led there. Ideas and imaginations of Europe are also inspired by media transmitting events and culture globally. For instance, some interviewees mentioned that they knew about many European countries such as Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Portugal through the Men’s Football World Cup.

Thus, participants’ notions of Europe serve as a reservoir of variegated fragmented information and imaginaries about different European countries, collected and constructed over time. New information obtained on Malta was thus filtered through this lens of Europe, enabling Nepalis to contextualise and complement information to patch the gaps with associations of Europe. As these associations are largely dominated by information about and imaginaries of larger European countries, we can understand this process as a spatial imaginary spillover: a cognitive transfer of place-specific imaginaries from one place to another, via a bridging meta-concept connecting both: Europe.

Researcher: Did you know how it is in Malta? … Because you didn’t have information about it, right?

I12, female: No, the point is, it’s Europe. Europe, ah! Europe is good, we think in Nepal.

Asked about Nepalis’ associations of opportunities with Europe, one interviewee explained:

First, money. And when we enter Europe, we can go to 29 countries, or 27 countries. And then, after seven years, after nine years, in Portugal or Spain, we get red passports. You know, and we can do our own business here. We can bring our families. These things come to mind first. (I26, male)

A key part of the imaginary of Europe was the idea that it could accommodate interviewees’ broader aspirations for a better life or future. In particular, the possibility to settle permanently and bring over family members was highly valued by participants: ‘Because here, we can bring our families. If I am married, I can bring my wife. Afterwards, my child’ (I26, male). However, permanent residence and family reunification are extremely difficult to access for TCNs in Malta (Buttigieg and DeBono 2015; DeBono 2013). This had not always been clear to interviewees when they had left Nepal, as some had simply associated Europe with possibilities of long-term settlement and family reunification – based on such rights in more established, better-known European destinations.

This emphasises a crucial point about spatial imaginary spillover: while it may ease uncertainty about a new place by filling gaps in the imaginary with information about places perceived as similar or connected, this information may produce imaginaries that stand in stark contrast to the experienced realities upon arrival. For instance, the powerful imaginaries of development most interviewees associated with Europe engendered high expectations of Malta that often remained unfulfilled:

In Nepal, India, or any Asian country, we think that European countries are the most developed countries. … We were thinking, this is a European country, … the European I know, so our expectations were like “wow!” before we came. And then I didn’t find anything wow. … Because it’s just normal. Nothing special. (I4, male)

Perhaps the most conspicuous marker of development as understood by study participants was infrastructural development. Malta’s landscape of small historic limestone buildings and often badly maintained infrastructure thus led to a particularly large gulf between imaginaries and experienced reality:

I thought here there were big, big buildings, but there’s no big, big building! Here everything is old, old houses. … Because I thought, this is Europe! And big, and all nice. (I10, male)

When I came out of the airport, there was no good architecture … I expected more. More everything. Because I thought, it’s Europe, and I expected some more developed country. And I also expected good buildings, good roads. (I26, male)

Such initial shocks upon arrival about the ‘developmental’ state of Malta were extremely common among interviewees. One interviewee, who had visited relatives working in Malaysia and Singapore before, shared:

Because when I went to Malaysia and Singapore, there were big buildings, it’s a developed place. But here, when I came here, only small houses! … I didn’t think Malta was like that. I thought here there would also be big buildings, new houses. I was shocked! Is it Europe?! Because in Nepal, we think Europe is a big country, like that. But here isn’t. Here it is only old houses … is it Europe? (I27, female)

A similar experience was shared by another interviewee, who had previously worked in Dubai. Her imaginaries of Malta were dominated by spatial imaginary spillover, interlinked with information obtained on Malta via online videos:

I went on YouTube, I saw the high buildings, everything. But when I came here, ooh … Dubai has big big buildings, but here everything is small small. Here all is, you know, … same as Nepal. I feel like it is Nepal. (I19, female)

These two latter quotes illustrate how spatial imaginary spillover interacts with the wider landscape of geographical imaginaries: As these interviewees had conceptualised Europe as more developed than Malaysia, Singapore, the UAE and certainly Nepal, processes of spatial imaginary spillover produced imaginaries of Malta that outranked these places. These imaginaries were further amplified by the selective and biased visual information they had found about Malta online. The experienced realities, however, could not keep up with these imaginaries, producing a wide gap some participants jokingly called ‘expectation versus reality’.

