Nomadic boat-dwelling children of Southeast Asia: Discourses on the Sama-Bajau children and implications on decentring child migration studies
Abstract
This article examines the discursive narratives in academic literature about the nomadic boat-dwelling children of the Sama-Bajau group in Southeast Asia. Through examining academic literature from 1989 to 2021, this paper explores how the literature shapes and mediates the narratives about Sama-Bajau children. Findings suggest two threads of discursive narratives—one takes a developmentalist lens, and the other offers alternative narratives that reveal the complex identities of Sama-Bajau children. These observations highlight the importance of nuanced conversations on child sea nomadism towards further developments of critical childhood studies on child migration in Southeast Asia and beyond.
INTRODUCTION: CHILDHOODS SOMEWHERE ELSE
This work offers a critical and reflexive examination of the discursive narratives concerning the nomadic boat-dwelling children of the Sama-Bajau1 people who navigate the seas of Southeast Asia. Sea nomadism is a complex way of living and a source of pride for the Sama-Bajau identity (Nagatsu, 2001; Roxas-Lim, 2017). The Sama-Bajau people, or more pejoratively called sea gipsies (Sather, 1997), have navigated the islands of the porous nation-state territories of maritime Southeast Asia from the 16th century (Ellorin, 2015). To date, they sail through hand-built boats across the Malay Peninsula, found in the Sulu Archipelago, Borneo and the Celebes Sea and in present-day nation-states of Indonesia, Southern Philippines, Malaysia and northern Borneo (Saat, 2003; Villafranca, 2013). Well-versed in crossing archipelagos, the Sama-Bajau people are skilled seafarers, fishers, salt producers and maritime traders (Iziq et al., 2017). While there are Sama-Bajau families that have already embraced sedentarisation in floating villages across Southeast Asia (Clifton & Majors, 2012), their nomadic lifestyle still imbues an ‘amphibious life’ (Pauwelussen & Verschoor, 2017). This article focuses on the ‘seaward’ Bajau children (Sather, 1997) (See Figure 1). Travelling as seafarers exposes young members of the family to Southeast Asia's diverse contexts—from multiple ethno-linguistic interactions (Pallesen, 1985) to discoveries of the world's richest marine biodiversity across the coral triangle (Kusuma et al., 2017; Stacey et al., 2018). These seaward children, however, have varying degrees of nomadism, that is, some are less nomadic than others. In the Philippines, for instance, children of the northern Bajau (Tawi-Tawi, Sibutu and Semporn) usually travel and fish with their parents whereby children learn to paddle boats at very young ages (Burningham, 1993; Nimmo, 1990c). Meanwhile, those born of the southern Bajau (Siasi, Jolo, Basilan and Zamboanga) do not participate in fishing (Nimmo, 1968) and go to school, albeit their dropout rate has been steadily increasing in recent years (Abelgas et al., 2019).
This study builds on works that diversify the theorising of ‘childhoods somewhere else’ beyond the North. For example, Sharon Stephens (1997) called for rethinking transnational childhoods beyond refugee children going to Europe or North America. Likewise, Erica Burman (1996) interrogated the relevance of children's rights in international legislation to different contexts. Within these critiques emerged, the agenda to push forward conversations in child migration in the global South (Beazley, 2015; Jones, 2008; Jordan & Graham, 2012; Wall, 2020). As Olga Nieuwenhuys (2013) puts forward, ‘the dominance of the North over the South is inextricably linked to Northern childhood(s) representations against which Southern childhood(s) is measured and found wanting’ (p. 4). Yet, for all these achievements, much remains to be unpacked concerning childhoods somewhere else, including children living as sea nomads. The nomadic boat-dwelling child is both everywhere and nowhere in the global South, embracing fragmented and fluid identities in a world that is obsessed with restrictive frames. The everyday spaces of the Sama-Bajau child reflect unboundedness by territoriality or ‘multi-stateness’ as opposed to the common narrative of statelessness (Lagsa, 2015).
