Chapter 16

---

Materializing US–Caribbean borders

Airports as technologies of communication, coordination, and control

Mimi Sheller

---

The convergence of intense human mobilities, financial flows, economic turbulence, and heightened securitization of borders make this a crucial period in which to study the implementation and impact of new mobility regimes and “smart borders.”¹ This also requires attention to the effects of shifting discourses, representations, and ideologies of im/mobility and opening/closure of borders. Research on the sociocultural dimensions of air travel and airports has brought new attention to the cultural and informational dimensions of air travel within the field of “aeromobilities” research (Adey 2004a, 2004b, 2009a, 2010; Cresswell 2006; Salter 2006, 2008; Adey et al. 2007; Urry 2007; Cwerner et al. 2009).² There is an emerging view of the airport as a site of both complex materialities and complex flows of information, communication, and discourses concerning mobility, security, and borders. As a site “imbued with power and control,” Peter Adey suggests, “the airport is now a surveillance machine – an assemblage where webs of technology and information combine” (2004b: 1375). Forms of vision, design, communication, and cultural circulation are all caught up in the production of what is broadly called aeromobility and its meanings (Sheller 2010).

Materialist approaches to communication offer an important perspective in which to situate the contemporary surveillant assemblage of the airport. For James Carey, the advent of the telegraph “freed communication from the constraints of geography” and in so doing “not only altered the relation between communication and transportation; [but] also changed the fundamental ways in which communication was thought about” (Carey 1983; and see Packer and Robertson 2007). Similarly, the advent of mobile communication technologies and software-supported transportation networks also fundamentally changes how communication is thought about, but in this case by re-embedding it into transportational infrastructures and spaces of transit, which are also spaces of transmission. Airports are one of the prime examples of communication-intensive infrastructure, dependent as they are on online reservation, digital ticketing and flight management systems, air traffic control systems, baggage and freight routing software, and generally “software-sorted mobilities” (Wood and Graham 2006). Conceptually and materially, transport and transmission are currently intricately linked, especially at airports, and need to be studied in conjunction with each other.

Furthermore, Carey first made the point that communication technologies such as the telegraph played a crucial role not just in communication, but in coordination and control, and in the creation of new temporalities (such as futures markets and universal time). His work foresaw the role of the computer in again shifting the relation between technology and ideology, and reworking coordination and control. As Jeremy Packer observes, “transportation has become increasingly dependent upon communications at the behest of safety and security. Second, this linkage depends upon a conceptualization of how to use transportation and communication technologies to ‘govern at a distance”’ (Packer and Robertson 2007: 6; see Packer 2007). It is here that we can begin to rethink the role of transnationally extensive communication and transportation networks in the USA’s efforts to assure safety and security of its borders by governing at a distance, with a particular focus on the role of the airport as a technology of communication, coordination, and control. For my purposes, this chapter will focus especially on the US–Caribbean border as one instantiation of this.

How do the transport and communication infrastructures that make up air travel come together with visions of mobility and accessibility, and discourses of security and safety, to produce highly differentiated experiences of travel – and along with them uneven spatialities and temporalities? Remarkably, there have been no major studies of the construction of the US–Caribbean border, its evolving forms, and its impact on Caribbean mobilities. I want to argue that the very practices that claim to perform the connection of Caribbean localities into new mobility regimes and communication infrastructures simultaneously produce the differentiated subjectivities, uneven spatialities, and unequal distributions of mobility capital that are decreasing the “motility” (i.e., potential mobility; Kaufmann et al. 2004) of the majority of citizens of Caribbean countries. While the potential for movement and the capacity for movement are being increased for foreigners (and foreign capital) who wish to enter the region, both the potential and the capacity for movement are being decreased for its inhabitants, placing them in a “slow lane” separated from the high-speed “kinetic elite.” Governing at a distance is thus achieved via the “modernized” infrastructures of communication and air travel – with their new modes of securitization, surveillance, and control – that assure the mobility of North Americans through the Caribbean, while fixing or mooring Caribbean nationals in place, or relegating them to dangerous, illegal, and undocumented forms of slow, convoluted, or circular mobility.