In Nepal, shopping malls are very big. And then here, the first time she [I27, female] went to the Point mall, you know, the shopping mall [in Malta], she’s like, “huh?”. Places are not like she thought. (I8, female)

With a growing Nepali community in the country, one would expect the information gap about Malta to close – and with it, the chasm between imaginaries and experienced realities. Indeed, interviewees who had only arrived recently, and particularly those who had followed close family members or friends to Malta, often shared slightly less-extreme stories of their arrival experience. However, there also seems to be reluctance among many Nepalis to be fully transparent about their experiences with people in Nepal, as those would tarnish the success narrative of their migration, and the social status attached to it.

If my friends ask me, I will say “everything is nice”. … And we post Instagram pictures and stories. And they say “Ah! I also want to come there.” Because [they see] we enjoy ourselves a lot here. But it’s only once in a while that we enjoy. But on Instagram, we only share nice pictures, … not bad things. They don’t see what we work here. … They think that we collect the money from the tree! (I2, female)

Other interviewees say they try to give a sober picture of their experience: ‘I tell them exactly the facts. So that when they come to Malta, … they cannot complain to me [and say] “yeah, you were telling me! If you were telling me this thing I would not have come!”’ (I4, male). This, however, does not deter many from seeking to come to Malta, enticed by the dominant positive imaginaries of Europe:

There are I think 3,000 plus Nepalis here. … And still, they want to come here from Nepal. Even my friends want to come. And I told them no. Don’t come. They want to spend [lots of money], taking a loan from the bank. For what? (I7, male)

Partially due to their disappointment with the country, some Nepalis leave Malta for other European destinations such as Portugal, France, Spain or Germany. The interviewees however had gradually adapted to their new reality in Malta and often decided to stay, at least for now:

I2, female: For money, it’s … good. The place I don’t like much. … When I first came from the airport, I cried. Because the buildings are so old! … My expectation was so nice.

I3, female: She had thought Malta would look like Dubai [where I2 had lived previously].

I2, female: But now I’m used to it. Now it’s okay.

Destination hierarchies and migration aspirations

These vivid expressions elucidate how geographical imaginaries are always constructed in relation to other places, and thereby attain a hierarchical value and position in people’s destination cosmologies. Apart from notions of development – for most participants epitomised in infrastructure and material abundance—, these place rankings were often based on the economic opportunities they offered to participants.

We worked [in Nepal] as well, but they never paid us in the right way. … At the end of the month, they will say “next month we are paying double”. And so we had to wait all the time. … So we decided, if we can work 12 hours under pressure [in Nepal], why don’t we go abroad and work there. (I13, female)

In Gulf countries, the salary is very little. Around 200-300 Euro [per month]. … If you go there or to Europe, or another country: it’s the same job! But you have a good salary here. (I9, male)

The economic dimension tended to be dominant in the destination rankings of participants. Many strived to provide a comfortable, stable income for their families, alleviate financial problems they and their relatives faced, or pay for their (future) children’s education at private schools. Interestingly, participants also mentioned aspirations of social and residential mobility of the family within Nepal, which related to the different economic opportunities at destinations:

I have only one thing on my mind: I try to move my family from my village to the city. Because in the village, life is very difficult. … And I am trying to build a small house in city. … Those who have family members in Europe move to the city. … They have a nice house. … Those who have family members in the Gulf have a nice house, but they cannot move [to the city]. Because if we move to the city, we need to spend a lot of money. We have to buy land, build a house. (I6, male)

Similarly, many interviewees pointed out the differences between destinations in permanent residence and family reunification rights. Participants did not even discuss such rights in the context of the major destinations in the Gulf and Malaysia, given their extremely restrictive policies and a dominant negative narrative about them as countries to live in, rather than just temporarily work in. In contrast, permanent status or family reunification was often associated with migration to Europe and other Western destinations, misrepresenting the policy reality in Malta. However, interviewees often knew they could move to another Schengen country with more liberal policies without having to pass border controls or apply for another visa. This option was perceived as a major advantage given the extraordinary difficulty for Nepalis to access Schengen countries directly from Nepal. Some claimed they had made plans to move onwards from Malta even before they had arrived in the country.