A specific strand of literature with which sea nomadism as childhoods somewhere else can be productively juxtaposed is the discourse on street children's mobile lives. The street is regarded as an unstable and inappropriate space for children (Lucchini, 1996). But scholars of childhood question the unidimensional construction of streets as simply disempowering spaces (Ennew & Swart-Kruger, 2003; Gigengack, 2008 [2000]; Glauser, 1997 [1990]; Stodulka, 2017). Such an approach to children's mobile lives reinforces a ‘sedentarist bias’ (Ungruhe, 2019, p. 56), which neglects streets as spaces of mobility affordances. Like the streets, the sea can be easily condemned as untenable spaces by sedentarist perspectives without interrogating the assumptions behind such criticisms. On this note, sea nomadism shows the fragmented spatial occupancy that ‘binds daily lives together, amorphous and so persuasive that is difficult to even perceive’ (Crawford, 2008, pp. 25–26). The Sama-Bajau children live in counter-spaces, serving as a point of departure from which debates and tensions over state–children relationship and the assertion of child identity take place. It is in this vibrant scholarship that this article joins the call to theorise childhoods somewhere else, following previous scholarship on mobilities for transnational child labour (Beazley, 2015; Huijsmans, 2008). By examining the literature concerning the boat-dwelling migrant children of the Sama-Bajau people, this paper recognises that academic works are sources of expertise that can deepen understanding of child migration and inform programme directions, policy-making, and key themes for future research on minority groups and communities, including the Sama-Bajau.
METHODOLOGY
This work employs discourse analysis of the gathered academic materials, whereby it lays down the development of academic thought about the Sama-Bajau children and how the literature speaks back to the broader field of child migration in Southeast Asia. Examining discourses seeks to understand ‘a shared means of making sense of the world embedded in language’ (Dryzek, 2000, p. 18). Through examining academic literature, this paper explores the constructions of Sama-Bajau children as sea-based migrants, with an emphasis on how the literature shapes the narratives of the Sama-Bajau children in maritime Southeast Asia—Borneo, Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia. Specifically, this study examines how various academic literature ‘frame’ the depiction of Sama-Bajau children and how ‘discourses coalesce, clash, or compete with one another’ (Wagnsson et al., 2010, p. 12). This is done through observing the ‘framings’ or aspects of reality presented about Sama-Bajau children. Analysis focuses on how the Sama-Bajau children's lives are depicted while noting that these frames are also inevitably linked with other discourses in the wider politics of knowledge production. This also reflects the pervading power relations in academic literature where legitimised knowledge about the Sama-Bajau people is couched in, shedding light on the kind of systemic power that commands the knowledge production about Sama-Bajau children.
This article takes stock of academic research, three decades since the ratification of The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989 (CRC). The past 30 years has witnessed research representing children from somewhere else, such as refugee, unaccompanied and/or asylum-seeking children. Extending such efforts, this manuscript examines research containing information on Sama-Bajau children's lives, published between 1989 and 2021. These were mainly written in English, with some texts in Tagalog (Philippines), including books, scholarly journal articles, conference proceedings, book series individual titles, non-serial books, articles in press, and graduate and postgraduate dissertations with contents related to Sama-Bajau families, children and lifestyles. The search included the databases Google Scholar and university subscription of academic databases such as EBSCOHost, Sage, Scopus, Taylor and Francis, Web of Science and Wiley. For the purposes of discussion, the term ‘children’ is not defined by any age range. Children in this work are considered as children insofar as the examined materials mention them as ‘children’ regardless of age. Search terms included ‘Sama-Bajau’, ‘Bajau-Laut’, ‘Bajau-Laut’, ‘Badyaw’, ‘Bajo’, ‘Badjao’, ‘Sama-Dilaut’, ‘sea nomad’, ‘sea gipsies/gipsies’, combined with the terms ‘Southeast Asia’, ‘Malay Archipelago’, ‘Malay Peninsula’, ‘Borneo’, ‘Indonesia’, ‘Sabah Malaysia’ and ‘Philippines’. This search excluded the case of sea nomad children in mainland Southeast Asia such as the Moken2 and Urak Lawoi children in Thailand and Southern Myanmar as well as the Orang Laut of the Thai-Malay peninsula because they identify differently from the Sama-Bajau (Hinshiranan, 2001). The search results yielded hundreds of documents but only 54 publications contain enough information about the Sama-Bajau children for analysis. Table 1 shows the composition of these selected documents by academic field and document type. Academic field was identified based on the descriptions from the book series, journal, conference or graduate/postgraduate degree in case of theses.