Although there have been numerous calls for further study of the complex global flows of people, objects, capital, information, and risks around the world (Appadurai 1996; Hannerz 1996; Urry 2000, 2007), most research into technologically advanced mobilities still focuses on the global North and lacks comparative approaches within the global South. While there is a longstanding interest in themes of migration, exile, and transnational ways of life among Caribbean writers and artists (DeLoughrey 2007), few incorporate new technologies of air mobility into that tradition. Within Caribbean Studies, specialists tend to work within particular national or linguistic contexts, so that it is also difficult to gain a perspective on mobilities across the region or a comparative overview of differentiated “mobility regimes” (Canzler et al. 2008). Caribbean mobilities were central to the initial theorizations of mobile diasporas (Gilroy 1993), transnationality (Basch et al. 1994; Clifford 1997), and creolization (Glissant 1992, 1997; Benitez Rojo 1996), yet only recently has there emerged a body of work offering empirical research on Caribbean transnational migration as part of the making of a “Trans-Caribbean” region (Puri 2003; Henke and Magister 2007; Jaffe 2008) including the formation of “transnational families” (Bauer and Thompson 2006) and “longdistance nationalism” (Schiller and Fouran 2001).³ Caribbean modernity, with its disjunctive temporalities, depended on the multiple intersecting mobilities and immobilities generated by shipping routes, airline networks, communications infrastructures, and peoples, cultures and images on the move, being both demobilized and remobilized in relation to colonial and postcolonial political economies (Sheller 2004, 2009b).

James Carey’s work is also telling in this regard. Although he focused on North America, his materialist perspective on communication offers insights into other colonial and postcolonial regions of the Americas. When he turns to an investigation of the telegraph in the domain of empire, he points out four factors:

Each of these points hints at crucial insights into Caribbean airports as technologies of communication, coordination, and control today. Just as the telegraph reshaped nineteenth-century spatiality and temporality, so too does the complex assemblage of the airport as an infrastructure for communication and transportation have the capacity to restructure space and time, with significant implications for military operations, global governance, media production and transmission, and transnational business.

First, as Caren Kaplan points out, contemporary airports historically developed from military airfields and the drive for “air power” afforded huge military advantages to those who controlled the “cosmic view” from aerial vision technologies (Kaplan 2006). Control over air space continues to play a significant part in allowing the USA to dominate the Caribbean region through air power and air-supported naval operations. This is noticeable not only during military operations in the region (such as the 1983 invasion of Grenada), but also in interventions such as the US take-over of the Toussaint Louverture International Airport immediately following the Haitian earthquake of January 2010. While still maintaining military bases in places such as Guantanamo Bay, the USA effectively controls the Caribbean region with neither colonial nor imperial authority, but through more dispersed and distanciated forms of power, which can be quickly deployed by controlling the air space and the satellite networks that together enable both transportation and transmission. Just as effective is the US embargo of Cuba and closure of air space, communication, and trade between the two countries. These facts are the backdrop to all sovereign power in the region, which depend on the laisse majesté of the USA.

Second, a number of Caribbean islands specialize in the high-speed financial mobilities associated with “offshore economies” – tax havens, free trade zones, export-processing zones, flags of convenience, internet business, shell banks – which can be viewed as part of a larger process of what Ronen Palan calls the “radical redrawing of state sovereignty” through new “state fictions” (1998). They form part of the “offshore economy” which “consists of largely unregulated legal spaces, external to but nevertheless supported by the state system” (Roberts 1994; Cameron and Palan 2004: 17). As “an ‘in-between’ juridical realm where states are able or willing to apply only a certain degree of regulation” (Palan 1998: 637), the Caribbean offshore banking sector has recently faced renewed scrutiny by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. International institutions for economic governance have also put pressure on Caribbean states to restructure in the interest of securing international business. A recent World Bank Report entitled “A Time to Choose: Caribbean Development in the 21st Century” (2005), for example, calls for “rapid liberalization of air services and cessation of Government support for national regional carriers” in the Caribbean. It emphasizes that “Caribbean countries must improve their performance in the areas of infrastructure, policy and legal environment, and taxation and customs” in order to attract foreign investment; and there is an especially strong emphasis on the privatization of airlines, telecommunications and other public services (electricity, water, and ports) and the implementation of regional regulatory approaches that will open these sectors to external private financing and investment. Here we find an explicit connection between infrastructures of communication and transportation, articulated as a policy to privatize and liberalize markets in both areas in the interests of business, rather than citizens.

