Pacific transnationalism can be temporal and fixed or shifting and continuous. At any moment, the circumstances of transnationalism can exist for any group of individuals or community of people. They occur when boundaries are crossed, and connections and links are made back to the country of origin or by their community. The patterns of transnational activities then become part of the community and of the lives of those with whom these contacts are made. It is not uncommon or difficult to identify certain communities as transnational communities or to regard certain practices as transnational. Yet it can be difficult to say when a particular activity that involved contact between two places of different national origins is not an example of transnationalism or to identify when the process of transnationalism stops. Kennedy and Roudometof (2002, 57) believe that transnationalism is sustained so long as new immigrants continue to join these communities, and people remain transnationals for the time that these links are sustained. Al-Ali and Koser (2002, 14) note the ‘permanence and resiliency of transnationalism’ and believe ‘that individuals can become transnational, and also stop being transnational’. Transnational communities that become inactive in terms of transnational practices may once again decide to revive and resume these practices. Although the formation of transnational communities has accelerated in recent years, so too has the unmaking of these communities as they regroup or move back to their country of origin or integrate into their host countries (Al-Ali and Koser 2002, 7). However, it is the continuous wave of transnationals, as each new individual, groups of individuals or communities make similar crossings over similar national boundaries and maintain similar contacts, which give transnationalism its permanence.
As second, third and subsequent generations of Pacific nations’ migrants are born, transnational practices tend to diminish. Although van Amersfoort and Doomernik (2002, 56) believe that, over time, the boundaries and social positions become ‘more diffuse’, they admit that not all groups develop in this way. They also believe that it is difficult to say at what point the process of ‘immigrant absorption’ draws to a close but agree that the initial processes lose their impetus and strength after about three generations.
It is possible for communities to lose their transnational identity, though it cannot be certain at what point this loss occurs. It could be when communities or individuals no longer make connections with the homeland or wish to do so. These connections do not always need to be to people but also to the ideas, cultures and customs of home. Cultures, like people, migrate and lead to ‘communities of “taste”, shared beliefs or economic interests’ (Kennedy and Roudometof 2002, 13). However, if a Pacific transnational identity can cease through a lack of identification with the homeland, then it can also resume as new arrivals or even older members seek to re-establish links and ties. A transnational identity is usually viewed as arising out of a community. Gegeo (2001) claims that identity is a quality that is ‘built in from birth’ but to which ‘one can add other identities’, suggesting that the adoption of other identities is an individual process even though it is influenced by external or communal factors. This allows an individual, at least, to regard herself as a transnational even though she may not be seen in that way by the community in which she lives.
Kennedy and Roudometof (2002, 14) argue that differentiating between older disaporic transnational communities, and second and third generation global communities, is dangerous and misleading because of the close connections and dependencies between the localised second and third generations and the initial globalised transnationals. Communications technology and mass transport have allowed transnationals to maintain links with their homeland and have made it easier for second, third and fourth generations to sustain these links even when it appears that they have moved towards assimilation in the host country. This would not necessarily bring an end to Pacific transnationalism but does indicate that the reasons for Pacific transnationalism vary according to the circumstances of each group that migrates outside the Pacific Islands and changes in nature over the time of each successive generation. Transnational communities will vary in the extent to which they carry out or portray the ideal of transnationalism, depending on their desires, needs and expectations of both themselves and the communities from which they come. Transnational communities are heterogeneous with respect to their home communities and among their members, and some transnationals may ‘share a lifestyle and personal aspirations’ (Kennedy and Roudometof 2002, 15) closer to that of the dominant host community than to members of their own migrant group. Allegiance to their migrant community and home country may shift over time, depending on factors such as new friendships being made, and as the prospect of returning home grows dimmer.
Countries constantly redesign their immigration laws in order to regulate and monitor the nature and flow of migrants. Most countries require migrants to meet certain criteria related to skills, country of application, reason for application and family members if they wish to migrate. Asylum seekers must also meet specific requirements and quota restrictions upon application for refugee status. Upon arrival in a host country, a range of community and government services and organisations are made available to both migrants and refugees to assist their successful integration and resettlement into the society. In contrast, there are no government policies, state organisations or community services for those persons defined as transnationals. In fact, there appears to be no obvious constitutional benefit to an individual or community to be classified as a transnational. This may be because, as Wong (2002, 175) points out, they are regarded as de facto citizens of more than one nation-state rather than de jure ones.
Work, legal or undocumented, has made transnationals out of people—from the seafarers of Kiribati, as described by Borovnik, who intertwine their travel with the prospect of procuring remittances for their kin at home, to the Fijian fruit pickers in Griffith, Australia whose circumstances have been brought to attention by Schubert. In Schubert’s account, like that of Lee’s, one recognizes that moving, travelling on, seeking circumstances more favourable than the ones left behind, are central to Pacific peoples’ existence. It highlights a people nomadic by necessity as often their transnational pattern involves not only one movement, but several, as Nosa illustrates in his chapter about Niueans who moved first to Aotearoa/New Zealand and then on to Australia.
In Pacific communities in Aotearoa/New Zealand and Australia, an important matter in transnationality is who forges and maintains the links with the home islands. Key members of both communities—pastors, politicians, sports stars, journalists and chiefly elders—have crucial roles to play in upholding the processes of transnationalism. They are needed to communicate with the home community about the affairs of its transnational host community, to inform the latter about events in the home country, and to make the host country aware of its transnational community. Transnational institutions work to help their nationals survive and improve their opportunities in the host country (Amersfoort and Doomernik 2002, 56). Churches, according to Lee (2003), are significant to ‘the organization of social spaces’ in Tongan transnational communities and to maintaining kinship connections and relationships. Church communities for Pacific transnationals, though not an exact replication of a village, provide the space and place where Samoan customs are enacted and their values reinforced (Burns McGrath, 2002). Transnational links are forged not only through cultural identities but also through sports, leisure and lifestyle, and Kennedy and Roudometof (2002, 1) agree that accounts of transnational relationships should be extended to include other social trends that shape peoples’ lives such as associations, clubs, and informal networks.