Do we need more or less focus on “class” in migration research?

Is “class” a metaphor in migration studies? A cursory review of recent literature suggests “class” is sometimes central to analysis (e.g. Bonjour & Chauvin, 2018; Kofman, 2018; Robertson & Roberts, 2022; Rye, 2019; Stock, 2024). However more often, “class” is mentioned as a figure of speech, symbolically referring to socio-economic dimensions of difference. The economic dimensions are often explicit but vague, e.g. “low skilled”, “high skilled”, “working class” or “privileged”. Links to social and cultural spheres are often implicit, echoing the influence of Bourdieu's conceptualization of social, cultural and economic capital (Oliver & O'Reilly, 2010). Thus, “class” sometimes assumes the function of a metaphor, suggesting that there lies potential in further reflection on how the term is used in order to enhance contextual depth and analytical generalization in migration research.