![Story logo](https://cdn.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/78804388449b446399e091c6ae872e30/resources/a7Amo1LgCvAz-ivT99sjp.jpeg?w=200)
Hopes, Fears, and Illusions: Notes from the field
How Migrants Assess Risk and Process Information on their Journey to El Norte
![](https://cdn.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/375db269390848f8b8a5ef313c793dfe/resources/ZNudc97xe1Y_lKmtMAXRT.jpeg?w=20)
About the Project
Hopes, Fears, and Illusions (HFI) is a pilot project funded by a Tufts Springboard grant to understand how migrants assess risk and process information on their journeys toward the United States. Specifically, we seek to learn more about 1) how migrants get their information and from where; and 2) how migrants interpret and then act on this information. Four teams of Fletcher graduate students are spending six weeks volunteering with local partners and interviewing migrants in Mexico, Costa Rica, and Colombia. Professors Katrina Burgess and Kimberly Howe designed and are coordinating the study as principal investigators.
01 / 05
3
Los Chiles, Costa Rica
Researchers Avery Closser and Diana Serrano
5
Necoclí, Colombia
Researchers Laura Velez Colorado and Andrew Fitzgerald
The Tijuana team, composed of Sara Fattori and Bri Fierro, is living, volunteering, and conducting interviews at Casa del Migrante , one of the oldest and most well-established shelters at the U.S.-Mexico border. The Tapachula team, composed of Khalil Bentley and Allyson Teague, is living, volunteering, and conducting interviews at Hospitalidad y Solidaridad , a newer shelter financed by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) to house migrants seeking asylum in Mexico. The Costa Rica team, composed of Avery Closser and Diana Serrano, is conducting interviews in Paso Canoas, on the southern border, and Los Chiles, on the northern border, with the support of HIAS Costa Rica , the local branch of an international NGO that provides services to refugees and asylum seekers in over 20 countries. Finally, the Colombia team, composed of Andrew Fitzgerald and Laura Velez Colorado, is working in Necoclí, a coastal town near the Panamanian border, where they will conduct interviews and provide research assistance to iMMAP Colombia , an international NGO that offers information management support to humanitarian and development organizations.
Entry 1: Different Sites, Common Patterns
By Dr. Katrina Burgess, Co-Principal Investigator
The field work began during the first week of June, when the Mexico and Costa Rica teams arrived at their assigned research sites. The Colombia team arrived at their assigned site two weeks later. Each team spent their first week being onboarded by their local partners and getting to know the local context. Even before starting their interviews, they observed some common patterns. First, local service providers are overwhelmed by the number of migrants and the demands for shelter, food, and information. Second, there are lots of families with children, including infants and toddlers. And, third, most migrants do not have access to reliable information – and many appear to be misinformed.
Tijuana: regarding the border's barbed wire walls, Sara remarked, "the view is impressive and almost destabilizing..." Bri noted, "I have noted significant evidence of militarization...on one ride, we would see [trucks of soldiers with guns] maybe 2-3 times."
Tapachula: reflecting on the people in their shelter, Allyson noted "There are a lot of children and families here and most people seem to be under the age of 35."
Costa Rica: In Costa Rica, Avery & Diana stopped in the beach town of Uvita and learned that most of the migrants passing through on the bus were Venezuelan. "A young Nicaraguan employee at our hotel confirmed [this], adding (in perfect English) that he's heard horrible stories about the jungle between Panama and Colombia."
Colombia: Laura & Andrew noted "[A migrant we interviewed] had been living on the beach in Necoclí for nearly three months, trying to save money— usually $400—to pay for the journey across the Darién Gap. Migrants must pay twice the price a Colombian pays for the boat ride [across the Gulf of Urabá] and an additional $320 for a "package" that will get them across the jungle."
Entry 2: "...one has to take the risk."