Another important dimension along which participants ranked destinations was the social prestige linked to certain destinations. ‘If you are in a good country, a European country or Australia, the way they look at your family is different. You see all kinds of respect’ (I1, female). Having a family member at a Western destination thus carried social status in itself, irrespective of the economic payoff: ‘They don’t care if I have a good salary [here]. … They care about the country. [They will say] “Oh they’re in Europe!” … And with someone who’s in America, “wow, her daughter or her son is in America!”' (I9, male).

Interviewees also commonly compared potential destinations based on what they knew or assumed about working conditions. They often spoke of the harsh conditions most Nepalis faced on their jobs in Malaysia and the Gulf:

You see, Arab people, the rich ones, they don’t consider other people, less people, the poor ones. Because you know, how many people have died in Saudi, Qatar, Nepalese people. A lot, a lot of people have died. (I4, male)

Because [in Gulf countries] … they treat people like machines. (I2, female)

The negative imaginaries of destinations in West Asia are also nurtured by increasingly negative media coverage, spotlighting (sexual) abuse and severely restricted freedoms of Nepali workers – particularly female domestic workers.

We heard this news as well sometimes. … Some girls talk with a journalist and say “my boss did this behaviour, the experience was very bad. We have to stay all the time with the family, and we cannot go out without permission.” With [the family], just with them, they can go out. Otherwise … like in a cage! (I12, female)

Many contrasted these negative notions of the Gulf with the freedoms and gender equality they had imagined in Europe, and often found in Malta:

For girls in Dubai, I heard, you are not allowed to wear shorts, except in the main city. … Here you can do whatever you want. … At least you feel a bit of equality. … There is discrimination, but not like in other countries, you know. Like, in Arab countries, or in Nepal. (I1, female)

To some female participants, gender equality, freedom and safety were particularly important dimensions in their destination hierarchy. Some younger participants also talked about the asphyxiating social control they experienced at home, which restricted them in their lifestyle choices:

Because in Nepal, we have to ask for permission for each and everything … [And] we Nepali girls, in Nepal, if we go out, and then if our neighbour sees us, they will gossip everywhere: “Look, her daughter is going out and coming [home] so late at night!” And my mom is so worried all the time, like “if you go like this, people will talk, talk, talk.” Because society, people are like that. (I13, female)

Moving to Malta with a group of close friends promised the opportunity to explore different lifestyles outside the grip of authority figures. ‘Here, there is no restriction, you know? Because we four are here. And … we have to decide what is wrong, what is bad, and we can enjoy our lives. … No one is there’ (I14, female). In this regard, they not only preferred Malta due to the increased individual liberties they had associated with Europe, but also because it was a new destination for Nepalis: most did not have family members in Malta, unlike in more established destinations. This allowed them to better control the information their families received about their lifestyles in Malta.

Such more individualistic aspirations linked to exploration, curiosity and experience were a common theme among younger interviewees, particularly those economically better off:

It’s not economic. … We had land, if I want to work, we can [make a living] by working there as well. And I decided to go myself. At least I will visit abroad once. I will see how it is, right? And I will come back here, and I start my own business. (I7, male)

I wanted to look at other countries, experience them. … To experiment, and then make a stable future. (I17, female)

This thrill of adventure helps to understand why many opted for a new and distant destination, where they did not have any friends or relatives. When asked whether she was not worried about moving to such a far-away place, one interviewee replied: ‘No, I was excited! Because it was a new place, new friends. First travel. First time, to [experience] the European society, the European system’ (I18, female).