| Academic fielda | Document types | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Book | Book chapter | Journal article | Thesis (masters/PhD) | Conference proceedings | Total | |
| Arts and humanities (performance, media, journalism) | 2 | – | 7 | 2 | 1 | 12 |
| Biological sciences/medicine | – | – | 4 | – | – | 4 |
| Development studies (gender, migration) | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | – | 8 |
| Environmental sciences | 1 | – | 5 | – | – | 6 |
| Policy and governance | – | – | 1 | 1 | – | 2 |
| Regional studies (Asia/Southeast Asia) | 5 | 2 | 5 | 1 | – | 13 |
| Social sciences (anthropology, geography, history, law) | 1 | 1 | 7 | – | – | 9 |
| Total | 10 | 4 | 33 | 6 | 1 | 54 |
- a In alphabetical order.
A codebook was created from the sample, with each of the works examined in terms of the terms used and main arguments. The works were thematically coded based on dominant framings. The publications were coded at the level of words and sentences first then when clearer themes appeared, the codes moved to paragraphs and sections. The themes went through axial codification (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), whereby the codes were grouped to fewer overarching codes. Thereafter, a review of the publications using the fewer overarching codes was conducted to check for necessary rearrangements or regrouping. After some point of saturation in which no new re-groupings emerged, the overarching codes were juxtaposed with broader discourses in the literature in childhood studies and child migration.
Noting the limited works written specifically about Sama-Bajau children in academic literature, this work is not to be treated as containing an exhaustive list of the academic publications on sea nomad children as there are many other types of sea nomadism. And while the examined texts also include publications written in Tagalog (Philippines) as well as works written in English by Southeast Asians themselves, let it be clear that such materials do not represent the entirety of the Sama-Bajau imaginaries in academic literature as there are materials written in different Southeast Asian languages. These materials were varied in focus on the lives of Sama-Bajau people, of which Sama-Bajau children can only give a fraction of information. It is also important to clarify that this work does not incorporate any primary data from the participation of Sama-Bajau children. Given the heterogeneity of the literature reviewed in this article, they could only represent certain maritime Southeast Asian geographies, thus only presenting a fragment of Sama-Bajau children's lives. There will be missed publications, which might displease many. There might be other relevant materials in other Southeast Asian languages, which ultimately restrict the scope of analysis of this study. Nevertheless, there is still value in the examined materials, as they provide a glimpse of the depiction of the Sama-Bajau on academic platforms, which are usually more extensively disseminated. These limitations also serve as key areas for future studies. Hence, the insights taken from this analysis are of best use as a point of reflection in further discussing child migration, especially in the global South.
RESULTS
Two kinds of discursive narratives transpire from the literature. The first reflects developmentalism, and the second aims to go beyond the former.
Focus on development
The group of academic literature that reflect a developmentalism emphasises the ideological framework that implements interventions to surpass economic poverty (Dirlik, 2014). Such publications frame the Sama-Bajau lifestyle using the ideals of stability, against which the Sama-Bajau nomadism falls short. Three salient themes emerge from this perspective: marginality, bureaucratic challenges and intervention. First, from a cursory view, most of these published writings emphasise on marginalisation and social exclusion from both land-based communities and the state while highlighting the Sama-Bajau's coping mechanisms to survive. Although various discussions have different focuses—education, health and housing—this academic discourse on nomadic childhood reflects the aim to counter the economic and cultural disadvantages among Sama-Bajau children. This discourse is observed in descriptions of the sea nomad lifestyle as ‘unpleasant’ living conditions (Ubas et al., 2019, p. 29), whereby the aspects highlighted are children's lives as street beggars (Balisi, 2000; Bracamonte, 2005; Bracamonte et al., 2011). Some publications use the term ‘sea gipsies’3 in their title to underscore the instability of the Sama-Bajau lifestyle (e.g. Abelgas et al., 2019), describing the extraordinariness of a nomadic custom where children are typically found playing in the waters instead of land. These publications also stress the difference of the Sama-Bajau children from land-based children while highlighting the misfit of Sama-Bajau people within the sedentary communities (Bracamonte et al., 2011). The emphasis on fisher familie’ temporary constructions on flat reefs compared to having more permanent settlements on stilts (Djohani, 1995, 1996) alludes to non-conformist cultures against