‘Remigration’ (also: return migration) refers to that part of a migration process which involves a return to a closer or broader context of origin, usually at the end of a migration chain. Remigration may be intended from the outset, but it may also be enforced (repatriation, deportation, expulsion) or occur spontaneously (e.g. following a change of regime). In principle, it can be assumed that all migration movements involve a certain proportion of remigration, varying in extent, provided that this was or is practically feasible. The term ‘remigration’ is generally used only within the context of an individual’s life story; migration to the context of origin of one’s ancestors, by contrast, constitutes a special form (‘ancestral return migration’^[1]). This form is also frequently referred to as ‘co-ethnic migration’^[2] to emphasise that the return takes place within the same ethnic context (though not necessarily within the same geographical context of origin). Co-ethnicity may appear to be an advantage for integration and suggest that remigrants are privileged, but it easily obscures the fact that cultural, political and social differences between the context of origin and the destination context influence the integration process.^[3]

In general, the same potential underlying factors and spatio-temporal dimensions apply to remigration as to migration. However, other factors, such as the desire to play an active role in the changed context of origin following politically motivated emigration,^[4] or simply homesickness, may lead to remigration.

Numerous disciplines deal with ‘remigration’, albeit to a significantly lesser extent than with‘migration’in general. Research in these predominantly historical, sociological, economic, geographical, political science and cultural anthropological fields focuses on issues of cultural transfer and the financial and political engagement of remigrants, thechallenges of (re)integration, and the typology of returnees.^[5]

Methodologically, studying remigration proves problematic, not least because of the lack of statistical data on the phenomenon. Consequently, research into remigration often focuses particularly on high-profile cases.^[6] Such actor-centred studies, which approach remigrants using biographical methods, are capable of providing profound insights into the patterns of behaviour and interpretation exhibited by remigrants. Within the field of historical exile research, for example, numerous studies on German remigrants in the post-war period highlight the difficulty of returning to a context of origin that has changed during their absence.^[7]

If one understands the history of Germans in Eastern Europe as a history of migration, then their remigration must also be taken into account. In the context of the many different migration processes involving Germans to, within and from Eastern Europe, remigration is well attested, but due to the scattered nature of the sources, it is rarely documented or researched systematically or in quantitative terms. Furthermore, the difficulty of discerning the criteria used to record ethnic or national affiliations in the surviving sources presents a methodological problem in this context.

For example, research estimates that the remigration of Germans from Eastern Europe, which followed their emigration overseas in the 19th and early 20th centuries, was numerically small. For instance, there was no significant remigration among emigrants of German descent from Croatia who emigrated to the USA between 1870 and 1940, whilst the return rate was higher among Croats and Hungarians.^[8] Nor are there any numerically significant return processes to be identified in the context of the expulsions of Germans from Eastern Europe after 1945; one exception is the large numbers of illegal Hungarian-German returnees.^{[9] Indirectly} , the expulsions of Germans after 1945 – for example, from theBohemian-Moravian border regions of Czechoslovakia – led in some cases to remigration by Czechs who had previously been forcibly resettled from those areas by the Nazi authorities. Alongside these individual remigrations, the Czechoslovak state pursued a vigorous repatriation policy with the aim of resettling the areas depopulated by the expulsions with Czechoslovak settlers, for example from Volhynia . In Czech historiography, these processes are now discussed as examples of social engineering , as they ultimately reflected the vision of an ethnically homogeneous nation-state in the face of unfavourable demographic conditions following the end of the war.^[10] Remigration processes can ^also be observed in the East Central European context as a reaction to a previous deportation, such as the return of Banat Swabians and Transylvanian Saxons from the Soviet Union to Romania. Remigration has also been observed and studied among various groups of late repatriates in recent decades, such as Germans from Upper Silesia or the successor states of the Soviet Union.^[11] To date, little attention has been paid in research to those individuals who have (re)acquired property in their regions of origin since 1989 and spend their holidays or retirement there. In the context of transnational migration processes, such commuter migration is increasingly coming to the attention of researchers, initially using the example of labour migrants from Southern and South-Eastern Europe, and subsequently, in the context of the EU’s eastward enlargements, also from Eastern Central Europe (e.g. seasonal workers), whose investments – particularly in the form of property in their home countries – support transnational life plans. Finally, the remigration of anti-communist emigrants and its influence on the post-socialist transformation processes in Eastern Europe has recently attracted interdisciplinary interest.^[12] However, remigration is rarely studied from a comparative perspective.