Third, international governance, policy-making and decision-makers have a massive impact on the small states of this fragmented region. Viewed as the USA’s Third Border since President George W. Bush’s “Third Border Initiative” of 2001, the region is subject to new US homeland security legislation under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 (Bryan and Flynn 2002), which has led to the tightening up of screening for all airline passengers, baggage and cargo, including new airport architectures, Vehicle and Cargo Inspection System (VACIS) X-ray machines for container ports, and new “smart border” technologies such as the region’s early implementation of electronic passport checks against the Interpol database. In 2007, the USA for the first time required passports for all travel to international destinations in the Caribbean. A central aspect of the opening of Caribbean air space for business and for tourism, therefore, is the securing of borders through new information technologies.

In the Caribbean today, as in airports across the world, there are new forms of intensive surveillance and software-supported sorting of people, luggage, and freight at borders (Adey 2004b, 2009a; Wood and Graham 2006; Salter 2006; Sparke 2006). Information systems are crucial to the management and servicing of airports and air travel, in particular involving the recent turn toward Security Management Systems to integrate risk management, ranging from the Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System to the operation of Explosive Detection Systems for baggage (Adey 2004; Salter 2008). Wood and Graham suggest that automated software for sorting travelers as they pass through airport surveillance systems, such as biometric iris-recognition systems and new palm-recognition technology, is increasingly producing a “kinetic elite” whose ease of mobility differentiates them from the low-speed, low-mobility majority. Airports act as “data filters” in which surveillance is enabled by what David Lyon calls the “informatting” of bodies and the “securitization” of identity at the newly deployed “smart border” (2008). Adey points out that “environments such as airports are developing a greater reflexivity. As airport surveillance and control become more sophisticated, airports are becoming more automated, integrating software programs with electronic data and monitoring technologies” (2004: 1376). Packer (2008) describes this in terms of the shift from a Foucaultian disciplinary state to a Deleuzian “control state,” in which information, tracking, and algorithmic prediction are crucial.

In particular, we need to pay more attention to the intersection of neoliberalizing discourses of capital mobility and tourism mobility, such as the so-called Open Skies agreements which allow US airlines greater access to other countries’ airports, with the simultaneous increase in border surveillance and software control in producing the intricately choreographed mobilities of Caribbean nationals through regional and US airports (Dodge and Kitchin 2004; Adey and Bevan 2006). As Heyman argues in regard to the US–Mexican border, at issue under heightened security regimes “is how emerging systems of regulation intensify existing practices of unequal social categorization, risk, and mobility” (2004: 321), leading to the differential allocation of mobilities (Cunningham and Heyman 2004). Flows of investment (including illegal flows of drugs, guns, and money) and transnational regulation of such flows impact on the forms of state sovereignty, new forms of securitization, surveillance, and governance of mobility in the region. And these new mobility regimes in the Caribbean region are in turn restructuring spatiality, state sovereignty, and citizenship in the context of crossing the US “Third Border.” These complex processes of interaction between discourses of mobility and materializations of communication and transportation infrastructures on the border have important implications for the uneven distribution of mobility capital, producing new inequalities in the motility of differently located subjects. Airports are spaces where these systems converge and diverge, and around which discourses and representations of mobility are produced, such as facilitating business mobility, securing tourist mobility, or blocking illegal mobility.