permanence. Temporariness is framed as atypical, such as stressing that kinspeople ‘borrow’ children from parents (Morrison, 1993). Another example of the marginality discourse is in accentuating that the Sama-Bajau children ‘rarely use slippers and usually roam around barefoot on dirt during play. Toddlers do not wear underwear. Kids play dirt and eat without washing their hands’ (Valle-Castillo, 2018, pp. 57–58). The literature that narrate the deprived lives of Sama-Bajau children also touch upon the trivialities of children's actions such as ‘the image of children elbowing each other out of the way and grabbing at the meagre bread in my [researcher's] hand’ (Llana, 2018, p. 257). Such descriptions are in line with the presupposed framing that the Sama-Bajau's low social status across Southeast Asia is related to their distinct language, subsistence-oriented economy and retention of spiritual beliefs (Gaynor, 2005). There is also a degree of fascination with the bodies of Sama-Bajau children, given that their genetic adaptability in extreme lifestyles intrigues the literature. Since Sama-Bajau people migrated across the Southeast Asian seas for centuries, the present-day Sama-Bajau children developed relatively bigger spleens, allowing a larger oxygen reservoir for diving (Ilardo et al., 2018). Yet, this is not surprising as studies seem to see inordinary bodily strength of Sama-Bajaus as beyond normal for being able to spend 60% of their working time underwater (Schagatay, 2014; Schagatay et al., 2011). Another example of this fascination highlights children as being preyed upon by saitan or spirits that cause illness, bad luck, or other misfortune to the Sama-Bajau community (Nimmo, 1990a, 1990b).
Another sub-theme of the developmentalist lens underscores bureaucratic framings, which hinge on a technocratic discourse against disruptions of formal systems. The perception of land-dwelling communities about the Sama-Bajau people as ‘outsiders’ (Saat, 2003) implies disorder within the established bureaucratic system. For instance, the Sama-Bajau newborns are considered transgressive of census records because of unrecorded births and with issues of citizenship (Brunt, 2015). This is evident in the absence of official birth certificates of children from Bajau Laut in East Malaysia (Sadiq, 2008). Another example is how the Sama-Bajau culture of sea navigation is described as intrusive of marine resources instead of being recognised as ‘collectors of marine produce, guardians of sea lanes and knowledgeable pilots’ (Andaya, 2020, p. 26). The risk of coral mining, harvesting of protected species and overexploiting individual fisheries can be attributed to Sama-Bajau children (Crabbe & Smith, 2005; Cullen, 2007) together with the risk of excavating marine resources such as small molluscs and shells on the shore, as items to sell to tourists (Abd-Ebrah & Peters, 2021; Stacey et al., 2018). Likewise, the declining attendance of Sama-Bajau children to school systems is disruptive of the ideals of the educational system since constant migration and diving in the sea for a living competes with achieving necessary improvement in their lives (Abelgas et al., 2019; Bracamonte, 2005). Studies instead highlight that participation in education as a way to manage discrimination and bullying towards the Sama-Bajau as a minority group (Baú, 2019) and to address the issue of child work among the Sama-Bajau, which obstructs from attending state-funded schools (Asis, 2006).
Finally, the intervention discourse transpires in the surge of intervention-driven research in the mid-2000s. For instance, the presentation of interventions such as social outreach programmes emphasises the need to change Sama-Bajau children's lifestyle from marine-oriented to a more sedentary farming lifestyle (Renddan et al., 2020, p. 12). There is also attention to the positive impact of the sedentarisation policies on the Sama-Bajau people (Navarro, 2015), referring to services and assistance such as housing programmes and conditional cash transfer fund systems to alleviate the lives of Sama-Bajau families (Mangarun et al., 2018). Yet, another case is presenting Sama-Bajau children's struggle with food security as a consequence of their own people's actions. Particularly, the hunger experienced by Sama-Bajau children in some areas of Southeast Asia is conflated with being collateral damages of the disruptive rebellion of minority groups against the state. For example, a case on hunger in the Philippines points out that the Sama-Bajau children's suffering from severe acute malnutrition with complications including chronic cough, pneumonia, and diarrhoea’ (Villafranca, 2013, p. 54) is a cost of their ethnolinguistic group's (Moro) disruption of peace and rebellion. This frames children as victims of the so-called ‘rebellion’ to have an independent state in the Southern Philippines. In this regard, the rights of Sama-Bajau children to food and water is presented as being curtailed by their own people, which they can only reclaim upon the cessation of the ‘rebellion’ of the Moro people. This fosters a view that the Sama-Bajau people are at fault of the rebellion, thereby victimising their own children.