Indeed, for some young interviewees the main point was to ‘go abroad’, with the specific destination being of secondary concern.

When I was in Nepal, I was always thinking: how do I go. How do I go abroad. … Whatever country, I don’t care, but I want to go. … I need to go abroad. (I6, male)

When you are young, but old enough to handle yourself, and if you want to be independent, you travel. Like, you have to go. … If you can’t go to Europe, go somewhere! You have to go somewhere … to say, “Yes, I’m abroad”. (I1, female)

Here, migration becomes a project, an important part of identity formation and maturity, a rite of passage into adulthood (see Carling and Schewel 2018; Mbodji 2008). When pressed, however, interviewees always had clear destination preferences, despite the apparent priority on migration itself. The extent to which they felt accomplished for their migration project was contingent on the destination they had managed to reach.

Destination tiers and the emergence of a new middle tier

What emerges from these narratives and imaginaries is not just a landscape of geographical imaginaries – destination cosmologies –, but one that has clear hierarchical qualities. Interviewees ranked locations based on different dimensions such as development, economic opportunities, working and living conditions, safety and freedoms, residence rights and duration, and social status, resulting in rather rigid destination hierarchies. By and large, these hierarchies were highly consistent across interviewees. Two main groups of established destinations can be distinguished, despite subtle differences between countries within groups: a lower tier consisting of the traditional labour destinations India, Malaysia and countries in the Gulf, and an upper tier of wealthy Western destinations in Europe, North America and Oceania and Japan.

The distinction between the two tiers was almost ubiquitous in the destination cosmologies of interviewees, regardless of their backgrounds. It was also reflected in the discourse: while upper-tier destinations were collectively characterised as ‘good’, ‘nice’, ‘big’ and ‘developed’ countries, lower-tier destinations were often referred to as ‘bad’, ‘not nice’ or ‘dangerous’ countries. For destinations in the Gulf, participants sometimes also used the terms ‘Arab’, ‘Muslim’ or ‘Asian’ in a pejorative way: ‘Here is freedom, Europe. Arab, not freedom’ (I11, female). Besides being extremely common among participants, many interviewees argued there was a universal preference for these upper-tier destinations in Nepal: ‘Europe is our dreamland. That's true! Nobody wants to go to Gulf countries. Nobody likes Dubai, Qatar, Saudi. That’s why we came here’ (I24, male).

These narratives strongly reverberate with Kölbel’s (2020) account of the discursive separation between labour migration to traditional destinations and student migration to the West and Japan among young Nepalis in Kathmandu. It also concurs with recent groupings of common destinations for Nepalis by GDP per capita, migrant wages and migration costs, as well as perceived popularity among Nepali migrants (Valenta 2022; Valenta and Garvik 2023).⁶

How does Malta fit into this two-tiered destination hierarchy? Due to its association with Europe and spatial imaginary spillover, many interviewees saw Malta closer to the upper tier. However, the lower salary, level of development, size of the country and economy, dearth of nature such as mountains and forests, limited opportunities for long-term residence and Malta’s low renown compared to established destinations of the upper tier led many interviewees to voice a clear preference for established upper-tier destinations over Malta. Consequently, Malta was ranked somewhat lower than other Western countries, placing it in between the two major groups. When prompted about other emerging destinations in Southern and Eastern Europe such as Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, Portugal or Cyprus, interviewees usually placed them in a similarly interjacent position. As such, these novel destinations form a new, emerging middle tier in the destination hierarchy. They were often not the first choice or ‘dream destination’ of participants, in particular for those who had previously unsuccessfully tried to move to ‘big countries’ such as the US or Australia. Yet, they are much more accessible than upper-tier destinations, as the work visas offered by these new destinations tend to be much cheaper and have fewer requirements. This makes them attractive destinations for those Nepalis who wish to migrate to Europe but do not meet the educational requirements or lack the financial means to realise a migration to upper-tier destinations via the student visa route. It also opens avenues to Europe for those who had previously worked in traditional labour destinations and never considered a move to Europe possible.