By Dr. Katrina Burgess, Co-Principal Investigator
All four teams began conducting interviews with migrants while gaining a deeper understanding of their local contexts. As the testimonies reveal, migrants usually leave their homes reluctantly, out of desperation, and with remarkably little information about what lies ahead. They also rely heavily on their faith and love for their children to sustain them on these perilous journeys. At the same time, we have found notable contrasts between the different sites. Migrants staying in the shelters in Mexico tend to be in relatively good shape and, in the case of Tijuana, more likely to have avoided the worst parts of the journey because they had the documents and money to travel by air. By contrast, migrants passing through the transit points in Costa Rica and Colombia are often ill, out of money, and sleeping rough on the streets, in trash-filled tent camps, or on the beach.
Tijuana: A 24-year-old male from Guatemala shared, "One hears the news that they kill you, they kidnap you, you are left in the desert. But one has to take the risk. So, yes, I was informed about this, but even so I wanted to attempt [the journey]."
Tapachula: Allyson writes, "We have learned about a network of migrants who have already crossed into the United States and who share their stories and experiences with those waiting out their process in the shelter. Some of the migrants in the shelter have mapped out their own routes based on the information provided by this network."
Costa Rica: Diana writes, "One migrant we chatted with informally demanded that the jungle be closed, and that new and safe pathways be created to avoid the deaths of innocent people. He had no information on the difficulty of the jungle before he entered. He ran out of food and went days without eating."
Colombia: Laura and Andrew explore the differences between migrants who chose to settle in Colombia and those who choose to continue through the Darién Gap. One respondent said, "It's 50/50: 50 is reaching the goal, and the other 50 is ending up dead."
Entry 3: "...at this point in the game, you cannot look back."
By Dr. Katrina Burgess, Co-Principal Investigator
Several patterns are emerging as our teams continue their interviews and observations. One is that migrants get most of their information from other migrants, be they friends or family already in the United States or fellow travelers farther along on their journey. Another is that migrants of different nationalities have notably different experiences. In Colombia and Costa Rica, Venezuelans tend to be the least well-informed with the fewest resources and thus the most vulnerable. In Mexico, Black and/or Muslim migrants face especially high levels of discrimination, abuse, and cultural insensitivity. Finally, migrants are aware of the dangers ahead but often feel it is a risk worth taking. And, having borne the "sunk costs" of having made it this far, few are willing to turn back.
Tijuana: Sara reflects, "The people recently interviewed made me reflect on the word 'vulnerability.' To me, the interviewees appeared anything but vulnerable. I saw them as strong, hopeful, confident, motivated."
Tapachula: Khalil reflects on the need for better cultural understanding among aid workers and the disparate treatment that Black and Muslim migrants face. He states, "...most of the migrants that I met were relying on [U.S. immigration policies] for a chance to enter the U.S. I wonder if the Black migrants in particular will be able to benefit the same as other migrants."
Costa Rica: Avery and Diana note the relaxed nature of Los Chiles compared to the chaos of Paso Canoas. One migrant reflected, " “When I reflect on everything I’ve done, it’s a little scary. Quite scary. But at this point in the game, you cannot look back. It’s up to you to move on, looking back makes things scarier.” – Male, 36, Colombia
Colombia: Andrew and Laura compare the insecurity that migrants face on their journeys to similar kinds of insecurity that push migrants from their home countries. "You have to sleep with one eye closed and the other open." – Male, 29, Venezuela
Entry 4: "As a migrant, I would like to be given the opportunity to speak...because we are all human beings."
By Dr. Katrina Burgess, Co-Principal Investigator
Our teams experienced bittersweet emotions as their time in the field drew to a close. They were ready to return to their friends, families, and regular routines, but they were also sad to say goodbye to communities and people they had gotten to know, often on a very personal level. In addition, they were left with unanswered questions: What will happen to the migrants they met? Will they make it to their destination? Will they be able to realize their dreams? How will policy decisions, both near and far, affect conditions on the ground for future migrants?