Alternative narratives
There is a different track of discourses that offer alternative narratives and critical views of the developmentalist lens, turning the gaze to the complex identities of Sama-Bajau children. These works aim to advance the discussions on the nomadic lifestyle of Sama-Bajau children beyond deprivations towards questioning the systemic exclusions and power dynamics involved in these very depravities. These studies commonly root from postcolonial frameworks that question the developmentalist lens for framing the issue of deprivation as an issue of the Sama-Bajau lifestyle, which ultimately isolates Sama-Bajau children's marginalisation from the issues of systemic inequalities and identity politics (Ellorin, 2015; Rodriguez-Tatel, 2018). For instance, Sama-Bajau children's non-enrolment in schools and street-begging shifts to the framing of statutory failure to provide their children with food and proper education. There is also interrogation of ‘misbehaviours’ (Hoogervorst, 2012) and incivility (Abad & Santamaria, 2020) of Sama-Bajau children—criticising the ‘troublesome’ narrative associated with statelessness,4 and instead foregrounding the abuses, arbitrary arrest and confiscation of property against these children (Andal, 2021). Another example is questioning the framing that the Sama-Bajau children are victims of their people's rebellion, which makes children political pawns for justifying the disarming of their ethnolinguistic group (See Villafranca, 2013). Likewise, there are works that encourage scrutiny of how socio-economic interventions are presented as ‘saving’ children from the nomadic lifestyle without taking into consideration the very system that excludes this kind of a migratory way of life—something that has become ‘a convenient means for avoiding direct engagement with the political and economic realities’ (Fernando, 2001, p. 12). Chou (2005) even offers a critical view on Malays' association of evilness with Orang Laut children (Indonesian nomadic boat-dwelling Sama-Bajau), emphasising children's central role as participants of the maritime community in the rich Sama-Bajau culture.
Another focus comes from the lens of agency against the poverty-stricken stories usually associated with studies on Sama-Bajau families. Although limited, there is a set of literature on the richness of the Sama-Bajau boat-dwelling culture as a source of empowerment and agency for children. For instance, Ellorin (2015) traces the traditional musical culture used in sea trading among the Sama-Bajau people, which children learn to practise and identify with. Children sing songs5 as part of their leisure activities in open spaces or at homes, especially in Malaysia and the Philippines. Despite the experienced marginalisation, the Sama-Bajau continue their traditional culture that children grow up with as a form of expression of cultural identity, be it attending a wedding or learning songs (Canuday, 2013). In an earlier study, Burningham (1993) underscores children's ability to make crafts ‘with extraordinary ease and skill’ (p. 195). Close to the narrative of agency are examples of Sama-Bajau children's empathy and camaraderie, such as Bellina et al.'s (2021) account on how Sama-Bajau children ‘manage resilience through collective action’ (p. 267). This also touches upon boat-dwelling lifestyle and statelessness as a form of resistance, whereby ‘being in such space (geographically and politically) as an expression of agency, which could be resistance or avoidance from state power that orders civilising discourse’ (Macalandag, 2020, p. 18). This has also been previously discussed by Bottignolo (1995) in that Sama-Bajau children participate and enjoy community life. Such studies also interrogate the depreciatory remarks against children divers accused of depleting marine resources. Whereas the Sama-Bajau communities, including children, serve as allies of marine resource conservation efforts, they receive little recognition and remain at the periphery in policies and programmes on marine conservation (Clifton & Majors, 2012; Elliott et al., 2001).