There is a significant body of work on Caribbean tourism (e.g., Pattullo 1996; Duval 2004; Klein 2008), yet few studies address the combined mobilities of people, objects, texts, and technologies that perform tourism in relation to different forms of stillness and movement (see Sheller and Urry 2004). Tourism, the largest economic sector in the region, depends on a geography of mobility and interconnectivity that not only brings foreign visitors into a country, but also brings some local populations to work in tourist areas (while excluding others), and ties places into complex webs of product advertising, place promotion, and information processing technologies for booking reservations, ticketing, and airport and port logistics. Tourism marketing is of course deeply tied to forms of media production and transmission in which particular destinations are positioned, and linked to transportation networks and “packages.” Tourism also depends on discourses of mobility, as much as actual practices of mobility. Efforts to make the Caribbean accessible to mobile travelers and to new technologies of mobile communication can be highlighted in the promotion of luxury real estate and new forms of mobile residency. Elsewhere I have used the example of the private resort development at Dellis Cay in the British Overseas Territory of the Turks and Caicos Islands to show how new virtual islands – amalgams of infrastructure, architecture, and software – are being unbundled from local communities, citizenries, and publics, and repackaged as intensely capitalized destinations of luxury tourism and foreign ownership (Sheller 2007, 2009b). Here, Caribbean space is being socially and politically produced under new conditions of commercialized sovereignty, virtual cyberproperty, and fictional residency.

Software-supported logistics, data-processing, property development, building design, marketing, internet banking, travel, and surveillance together enable the disembedding of island space from structures of local governance and territoriality. New forms of infrastructural exclusivity, computer-aided design, media-savvy web-based property marketing, and uneven forms of software-sorted mobility and mobile communications connectivity underwrite proprietary regimes that assist in channeling who has access (or does not) to various kinds of real estate and virtual territories (Sheller 2009a, 2009b). As development takes place and land is owned, transferred, structured, accessed, and consumed in new ways, different groups of people gain or lose access to homes, neighborhoods, resources, livelihoods, public space, and national space. I call for extending the analysis of such phenomena by focusing on the new modes of controlling and tracking Caribbean citizens leaving and re-entering their national territories, even as their “offshore” economies are opened up to external flows of foreign capital, property ownership and internet-based business. New understandings of US–Caribbean “Third Border” security infrastructures, and the threats and risks presented along that multi-locational and irregular border, must address the ethics of differentiated mobility, the mechanisms that foster and impede mobility rights, and the varied forms of identification, detainment, detention, and deportation that are used to police the border. As a site of both transport and transmission, the airport is crucial a technology of predictive control and coordination, reshaping the spatialities and temporalities that divide the USA from the Caribbean and enable governance at a distance.

Conclusion

By bringing together studies not only of exile, migration, transnationalism, and tourism, but also of mobile communications, offshore finance, free trade policies, and so on, a new critical mobilities paradigm informed by materialist approaches to communication can begin to show how the material, symbolic, and discursive dimensions of mobility intersect within infrastructural practices. Mobilities research in its broadest sense concerns not only physical movement, but also potential movement, blocked movement, immobilization, and forms of dwelling and place making (Büscher and Urry 2009; Büscher et al. 2010). It recognizes the idea of potential movement and differential capacities and competencies for movement through the concept of “motility,” which refers to “the manner in which an individual or group appropriates the field of possibilities relative to movement and uses them” (Kaufmann and Montulet 2008: 45). Mobility capital is the combination of competences, skills, equipment, and social capital that allows for relatively high motility. Access to and capacities to use information are as important in the formation of motility as are actual transits through physical space.

In contrast to earlier “nomadic theory,” mobilities researchers now attempt to capture the dialectics of mobility and immobility, to analyze the relations of power that shape the meanings and practices of mobility and stillness (Cresswell 2006; Bissell 2007; Bissell and Fuller 2009), and to acknowledge the more ephemeral, embodied, and affective dimensions of interlocking relational (im)mobilities (e.g., Hannam et al. 2006; Adey 2009b, 2010; Fincham et al. 2010). Issues of uneven motility and of mobility rights, ethics, and justice have also become crucial to the field (Cresswell 2006; Bergmann and Sager 2008; Uteng and Cresswell 2008). In this chapter, I have tried to suggest some of the ways in which the remaking of infrastructures of air travel on the US–Caribbean border have implications not only for communication and transportation, but also for wider processes of coordination and control.