I had my own encounter with these questions the other day, when I came across a horrifying story in USA Today about migrants getting caught in floating buoys and barbed wire placed by Texas authorities in the Rio Grande. As I was reading the article, I realized that I had met one of the families during my brief visit to Paso Canoas, Costa Rica, in late June. The family, originally from Venezuela, had just crossed the border from Panama and were at the HIAS tent seeking information about how to get to the northern border with Nicaragua. While the parents spoke to HIAS staff, their 5-year-old twins were fidgeting and looking unhappy. We offered the twins a coloring book and crayons, and their eyes lit up with excitement. Several minutes later, the family went off in the direction of the bus station, and I wondered what would happen to them.
Imagine my surprise when, nearly a month later, a photograph of the twins showed up in the news. On the one hand, I was saddened and angry to learn that one of them had fallen victim to the barbed wire in the river, an unconscionable policy that is being challenged in court. On the other hand, I was relieved that they made it through Central America and Mexico and are now safely in the United States.
Angela Piazza/Caller-Times
Most of the time, we don't know what happens to the people we meet, which is one of the emotional burdens of doing this kind of research. On a personal level, often the best we can do is offer them a few moments of joy or support – even if it's with a simple act of kindness like giving a child a coloring book or listening to their story. But if we can take the insights and experiences these migrants have shared with us and build an empirical foundation for more humane and effective migration policies, we may have a more long-lasting impact at the policy level.
Stay tuned for this next stage of our project!
Tijuana: Sara reflects on the way race impacts migrants' experiences. "I am convinced that adding the race layer to our research will be essential and provide an even more complex and complete picture of the migration issues we are trying to unpack."
Tapachula: Allyson shares the stories of two migrant families--one that reaches the U.S., and another that loses contact after leaving the shelter. She underscores the close relationships and unanswered questions that remain beyond her research.
Costa Rica: Diana details how migrants' knowledge of their remaining journey changes as a result of HIAS's information sharing and the kinds of support migrants need. “Humanitarian organizations should reflect on their practices and the kind of support they deliver to us. For us being able to communicate is essential. However...we often must pay fees to connect to Wi-Fi or charge our phones. This should be a priority in humanitarian services.” – Male, 28, Venezuela
Colombia: Andrew and Laura learn about a potential migrant shelter opening soon but are unable to confirm many details. "We left Necoclí with unanswered questions about the future of these migration flows and how the local government and humanitarian entities will respond."
Entry 5: Who are the migrants in our study?
By Dr. Katrina Burgess, Co-Principal Investigator
Since our research teams returned from the field in August 2023, we have been analyzing the results of their in-depth interviews with migrants. Most of the questions were open-ended, requiring a lengthy process of qualitative coding. But we did ask a few closed questions that generated the descriptive statistics shared here.
Over six weeks, the team interviewed 131 migrants from 15 countries. Reflecting trends in the region, most of them were Venezuelans, with Hondurans a distant second (Figure 1).
When we break these numbers down by research site, we find much more diversity in the Mexican sample (Figure 2), reflecting Mexico’s closer proximity to the United States and the greater dispersion of migrants across different points of entry to and, especially, exit from Mexico.
Turning to age and gender, our sample looks quite similar to the overall migrant population. Most of the migrants we interviewed were young adults, often traveling with small children (Figure 3). Nearly half of them were women (Figure 4). Although single men still represent the majority of migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border, the share of women (and children) making these journeys has risen dramatically in recent years, which our study captures.
We also asked migrants how long ago they left their country of origin. As Figure 5 shows, we find a bimodal pattern in which they left either in the last 6 months or more than three years ago. The latter was especially prevalent among Venezuelans and Haitians, many of whom first migrated to South America but found life increasingly untenable in the face of Covid-related economic stress and worsening xenophobia. As a result, they were making a kind of “second exodus” to the United States.