Finally, there are studies that focus on the complex identities of the Sama-Bajau children. For example, the undocumented children in Sabah are firm in expressing that ‘they do not want to be Filipino citizens, since they feel they belong in Malaysia’ even if they came from the Philippines (Allerton, 2013, p.32). Moreover, the thoughts of young Sama-Bajau, especially the late teens, do not necessarily align with the older ones, speaking of their lack of rights with confidence and boldness ‘almost as if wanting to challenge the status quo’ (Somiah, 2019, p. 197). Besides, even students of non-ethnic groups have questions about whether or not ethno-linguistics groups such as the Sama-Bajau are part of their country (Agcaoili, 2010). A more complex issue relates to the concept of migrant children per se. The Sama-Bajau children are frequently described as ‘migrant children’ or children of ‘irregular migrants’ (Allerton, 2014), calling out that ‘immigration and other laws that deny their existence’ and public discourse frames the Sama-Bajau as ‘unsolvable problems’ (Allerton, 2018, p. 7). Such critical views allude to the monolithic narratives of the Sama-Bajau children with cultural and religious codes as part of nationalist discourses, with their ‘folkloric’ identity serving as a cue of cultural minority (Toohey, 2005). These limited studies that offer alternative lenses to looking at the migrant lives of Sama-Bajau children ‘do not fix or normalise [certain] ascribed identities of the Sama-Bajau’ (Macalandag, 2020, p. 19). As Tagliacozzo (2009) points out, even if some Sama-Bajau children have already left the nomadic lifestyle and pledge allegiance to a certain state, their affiliation with the boat-dwelling and ‘far-flung’ communities (p. 114) will still linger, and thus contributing to the multiplicity of their identities as former migrant children (See also Evasco, 2013).
Note that these are critical reviews of the narratives of marginalisation and deprivations of the Sama-Bajau while not dismissing that these exclusions are valid points to raise (Acciaioli, 2001). The point of these publications is to offer an alternative perspective of the kind of exclusions that the Sama-Bajau children experience, questioning the descriptions of the Sama-Bajau as ‘obstinate to the point of stupidity, dirty to the point of contagion, and backward to the point of invalidity’ in Southeast Asia (Hope, 2001, p. 140).
IMPLICATIONS: BATTLE OF EPISTEMOLOGIES?
The difference among the above-mentioned studies lies in their contrasting epistemologies. Studies that reflect developmentalist views reflect positivist epistemologies that govern scientific findings (Nandy, 1988). This is found within the broader discussions of academic studies as anchored on European enlightenment's idea of civilisation and progress (ibid), heavily influencing understandings of childhood (Cannella & Viruru, 2004; Gigengack, 2014). In this regard, the Sama-Bajau children are ‘out of place’ because they do not fit within the conditions of ‘normal for western, modern, middle-class children—family homes, schools and clubs organised by adults’ (Connolly & Ennew, 1996, p. 133). Studies reflecting a positivist epistemology tend to suppose ‘backwardness’ in the Sama-Bajau lifestyle; hence, the need to offer solutions towards civility and progress. The positivist narrative is found across disciplines. Although positivist frames are typically found in natural science publications, humanities and the social sciences are not less guilty of such framings (See Table 2). The ‘othered’ depictions of Bajau children in academic literature reflect the decades-long observation about the ‘lack of diversity in the ideas and ways of knowing deemed acceptable in science class’ (Barton, 1997, p. 147). Such a developmentalist view from academic works is not new in global South literature (See Dados & Connell, 2012; Therien, 1999).
| Academic fielda | Narratives | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Developmentalist narratives | Alternative narratives | Total | |
| Arts and humanities (performance, media, journalism) | 4 | 8 | 12 |
| Biological sciences/medicine | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Development studies (gender, migration) | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| Environmental sciences | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Policy and governance | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Regional studies (Asia/Southeast Asia) | 5 | 7 | 12 |
| Social sciences (anthropology, geography, history, law) | 4 | 5 | 9 |
| Total | 26 | 28 | 54 |
- a In alphabetical order.
Correspondingly, there are studies that resist unidimensional depictions of the Sama-Bajau children across different academic fields. While there is no explicit claim to challenge the developmentalist discourses, these studies serve as ‘sites of resistance’ (Apple & Christian-Smith, 1991) against civilising discourses in scientific literature. This also aligns with the scholarship that questions the very notion of conceptual spatial categories, deviating from a state-centred understanding of migration and instead focusing on the culture of movements across permeable boundaries (Tagliacozzo, 2009). But caution is necessary lest the free migrant lives of the Sama-Bajau children get homogenised. As Allerton (2018) points out, there is a broader need to question the idea of Sama-Bajau children as ‘migrant children’ as it ‘ignores the fact that the clear majority have never in fact migrated’ (p. 7). And while it can be argued that this can also produce rebellious bodies of literature that interrogate the homogenised childhood(s), this does not prevent romanticisation of the precarities of sea nomadism.