In the context of the current migration debate in Germany , the term ‘remigration’ is used differently from its usage in an academic context, in particular to legitimise problematic political positions.^[13] Political actors on the right and far-right of the political spectrum are subjecting this value-neutral term – established in exile and migration studies – to ideological appropriation and reinterpretation, and are using it to conceal their plans for the forced expulsion and deportation of immigrants. For this reason, a jury at the University of Marburg, comprising predominantly linguists, selected the term ‘remigration’ as the ‘Unwort des Jahres 2023’ (Word of the Year 2023) to draw attention to its inappropriate and obfuscating use in public discourse. In its statement, the jury emphasised that the word ‘remigration’ is used “as a right-wing battle cry” and “a euphemistic cover term” and is “deliberately co-opted for ideological purposes (…). By using this term, the New Right aims to achieve cultural hegemony and ethnic homogeneity. What is being demanded through the use of this word infringes upon the fundamental liberal and civil rights of people with a migration background. The infiltration and spread of this supposedly harmless and euphemistic expression into general language use is leading to a shift in the discourse on migration policy towards the normalisation of right-wing populist and far-right positions”.

• Edda Currle: Theoretical approaches to explaining return and remigration. In: soFid Social Science Information Service. Migration and Ethnic Minorities (2006), No. 2, pp. 7–23.
• Michael Schönhuth: Remigration of ethnic German repatriates – A new field of research. In: IMIS-Beiträge 34 (2008), pp. 61–84.
• Sarah Scholl-Schneider: ‘(...) but my husband didn’t want to stay any longer; he wanted to go back home.’ The option of remigration for German emigrants from Eastern Europe overseas. In: Yearbook for German and Eastern European Folklore 54 (2013), pp. 132–149.
• Ágnes Tóth: Return to Hungary 1946–1950. First-hand accounts of Hungarian-German displaced persons. Munich 2012 (Publications of the Federal Institute for the Culture and History of Germans in Eastern Europe 43).

[1] Russell King: ‘Return migration and regional economic development. An overview’. In: Ibid. (ed.): *Return migration and regional economic problems*. London et al. 1986, pp. 1–37, here p. 6.

[2] Jasna Čapo Žmegač, Christian Voß, Klaus Roth (eds.): Co-Ethnic Migrations Compared. Central and Eastern European Contexts. Munich, Berlin 2010 (Studies on Language and Culture in Central and Eastern Europe 14); Takeyuki Tsuda (ed.): Diasporic Homecomings. Ethnic Return Migrants in Comparative Perspective. Palo Alto 2009.

[3] Mathias Beer: A Small Difference – A Big Impact. The Significance of Cultural Difference in the Integration Process of Co-Ethnic Migrants. In: Čapo Žmegač, Voß, Roth (eds.): Co-Ethnic Migrations Compared (note 2), pp. 101–118.

[4] In the case of post-war remigration to Germany, it can be assumed that the more politically motivated the emigration was, the more likely a return was to take place. See Marita Krauss: Homecoming to a Foreign Land. A History of Remigration after 1945. Munich 2001 (Beck’sche Reihe 1436), p. 11.

[5] Jean-Pierre Cassarino: ‘Theorising Return Migration: The Conceptual Approach to Return Migrants Revisited’. In: International Journal on Multicultural Societies 6 (2004), no. 2, pp. 253–279.

[6] For example: Sarah Scholl-Schneider: Mediators between Cultures. Biographical Experiences of Czech Remigrants after 1989. Münster et al. 2011 (Publications of the Commission for German and East European Folklore 94).

[7] For example: Claus-Dieter Krohn, Patrick von zur Mühlen (eds.): Return and Reconstruction after 1945. German Returnees in Public Life in Post-War Germany. Marburg 1997 (Publications of the Herbert and Elsbeth Weichmann Foundation).

[8] Ivan Čizmić: Emigration from Croatia 1880–1940. In: Julianna Puskás (ed.): Overseas Migration from East-Central and South-Eastern Europe. 1880–1940. Budapest 1990 (Studia historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 191), pp. 143–167, here p. 160. This is consistent with the observation that overseas migration often originated from German-speaking villages where a tradition of mobility already existed (cf. Julianna Puskás: Summary of the Discussion. In: Puskás (ed.): Overseas Migration, pp. 236–246, here p. 237).

[9] See Tóth: Return.

[10] Matěj Spurný: The Long Shadow of Expulsion. Ethnicity and the Construction of Socialism in Czech Border Regions (1945–1960). (Studies in the Social and Economic History of East Central Europe 27). Wiesbaden 2019.

[11] See Schönhuth: Remigration.

[12] Caroline Hornstein Tomic, Robert Pichler, Sarah Scholl-Schneider (eds.): Remigration to Post-Socialist Europe: Hopes and Realities of Return (ERSTE series 3). Vienna 2018.

[13] Press release from the language-critical campaign ‘Unwort des Jahres’, University of Marburg, 15 January 2024, see https://www.uni-marburg.de/de/aktuelles/news/2024/unwort-des-jahres-2023-remigration.

Sarah Scholl-Schneider: Remigration. In: Online Encyclopaedia on the Culture and History of Germans in Eastern Europe, 2015. URL: ome-lexikon.uni-oldenburg.de/p32737 (as at 22 January 2024).