Interested in where migrants get information, we asked whether they knew anyone in the destination country, which for 99 percent of them was the United States. Two-thirds of them responded in the affirmative (Figure 6), but this ratio varies across national groups (Figure 7). While the vast majority of Haitians and Central Americans had a U.S. contact, only about half of Venezuelans did. Among our small African sample, only one migrant (from Angola) knew someone. This finding has implications not just for the kind of information migrants receive but also for their options for gaining entry into the United States and the kinds of integration challenges they are likely to face if and when they do.
Our final set of closed questions referred to the reasons for leaving home and awareness of U.S. policies. For each question, we asked the respondents to answer “yes” or “no” to a list of options. The five most-cited reasons for migrating were family support, low wages, fear of violence, inflation, and weak rule of law (Figure 8).
Once again, these results look different when we disaggregate our sample by national group. For example, Venezuelans were more likely to be fleeing economic hardship (Figure 9), whereas Hondurans were more affected by violence (Figure 10). Across these two groups, the reasons with the greatest overlap were family support and weak rule of law.
Regarding U.S. policies, we found that CBP One, the application required to get an appointment to request asylum or humanitarian parole, was by far the most well-known (Figure 11). It was followed by asylum and Title 42, a Covid-era measure that had enabled U.S. authorities to turn away irregular migrants and asylum seekers without any hearing until being revoked in May 2023. Most migrants familiar with Title 42 knew it was no longer in effect, but they were often confused about what had taken its place.
When we compare Venezuelans and Hondurans, we find a roughly similar pattern across the policies but with higher levels of awareness overall among Hondurans (Figure 12). This information gap likely reflects the weaker U.S. ties of Venezuelans but also the closer proximity of Hondurans to the U.S.-Mexico border as well as their greater access to information as residents of shelters in Tapachula and Tijuana.
These descriptive statistics provide an intriguing snapshot of the migrants we interviewed but only scratch the surface when it comes to their decision-making. We will continue to publish updates as we code our open-ended interview data to find patterns in how the migrants we interviewed assessed risk and processed information as they journeyed north.
Stay tuned!
Entry 6: Navigating Trauma-Informed Research with Migrants on the Move
By Dr. Kimberly Howe, Co-Principal Investigator, and Shenandoah Cornish, Project Manager
Introduction
We intentionally designed the Hopes, Fears, and Illusions (HFI) research project with a trauma-informed approach that considers the psychological risks and well-being of the researcher as well as the research participant. This approach aims to improve the way researchers interact with vulnerable populations and sensitive research contexts. We felt that such an approach was ethically necessary given HFI’s focus on the journey of migrants, their reasons for leaving home, their experiences along the way, and their hopes for the future. On the migrant-side, we developed research tools and methodologies that encouraged a genuine exchange between participants and researchers while also trying to mitigate the possibility of re-traumatization. On the researcher-side, we thought carefully about the risks and well-being of the researchers, who would be spending six weeks living in demanding conditions, listening to difficult narratives, and witnessing the suffering of others.
In this entry, we will share some insights from our approach, shedding light on the importance of such methodologies in navigating the challenging terrain of migrant experiences.
HFI Colombia researchers Laura Velez Colorado and Andrew Fitzgerald, accompanied by co-Principal Investigator Dr. Kimberly Howe.
Understanding Trauma-Informed Research
Trauma-informed research extends beyond the conventional boundaries of inquiry, recognizing the intricate interplay between researchers and the researched. Drawing inspiration from feminist research principles, the approach encourages the researcher to be reflexive and aware of power dynamics. It relies on a set of skills whereby researchers understand the risk of (re)traumatization and are ready to mitigate such risks prior to data collection, during interviews, and in the aftermath. Trauma-informed research also recognizes the emotional toll that such work can take on researchers, underscoring that self-care is the responsibility not just of the researchers but also of the institutions with which they are working. The foundation of trauma-informed research lies in creating a safe, respectful, and empowering environment for all involved.
Integrating Trauma-Informed Methods into the HFI Project
In the context of HFI, we worked to implement trauma-informed practices as much as possible, while keeping in mind that doing so is a highly context-specific moving target.