The point of highlighting the above-mentioned narratives was not to condemn the developmentalist lens, while celebrating the alternative narratives—a rather counterproductive push back. The aim is to show that there is a way to acknowledge the nuances that come with nomadism and plurality of childhoods. While there is wisdom in highlighting the exclusions experienced by sea nomad children, the story is incomplete at best, and distorted at worst. Even though academic literature's discourses on the Sama-Bajau children are well-intended in providing necessary critique of their social exclusion, critical reflection remains vital lest we fixate a dominant story of them as only marginalised people. This is not to suggest disregarding the precarities experienced by Sama-Bajau children as sea nomads. Rather, this is a call for self-critical evaluations of research practices away from a sedentary bias (Ungruhe, 2019). While it is important to address the exclusions experienced by Sama-Bajau children, it is equally important that studies acknowledge the various forms of mobilities that a nomadic lifestyle affords them. Such a call can be found in the wider drive to continue the fight against homogenising childhood(s), especially in the global South. Considering the neoliberal and political landscape in knowledge production in which ‘objectivity’ dominates academia in many respects, the danger to mainstreaming a single story (See Adichie, 2009) is a subsequent reductionist view of Sama-Bajau children as told from a single perspective (Shiva, 1987).
Moving forward: Fertile epistemological clash
At a certain capacity, academic works mediate the interpretations of Sama-Bajau children, which necessitates constant critical evaluations of research on, for, and with Sama-Bajau children. Hence, academic literature is responsible for explicitly pluralising the depictions of Sama-Bajau children through a healthy epistemological clash. As de Sousa Santos (2009) argues, developing rebellious epistemic views requires acknowledging knowledge's plural and subjective character, reinforcing perspectives outside a hegemonic epistemic stance. But the next question is: how much should we push back against a homogeneous discourse about Sama-Bajau children? In this regard, a productive epistemological clash transpires from questioning disciplinary assumptions on knowledge production. What does this look like for research on sea nomad children? Some potential directions to doing interdisciplinary research on sea nomad children can explore the following:
First, self-critical evaluation is needed on how much of a generalisation studies claim about Sama-Bajau children given the heterogeneity of their cultures. This suggests further comparative studies that examine the experiences among sea-based migrant children between the maritime and mainland Southeast Asia, especially the case of Moken and Urak Lawoi children of the Mergui Archipelago in Thailand and Southern Myanmar. Understanding this diversity addresses the homogenising tendencies both in academic literature and otherwise that perceive sea-based minorities as the same groups (Macalandag, 2020; See also Macalandag, 2009).
Second, it is important to recognise the epistemes of Sama-Bajau children themselves as informed and afforded by their mobile practices, rich marine experiences and indigenous wisdom. Which sea-specific experiences are important in their knowledge generation? For instance, it would be instructive to substantiate the literature on how Sama-Bajau children make sense of the concept of home and travel in the context of their maritime life. Since the Sama-Bajau people have a fluid sense of boundaries historically (Tagliacozzo, 2009), it is of value to unpack how these understanding of boundaries make sense to the Sama-Bajau children. Such knowledge will be relevant in espousing a version of multicultural inclusion and welfare that is responsive to the sensibilities of the Sama-Bajau children.
Finally, a child-oriented lens combined with challenging sedentary fixity is necessary to generate a more holistic narrative about Sama-Bajau children. Although easier said than done, challenging disciplinary epistemologies is central for pluralising conceptualisations of the versions of childhood that Sama-Bajau children live. It is important to investigate what kinds of publications produce which narratives. While it is difficult to pin down the nature of the observed publications in this paper, it is noteworthy to identify journals with high impact factors that somehow indicate what knowledge about the Sama-Bajau children gain readership and attention. Those with wider readership hint at what is considered as valuable sources of knowledge, implying a potential to keep gatekeeping and hierarchies in knowledge production (Lazaric et al., 2008) about the Sama-Bajau children.