Caribbean islands, already used as offshore tax havens and free trade zones, are being further disembedded from national territories and repackaged as luxury enclaves that are hyperconnected to global metropolitan transport, media, and data flows – at the very same moment that the region’s poorest people are trapped by ever-more powerful border control regimes and enforced immobilities. Disasters like Haiti’s earthquake throw into even sharper relief the chasm between the mobile kinetic elite and the people mired in camps for the internally displaced, placeless yet immobile. Fictions of the offshore state, mechanisms supporting highly liquid financial movements, and the infrastructures of tourist mobility and security, all collide with realities on the ground wherein the material spaces of movement and dwelling are being reshaped to the disadvantage of citizenries without sovereign territories. This particular materialization of communication on the border produces the spatial and temporal vortices in which rickety boats wash up on rocky shores, or overturn at sea chased by Coast Guard Cutters; in which people who have lived most of their lives in the USA are deported back to the islands of their birth, with no chance for return; in which people starve to death and die of cholera just a short flight away from Miami.

Finally then, I conclude that the very moves by which some international actors claim to connect the Caribbean into new mobility regimes and into open communication infrastructures simultaneously produce differentiated mobilities, uneven spatialities, and unequal distributions of mobility capital. Airports remake the space–time of travel and communication, but do so in ways that serve to recreate the unequal subject positions and discrepant temporalities of earlier phases of modernization. And so the border is materialized as an insurmountable barrier between those who gain from its existence, and those whose life chances, opportunities, and freedoms are held back in a place apart, yet a place so easily accessible to capital, to tourists, to transnational do-gooders and disaster responders, to reporters and missionaries, and to all who do not call it home yet claim the inalienable right to be there.

Notes

References

Adey, P. (2004a) “Secured and Sorted Mobilities: Examples from the Airport,” Surveillance and Society, 1: 500–519.

Adey, P. (2004b) “Surveillance at the Airport: Surveilling Mobility/Mobilising Surveillance,” Environment and Planning A, 36: 1365–1380.

Adey, P. (2006) “Airports and Air-Mindedness: Spacing, Timing and Using Liverpool Airport, 1929–39,” Social and Cultural Geography, 7(3): 343–363.

Adey, P. (2009a) “Facing Airport Security: Affect, Biopolitics, and the Preemptive Securitisation of the Mobile Body,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 27: 274–295.

Adey, P. (2009b) Mobility. London: Routledge.

Adey, P. (2010) Aerial Life: Spaces, Mobilities, Affects. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Adey, P. and Bevan, P. (2006) “Between the Physical and the Virtual: Connected Mobilities,” in M. Sheller and J. Urry (eds) Mobile Technologies of the City. London: Routledge.

Adey, P., Budd, L. and Hubbard, P. (2007) “Flying Lessons: Exploring the Social and Cultural Geographies of Global Air Travel,” Progress in Human Geography, 31(6): 773–791.

Amoore, L. (2006) “Biometric borders: Governing mobilities in the war on terror” Political Geography, 25: 336–351.

Amoore, L. and Hall, A. (2009) “Taking bodies apart: digitized dissection and the body at the border”, Environment and Planning D: Society & Space, 27 (3): 444–464.

Appadurai, A. (1996) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Basch, L., Glick Schiller, N., and Szanton Blanc, C. (1994) Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach.

Bauer, E. and Thompson, P. (2006) Jamaican Hands Across the Atlantic: Transnational Families. Kingston: Ian Randle.

Benitez Rojo, A. (1996 [1992]) The Repeating Island: The Caribbean and the Postmodern Perspective, 2nd Ed., Trans. J.E. Maraniss. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Bergmann, S. and Sager, T. (eds) (2008) The Ethics of Mobilities: Rethinking Place, Exclusion, Freedom and Environment. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Bissell, D. (2007) “Animating Suspension: Waiting for Mobilities,” Mobilities, 2(2): 277–298.

Bissell, D. and Fuller, G. (eds) (2009) “The Revenge of the Still,” M/C Journal, 12(1). Accessed 01/04/11 at http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/136/0

Bryan, A. and Flynn, S. (2002) “Free Trade, Smart Borders, and Homeland Security: U.S.–Caribbean Cooperation in a New Era of Vulnerability,” The Dante B. Fascell North-South Center Working Paper Series, No. 8 (Sept. 2002), accessed 11/1/2010 at http://www.centerfornationalpolicy.org/ht/display/ContentDetails/i/16647

Büscher, M. and Urry, J. (2009) “Mobile Methods and the Empirical,” European Journal of Social Theory, 12(1): 99–116.