A cautionary note is due. This rather crude grouping of destinations brushes over more subtle differences within each group that participants voiced. For instance, Dubai was often seen as a premium within the lower tier, where Nepali workers had more freedoms and higher salaries. Some interviewees also stated to prefer a certain destination over another that is usually ranked higher. For instance, two friends explained how their initial preference for a ‘big country’ in the upper tier changed because of the necessity to migrate via a student visa, implying a double burden they did not want to accept: ‘Because here, we only work. But … they have to study and work. They have to [balance] the two at the same time’ (I14, female). Yet, such varying individual preferences relating to specific dimensions do not disqualify the broader and highly consistent hierarchical landscape of imagined destinations, and the interjacent middle position of Malta and other new European destinations within it.

Discussion and conclusion

This article set out to uncover how people imagine new and unknown destinations, and how these imaginaries interact with their migration aspirations and destination preferences. Drawing from interviews with Nepali migrants in Malta, it shed light on how participants imagined Malta – a new destination for Nepalis – before their migration. Participants subconsciously drew extensively from imaginaries of larger and better-known European countries to imagine Malta and contextualise the information they obtained, in a mechanism I call spatial imaginary spillover. This transfer of imaginaries was bridged via participants’ construct of Europe, an often-vague concept carrying specific associations such as high levels of wealth and (infrastructural) development, individual freedoms and rights, safety, mobility and long-term settlement.

Spatial imaginary spillover gave rise to imaginaries and expectations of Malta that were sometimes close, but often far from what participants found upon arriving in Malta. There is some evidence of spatial imaginary spillover in other studies on migration to new destinations. For instance, Pereira et al. (2021) discuss how Nepalis working in the Portuguese agricultural sector were shocked about the working and living conditions upon arrival, as they had had very different expectations of ‘a European life, respectable job and everything’ (quoted participant, 506). Similarly, a recent study quotes European migration practitioners noting that non-EU migrants tend to equate Europe with countries in Northern and Western Europe, and often express stark disappointment with the conditions they encountered in Greece, Bulgaria or Cyprus (Bermejo and Carrasco 2021). As spatial imaginary spillover critically relies on imaginaries from elsewhere, the gap between prior imaginaries and actual experiences of unknown places is often particularly wide. For migrants, this seems to frequently cause surprises and unmet expectations at newer destinations.

While these insights are valuable in their own right, they are also highly informative to better understand the decision-making of migrants, given the decisive role geographical imaginaries, cosmologies and destination hierarchies play in this process (Belloni 2022; Paul 2011; Salazar 2011). To revert to the opening quote, the notion of spatial imaginary spillover helps to understand how even in the absence of circulating imaginaries people never decide to move to a destination without first forming at least some basic imaginaries thereof. This occurs both through gathering information and via spillovers from conceptually adjacent destinations. Though people may only be able to vaguely envision such new destinations, they may still choose to move there if the formed imaginaries are ranked higher than those of other destination options, or if they align closer with people’s individual aspirations.

Importantly, spatial imaginary spillover is not a mechanism exclusive to countries. Conceptually, it can also explain the production of imaginaries of unknown towns, villages or neighbourhoods, where attributes are cognitively transferred from a more familiar place within the same larger unit (country, region, city, etc.). Notably, these attributes may be evaluated positively or negatively. Thus, the concept contributes to the literature on geographical imaginaries and place representations by helping to explain how these take shape and interact.

In its capacity to affect migration decisions and physical moves, spatial imaginary spillover has tangible, material consequences beyond the imaginative and discursive realm. The article demonstrates how imaginaries of other places interact with spotty information of ‘the unknown’ and people’s aspirations to produce visions and expectations that eventually propel migration. Despite the disparities between these visions and experiences upon arrival, many still opted to adapt to the circumstances and stay. Further, the weight of the collective imaginaries of Europe and the desire of many migrants to portray their migration as a success perpetuates the imaginaries among Nepalis and inspires additional migrations to Malta, even after the Nepali community had grown substantially in the country. These insights speak to a renewed interest in geography in the material consequences (or ‘force’) of imaginaries and representations of places (Anderson 2019). The article spotlights migration and mobility as quintessential physical manifestations of place representations and sheds light on how representations of one place may drive (or inhibit) migration to another, via spatial imaginary spillover.