Obviously, the literature included in this analysis cannot paint the whole picture of Sama-Bajau children's mobile lives, as there is no limit to the layers and diversity of their stories, for which many books can be written. This very article is not an exemption to having blind spots about the discourses concerning Sama-Bajau children. Yet, an insightful lesson here is that consciously acknowledging the partiality of knowledge shared in studies affords researchers to better position themselves as knowledge producers with only partial understandings of Sama-Bajau children, and to further recognise its implications to knowledge generation about sea nomadism. Such a humble recognition of our limited understanding of the Sama-Bajau children invites a plurality of perspectives and epistemic traditions to coalesce and provide knowledge about sea nomadism in Southeast Asia and beyond.
CONCLUSION
This piece stands as a witness to Deleuze and Guattari's (1987) long-standing argument that ‘history is always written from the sedentary point of view’ (p. 25). This work has brought together different yet interacting academic literatures, with the aim of prompting further scholarly engagements and reflection about the frameworks that underpin sea-oriented child migration. It has been argued that there is an analytic potential and urgency to understand the migrant lives of Sama-Bajau children away from discourses that juxtapose sea nomadism against the sedentary lifestyle. What can be more productive, rather, is rethinking boat-dwelling life with a nuanced approach, seeing both the richness of a nomadic life but not condoning the precarities sea nomad children face. Such an approach opens conversations on the broader discussions concerning the critiques of homogenising childhood(s), making a case for recognising sea migration in understanding the diversity of children's migrant lives. This highlights the relevance of further examining the richness of child migration narratives with a focus on the lives of children whose childhood(s) are often unseen and unheard than others. This also raises the importance of more nuanced and decolonised theorisations of the interface between the Sama-Bajau migrant lifestyle and academic discourses. While academic literature's discourses on the Sama-Bajau children are limited, there is a growing set of literature that provide critical view of the previously written works. Such a momentum needs further continuity because academic publications can mediate the dominant interpretations of nomadic boat-dwelling children's lives.
Ultimately, the case of Sama-Bajau children reverberates Bhabha's (2014) note that migrant children are points of contention ‘where perceptions of vulnerability (poor and innocent children) and otherness (not really like our [non-migrant] children) coalesce’ (p. 13). Such observations bounce back to scholarly works that underscore children's lives as prisms to gain substantial understanding of their place in migration studies and in their communities more generally (See Spyrou, 2016; Van Blerk & Barker, 2008). This aligns with scholarship on childhood studies that interrogates the hegemonic assumptions about children's participation in productive life (See O'Kane & Karkara, 2007). Likewise, the lives of the Sama-Bajau children are an important point of tension in reinforcing further discussions to challenge hegemonic assumptions about nomadic childhood and, more broadly, child migration. This work thus encourages further research on child sea nomadism towards further developments of critical childhood studies on child migration, because knowledge production about the lives of Sama-Bajau children is not isolated from the academic discourse concerning them. The spirit carried forward throughout this paper is a careful examination of the range of spaces and scales where the politics of child migration takes shape. This article hopes to stir up future research on what discourses on nomadic boat-dwelling children get included beyond academia—including but not limited to public and political conversations.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper is in honour of Maya, a Sama-Bajau child, whose thirst for knowledge is far greater than I could ever have as a scholar. This work was supported by the International Macquarie University Research Excellence Scholarship (iMQRES). Open access publishing facilitated by Macquarie University, as part of the Wiley - Macquarie University agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.
FUNDING INFORMATION
This work has been supported by the International Cotutelle Macquarie University Research Excellence Scholarship (Cotutelle ‘iMQRES’) from Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The author declares that there is no known conflict of interests.
Endnotes
Biography
Aireen Grace Andal (she/her) is a PhD researcher under a Double-PhD track in Social Sciences (Macquarie University, Australia) and Social Philosophy (Ural Federal University, Russian Federation). She is also a research fellow at the Space for Engagement and Epistemic Diversity (SEED) (University of Melbourne) and at the Centre of Global Urbanism (Ural Federal University). Aireen's research pays particular attention to children and children's spaces and the importance of children as co-creators of knowledge. Majority of her academic engagements involve children's voices on the urban spaces they occupy, with emphasis on slum-dwelling communities in the global South.
Open Research
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