Büscher, M., Urry, J. and Witchger, K. (eds) (2010) Mobile Methodologies. London: Routledge.

Cameron, A. and Palan, R. (2004) The Imagined Economies of Globalization. London: Sage.

Canzler, W., Kaufmann, V. and Kesselring, S. (eds) (2008) Tracing Mobilities: Towards a Cosmopolitan Perspective. Farnham: Ashgate.

Carey, J. (1983) “Technology and Ideology: The Case of the Telegraph,” Prospects, 8: 303–325.

Clifford, J. (1997) Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Codourey, M. (2008) “Mobile Identities, Technology and the Socio-Spatial Relations of Air Travel,” Technoetic Arts, 6(1 May): 99–111.

Cresswell, T. (2006) On the Move: Mobility in the Modern Western World. London: Routledge.

Cunningham, H. and Heyman, J. (2004) “Introduction: Mobilities and Enclosures at Borders,” Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 11(3): 289–302.

Cwerner, S., Kesselring, S. and Urry, J. (eds) (2009) Aeromobilities. London: Routledge.

DeLoughrey, E. (2007) Routes and Roots. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Dodge, M. and Kitchin, R. (2004) “Flying through code/space: the real virtuality of air travel,” Environment and Planning A, 26 (2): 195–211.

Duval, D. (2002) “The Return Visit-Return Migration Connection,” in C.M. Hall and A.M. Williams (eds) Tourism and Migration. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 257–276.

Duval, D. (2004) Tourism in the Caribbean: Trends, Development, Prospects. London: Routledge.

Fincham, B., McGuinness, M. and Murray, L. (2010) Mobile Methodologies. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Foner, N. (1998) “Towards a Comparative Perspective on Caribbean Migration,” in M. Chamberlain (ed.) Caribbean Migration: Globalised Identities. London: Routledge, pp. 47–62.

Fuller, G. (2003) “Life in Transit: Between Airport and Camp,” Borderlands (e-journal), 2: 1.

Fuller, G. and Harley, R. (2005) Aviopolis: A Book About Airports. London: Black Dog Publishing.

Gilroy, P. (1993) The Black Atlantic: Modernity and Double Consciousness. London: Verso.

Glissant, E. (1992 [1989]) Caribbean Discourse, Trans. J. Michael Dash. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.

Glissant, E. (1997) Poetics of Relation, Trans. Betsy Wing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Gordon, A. (2008) Naked Airport: A Cultural History of the World’s Most Revolutionary Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Gottdiener, M. (2001) Life in the Air. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.

Hannam, K., Sheller, M. and Urry, J. (2006) Mobilities, Immobilities, and Moorings. Mobilities, 1(1): 1–22.

Hannerz, U. (1996) Transnational Connections. London: Routledge.

Henke, H. and Magister, K.H. (eds) (2007) Constructing Vernacular Culture in the Trans-Caribbean. Boston: Lexington Books.

Herz, A. (2010) “WikiLeaked Cables Reveal: US Worried About International Criticism of Post-Quake Troop Deployment,” Haïti Liberté, http://www.haiti-liberte.com/archives/volume4-48/U.S.%20Worried%20about%20International.asp

Heyman, J. (2004) “Ports of Entry as Nodes in the World System,” Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 11(3): 303–327.

Jaffe, R. (ed.) (2008) The Caribbean City. Kingston: Ian Randle and Leiden: KITLV Press.

Kaplan, C. (2006) “Mobility and War: the ‘cosmic view’ of air power,” Environment and Planning A, 38 (2): 395–407.

Kaufmann, V. and Montulet, B. (2008) “Between Social and Spatial Mobilities: The Issue of Social Fluidity,” in W. Canzler, V. Kaufmann and S. Kesselring (eds) Tracing Mobilities: Towards a Cosmopolitan Perspective. Farnham: Ashgate, pp. 37–56.

Kaufmann, V., Bergman, M., and Joye, D. (2004) “Motility: Mobility as Capital,” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research,28:4 (December): 745–756.