The article also emphasises the inherently relational nature of geographical imaginaries. Imaginaries of Malta need to be understood as relative to other destinations and home, which Nepalis compare and rank in hierarchies based on dimensions of opportunity and desirability. Participants drew a clear line between a desirable upper tier of wealthy destinations in the West and in East Asia and a lower tier of traditional labour destinations in West Asia, Malaysia and India. This distinction not only concurs with prior research on destination hierarchies among Nepalis (Kölbel 2020; Valenta 2022) but also bears striking similarities to the hierarchies found in other parts of the world (Paul 2011). This suggests that broader destination hierarchies tend to reflect structural inequalities between destinations with respect to economic opportunities, rights, mobility and thus, social status attainable for migrants, contingent on their class and level of formal education. However, as initially observed by Paul (2011), the accessibility of destinations tends to be the inverse of these very hierarchies, which further increases the prestige linked to successful migration to higher-ranking destinations.

In line with these patterns, participants overwhelmingly placed Malta and other emerging destinations in Southern and Eastern Europe in a new middle tier of destinations, below more established destinations in the West, but above and clearly distinct from traditional labour destinations. Given the high costs and difficulties of obtaining (student) visas for better-known destinations in West and East Asia, these hierarchies explain why Nepalis increasingly choose new European destinations where access through work visas is easier, faster and cheaper. Whilst contributing to emerging research on increasing labour migration from South Asia to Eastern and Southern Europe (Mendoza, Florczak, and Nepal 2020; Pereira et al. 2021), these findings also point to a potential transformation of the segmented two-tiered migration system in Nepal. In this manner, they provide novel conceptual insights on how new destinations are integrated into destination cosmologies and hierarchies, which may transform dynamically as a result.

Finally, the article analysed participants’ migration aspirations through the lens of geographical imaginaries. Interviewees often aspired to a more economically comfortable and stable life for themselves and their families, upward social mobility, or a family house in one of the cities – notably, all within Nepal. Yet, these aspirations necessitate capital difficult to accumulate in Nepal, and the imagined economic opportunities in Europe were seen as a solution. Similarly, the individual liberties, safety, settlement and mobility options many sought in the Western world were perceived unattainable within the imaginaries held of traditional labour destinations and Nepal. For some, migration also had a more intrinsic value, where social prestige or a desire to explore is tied to the act of migration itself, and preferably to destinations in the West. These insights highlight how migration aspirations are inextricably linked to geographical imaginaries, and how these imaginaries offer a rich emic lens to better understand migration aspirations and decision-making.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was granted by the thesis supervisor as part of the research master’s programme at the University of Amsterdam.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the participants for sharing their thoughts, aspirations and experiences with me. My gratitude also goes to Simona Vezzoli, Yentl de Lange, Julia Kirmes-Daly, Afroditi Konstantopoulou, Sorcha Lyne, research cluster participants at the University for Continuing Education Krems, and two anonymous reviewers for their useful feedback on this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported indirectly through an Erasmus + traineeship grant from the European Union, and a study scholarship from the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Germany.

Notes

1 International Organization for Migration, United Nations.

2 Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security, Government of Nepal.

3 This article uses the term ‘Western countries’ or ‘the West’ to refer to countries in Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand.

4 Third-country national here refers to any person who does not hold a citizenship from an EU or Schengen member country.

5 Throughout the article, some grammatical corrections to quotes were made for ease of reading, without altering the meaning or emphasis of the participants’ statements.

6 Note that Valenta and Garvik (2023) make a further distinction between India and Malaysia and GCC countries: India ranks the lowest, with the lowest migration costs and wages.