A trauma-informed approach lays the groundwork for ethical and nuanced research long before researchers step into the field. It begins with thoughtful and empathetic formulation of research questions, tools, and approaches and compels us to question not only what we seek to discover, but why such an inquiry is necessary, and how such inquiries should be framed. This involves a conscious consideration of the potential impacts of questions on the well-being of participants. To this end, we prioritized open-ended queries, acknowledging the diversity of experiences and allowing individuals to share their narratives on their terms.
By contemplating the implications of our inquiries, we strove to foster an environment that respected the autonomy and agency of those who choose to share their stories. We held two training sessions for our researchers that discussed the following points:
1. Interview Choices: This included physical considerations emphasizing participant comfort and attending to non-verbal cues; framing techniques prioritizing human connection, active listening, and validation of participant experiences; and providing choices and opportunities for participants to exercise agency.
2. Ethical considerations: We had lengthy discussions on representation, questioning how interlocutors are portrayed in research and its potential impact on their lives; positionality, reflecting on researcher biases, worldviews, and power dynamics in interactions; and the importance of transparent communication to establish trust.
3. What It Means to be a Trauma-Informed Researcher: We explained what traumatic experiences are and their far-reaching impacts on individuals. We discussed how traumatic responses may be invisible to researchers, while underscoring the importance of recognizing distress when it arises. We also identified skills and interviewing techniques that could be utilized during interviews that might mitigate the risk of re-traumatization.
4. Context-Aware Research: We explored options for tailoring HFI to each of the contexts where the project was located, acknowledging the specificity of each setting and adjusting methodologies accordingly; and we encouraged researchers to adapt to unexpected situations and regularly reflect on their approaches.
The HFI fieldwork also included multiple support strategies for researchers.
1. Prior to leaving for the field, researchers received institutional supports that included security plans tailored for each field site and the development and incorporation of detailed self-care plans for researchers. They also participated in discussions about individual self-care strategies, including how to recognize warning signs early on and establish coping mechanisms. We emphasized the importance of setting boundaries, establishing field allies and empathy partners, and taking time each day to “recharge.” We encouraged researchers to think ahead of time about what tends to go by the wayside when they are overwhelmed (exercise, diet, sleep, etc.) and to set up plans to recognize such signs in advance and develop strategies to manage these eventualities.
2. During the field work, we provided team support plans that included internal debriefs between each research pair, weekly team meetings, and bi-weekly cross-team sessions to ensure diverse perspectives and insights. In addition, we partnered with local organizations to host the researchers and provide additional support as needed, and the PIs (or a local faculty advisor) visited the researchers at each site during the first phase of the field work.
Lastly, as part of our trauma-informed research process, we created a series of feedback sessions in various modalities (group, individual, written form), for researchers to provide reflective feedback on their experiences at all stages of the project.
Reflections
Several key takeaways emerged from these feedback sessions. HFI researchers noted that the pre-research trainings exposed them to topics (mental health and self-care) that they had not considered previously as part of research or fieldwork, although they wished they had had additional trainings prior to data collection and a refresher during the beginning phase of their fieldwork. Researchers also noted the positive impacts of having had a partner in their research sites (as opposed to being solo), but would have benefited from more in-person team building sessions before beginning research. There was also an appreciation of the support sessions provided, although some felt it would have been helpful to have individual supportive check-ins in addition to group meetings.
Trauma-informed research is an evolving landscape, and we are still left with some ongoing questions as researchers in this space, including:
1. What is the most ethically appropriate way to address the researcher's access to valuable information (e.g. risks of travel, immigration policies, life in the US) that the research participant may not have? What are the power dynamics that this implies?
2. How can researchers show appreciation for research participants in context-appropriate ways?
3. What is the impact of this research on migrants as individuals? We had opportunities to prepare, discuss, and reflect with our own team, but where does that leave our interlocutors? How can we do better to ensure that research participants benefit more directly from the experience of working with us?