Kellerman, A. (2008) “International Airports: Passengers in an Environment of ‘Authorities’,” Mobilities, 3: 161–178.

Klein, R. (2008) Paradise Lost at Sea: Rethinking Cruise Tourism. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing Co.

Lassen, C. (2006) “Aeromobility and Work,” Environment and Planning A, 38(2): 301–312.

Lyon, D. (2008) “Filtering Flows, Friends, and Foes: Global Surveillance,” in Mark Salter (ed.) Politics at the Airport. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 29–50.

Packer, J. (2007) “Rethinking Dependency: New Relations of Transportation and Communication,” in Packer and Robertson (eds) Thinking With James Carey: Essays on Communications, Transportation, History. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 79–100.

Packer, J. (2008) Mobility without Mayhem: Safety, Cars, and Citizenship. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Packer, J. and Robertson, C. (2007) “Introduction,” in Packer and Robertson (eds) Thinking with James Carey: Essays on Communications, Transportation, History. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 1–10.

Palan, R. (1998) “Trying to Have Your Cake and Eating It: How and Why the State System Has Created Offshore,” International Studies Quarterly, 42(4): 625–643.

Pattullo, P. (1996) Last Resorts: The Cost of Tourism in the Caribbean. London: Cassell/Latin American Bureau.

Puri, S. (ed.) (2003) Marginal Migrations: The Circulation of Cultures within the Caribbean. Oxford: Macmillan Caribbean.

Roberts, S. (1994) “Fictitious Capital, Fictitious Spaces: The Geography of Offshore Financial Flows,” in S. Corbridge, R. Martin and N Thrift (eds) Money Power Space. Oxford: Blackwell.

Salter, M. (2006) “The Global Visa Regime and the Political Technologies of the International Self: Borders, Bodies, Biopolitics,” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 31(2 April): 167–189.

Salter, M. (ed.) (2008) Politics at the Airport. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Schiller, N.G. and Fouran, G. (2001) Georges Woke Up Laughing: Long-Distance Nationalism and the Search for Home. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Sheller, M. (2003) Consuming the Caribbean. London: Routledge.

Sheller, M. (2004) “Demobilising and Remobilising the Caribbean,” in M. Sheller and J. Urry (eds) Tourism Mobilities: Places to Play, Places in Play. London: Routledge, pp. 13–21.

Sheller, M. (2007) “Virtual Islands: Mobilities, Connectivity and the New Caribbean Spatialities,” Small Axe: A Caribbean Journal of Criticism, 24(October): 16–33.

Sheller, M. (2009a) “Infrastructures of the Imagined Island: Software, Mobilities and the Architecture of Caribbean Paradise,” Environment and Planning A, 41: 1386–1403.

Sheller, M. (2009b) “The New Caribbean Complexity: Mobility Systems, Tourism and the Re-Scaling Of Development,” Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 30: 189–203.

Sheller, M. (2010) “Air Mobilities on the US–Caribbean Border: Open Skies and Closed Gates,” The Communication Review, 13(4): 269–288.

Sheller, M. and Urry, J. (eds) (2004) Tourism Mobilities: Places to Play, Places in Play. London: Routledge.

Sparke, M. (2006) “A Neoliberal Nexus: Economy, Security and the Biopolitics of Citizenship on the Border,” Political Geography, 25: 151–180.

Thomas-Hope, E. (1992) Freedom and Constraint in Caribbean Migration and Diaspora. Kingston, Jamaica: Ian Randle Publishers.

Urry, J. (2000) Sociology Beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-first Century. London: Routledge.

Urry, J. (2007) Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity.

Uteng, T.P. and Cresswell, T. (eds) (2008) Gendered Mobilities. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Wood, D. and Graham, S. (2006) Permeable Boundaries in the Software-sorted Society: Surveillance and the Differentiation of Mobility, in M. Sheller and J. Urry (eds) Mobile Technologies of the City. London: Routledge.

World Bank Report. (2005) “A Time to Choose: Caribbean Development in the 21st Century,” Caribbean Country Management Unit, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region, World Bank Report No. 31725-LAC (April 7, 2005). Accessed 11/1/2010 at http://www.worldbank.org/caribcrossroads