The research sought to contribute to a gender-sensitive understanding of the interaction between economic and socio-cultural drivers of labour migrations in different cities: Erbil in Kurdistan-Iraq; Beirut in Lebanon; Islamabad in Pakistan; and Istanbul in Turkey. While migration remains a key issue globally, relatively little work has been done on gender migrations in the Global South, and what has been done has largely focussed on domestic and care work, without including higher-skilled migrants. The project addresses this gap by interviewing approximately 25 women and NGO workers in each city and was designed to go beyond domestic work by looking at a range of labour sectors where women play active roles. In doing so, this research contributes to a better understanding of, the global circulation of gendered labour that is occurring, the drivers of this movement, women’s rights and agency, and how migrant women use urban spaces, within these contexts. This project was designed with specific attention to researcher power dynamics. It was conducted with (not on) researchers in the Global South, thus aiming to produce knowledge from the South rather than to impose knowledge from the North. The multi-context project design also brings forward a rich comparative analysis of societies in South Asia and the Middle East – going beyond one country and nation-state borders. Key findings of the project are: • Gendered migrations in the Middle East and South Asia are diverse In terms of educational level, occupations, nationalities and rights and include migrant women from the Global South and North. • Discriminatory practices in home countries inform migration. In each of the four countries there were discriminatory practices and patriarchal norms in their home countries that influenced the women’s migration (e.g., sexual violence, domestic violence, discriminatory employment practices because they are women, discrimination against their SOGIE identity, no legal rights to divorce). • Women are treated differently based on their race, country of origin, and social capital within a given context. Women from diverse backgrounds faced distinct forms of discrimination based on their intersectional identities. For example, in Turkey, cultural capital is important. Women from North America, in particular those who were educated with university degrees were often able to find good work as teachers, journalists, or translators. In contrast, the women interviewed from the former Soviet Union, who were also educated, went through a process of de-skilling after migration – now working as cleaners or live-in carers. This happens in-part because they have less cultural capital in the Turkish context. • Education levels amongst the women were high, but the value placed on that education once in the country of migration was mixed. Despite relatively high levels of education, many of the women still faced significant hurdles in finding commensurate employment opportunities. • Women’s agency can be both amplified and strained in migration contexts. Most women showed agency in their choice to migrate away from their home countries and in their efforts to improve their life conditions. However, women's agency in these contexts was strained by structural inequalities and violence that inhibited and moulded their ability to participate in the labour market. For example, two of the Syrian women interviewed in Lebanon described how they ended up in sex work, despite this not being their choice or aspiration. • Personal networks based on nationality play a key role in women’s lives. Interviews revealed that rather than relying on formal trade unions or collective forms of organising, many women used personal networks based on nationality to build community and advance their working conditions and livelihoods. • Recruitment agencies have a lot of control and power. Recruitment agencies also shape who migrates because they have bilateral agreements with agencies in countries of origin. They can influence and shape the flow of who and under what conditions migrants are allowed to enter the country. This is particularly the case in Lebanon where they blocked changes to the Kafala systemThe GCRF Gender, Justice and Security Hub will deliver innovative interdisciplinary research on the challenge of achieving gender justice and inclusive security in conflict-affected societies. The Hub addresses the overlapping of three major policy areas: Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 5 on gender equality; SDG 16 on peace, inclusivity and justice; and the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda. The UK is a global leader on these issues, particularly gender equality, which is at the heart of UK Aid Strategy as well as a national security priority. Yet in each of these areas, progress has been frustratingly slow, and in some cases has stalled altogether. The Hub will develop an evidence base on the intersections of gender, justice and security; expand research capacity in collaboration with international partners; and make use of unrivalled links with leading ambassadors for gender justice (Hub Champions) to translate research into impact for the achievement of sustainable peace. Promoting the conditions for gender justice and inclusive security requires a broad vision, ability to unite disparate specialisms, develop capacity across the sites where the development challenge is most intense, and provide independent scrutiny of policy initiatives. A diverse team of PI and co-investigators, widely regarded as experts in gender studies, development, justice and/or WPS, will lead the research. The Hub will pursue its key questions through four projects - on Transformation & Empowerment; Land, Livelihoods & Rights; Migration & Displacement; and Masculinities & Sexualities, as well as two cross-cutting work streams on Law & Policy Frameworks and Methodological Innovation. The challenge the Hub confronts is global, but appears in different ways across contexts. To generate detailed knowledge from which to draw scalable conclusions and recommendations, the Hub will focus on eight core cases: Afghanistan, Colombia, Iraq, Lebanon, Myanmar, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka and Uganda. While each is distinctive in its experiences and timelines of conflict, the cases are broadly geographically representative and are all significantly conflict-affected. The Hub structure is designed to build deep and lasting links between researchers, project partners, policy makers, civil society actors and vulnerable groups. In addition to a range of academic outputs (monographs; journal articles; visual materials; working papers; policy reports) specific to each project, the Hub will yield several other outputs of significance for the wider research community: new datasets on transitional justice, women's empowerment and subsequent backlash, and post-conflict reconciliation; a major 'Global Gender, Justice and Security' report, with researchers from across the Hub contributing data and chapters; and an innovative web portal providing wide access to Hub research. The portal will be the Hub's main site of public engagement, featuring videos, podcasts and case studies of the development challenge and effective responses to it, as well as serving as a resource beyond the end of the award. While the Hub will be housed administratively at the LSE Centre for WPS, its activities will be most evident in the eight core countries. Hub workshops will be held in each one throughout the grant, to include knowledge exchange, research presentation and development, leadership team meetings to identify project synergies and forward plan, visits from Hub Champions, policy meetings, networking and collaboration opportunities and expert-led training. Hub institutions have committed to providing access to research methods courses for researchers from the core countries. The Hub's activities will be geared towards achieving five forms of impact (including policy and institutional reform and capacity building), in partnership with global south researchers and civil society, to the benefit of those currently facing gender insecurity and injustice.

The study has a descriptive, qualitative participatory design, based on individual, in-depth, semi-structured interviews; ethnographic participant observation, and extensive reviews of legal and policy documents, reports and statistics, official websites of relevant organisations, and academic literature. A purposeful sampling method was used, based on convenience, emergent and snowball sampling led by the local partners in each countries. Inclusion criteria of participants were to be an adult, working migrant woman in the country or to be an officer in a statutory or third sector agency/organisation active in the field of migration in the country.