SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 46 Sayı: 1

Digital Social Capital: The Role and Limits of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Applications in Migrant

Dijital Sosyal Sermaye: Yapay Zekâ Destekli Uygulamaların Göçmen Entegrasyonundaki Rolü ve Sınırları

Furkan Düzenli(DÜZCE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7044-3403
Pages
386–414
Publication Date
2026-07-28
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal that these applications provide significant contributions, such as transcending "credentialism" (diploma fetishism), eliminating information asymmetry, and optimizing resource allocation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study critically examines artificial intelligence (AI)-powered migrant integration applications situated at the intersection of the sociology of migration and digitalization studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings reveal that these applications provide significant contributions, such as transcending "credentialism" (diploma fetishism), eliminating information asymmetry, and optimizing resource allocation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, the same findings indicate that these technologies tend to deepen the digital divide, incorporate migrants' private data into systems through the "paradox of mandatory consent," and establish surveillance infrastructures prone to "function creep." Drawing upon classical sociological frameworks, including Bourdieu’s capital theory, Foucault’s biopolitics, Weber’s iron cage, and Goffman’s theory of stigma, this study proposes the concept of "algorithmic capital." Consequently, AI should be positioned not as a replacement for social justice and rights-based approaches but as a complementary tool that can strengthen them.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Göç Sosyolojisi · Yapay Zeka · Göçmen Entegrasyonu

Abstract

This study critically examines artificial intelligence (AI)-powered migrant integration applications situated at the intersection of the sociology of migration and digitalization studies. The central research question is whether these AI applications offer a window of opportunity to bypass bureaucratic hurdles or, conversely, construct a "digital cage" that reproduces new forms of inequality. To address this question, five distinct AI applications were analyzed using the empirical case study method: SkillLab in the context of economic integration, Tarjimly for social integration, MigrantHelp for institutional integration, and Refugees.AI regarding spatial integration and the Kiron platforms in the field of educational integration. The findings reveal that these applications provide significant contributions, such as transcending "credentialism" (diploma fetishism), eliminating information asymmetry, and optimizing resource allocation. However, the same findings indicate that these technologies tend to deepen the digital divide, incorporate migrants' private data into systems through the "paradox of mandatory consent," and establish surveillance infrastructures prone to "function creep." Drawing upon classical sociological frameworks, including Bourdieu’s capital theory, Foucault’s biopolitics, Weber’s iron cage, and Goffman’s theory of stigma, this study proposes the concept of "algorithmic capital." Consequently, AI should be positioned not as a replacement for social justice and rights-based approaches but as a complementary tool that can strengthen them.

Özet

Bu çalışma, göç sosyolojisi ile dijitalleşme çalışmalarının kesişiminde yer alan yapay zeka (YZ) destekli göçmen entegrasyon uygulamalarını eleştirel bir perspektiften incelemektedir. Araştırmanın temel sorusu şudur: Yapay zeka uygulamaları, göçmen entegrasyonunda bürokratik engelleri aşan bir fırsat penceresi mi sunmakta, yoksa yeni eşitsizlikler üreten bir "dijital kafes" mi oluşturmaktadır? Bu soruya yanıt vermek amacıyla beş farklı yapay zeka uygulaması ampirik vaka analizi yöntemiyle incelenmiştir: Ekonomik entegrasyon bağlamında beceri eşleştirme platformu SkillLab, sosyal entegrasyon bağlamında anlık tercüme platformu Tarjimly, kurumsal entegrasyon bağlamında hukuki danışmanlık chatbotları (MigrantHelp), mekânsal entegrasyon bağlamında algoritmalı iskân sistemi Refugees.AI ve eğitim entegrasyon bağlamında dijital eğitim platformu Kiron. Bulgular, söz konusu uygulamaların diploma fetişizmini aşma, bilgi asimetrisini giderme ve kaynak dağılımını optimize etme gibi önemli katkılar sunduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Ancak aynı bulgular, bu teknolojilerin dijital uçurumu derinleştirme, zorunlu rıza paradoksu aracılığıyla göçmenlerin mahrem verilerini sisteme dahil etme ve "işlev kayması" riski taşıyan gözetim altyapıları oluşturma eğiliminde olduğuna da işaret etmektedir. Çalışma, Bourdieu'nün sermaye teorisi, Foucault'nun biyopolitika kavramı, Weber'in demir kafes metaforu ve Goffman'ın damgalanma kuramı gibi klasik sosyolojik çerçevelerden yararlanarak "algoritmik sermaye" kavramını önerir ve teknolojik çözümcülüğün entegrasyon politikalarını depolitize etme riskini mercek altına alır. Sonuç olarak yapay zekanın, sosyal adalet ve hak temelli yaklaşımın yerini alamayacak ancak bunları güçlendirebilecek tamamlayıcı bir araç olarak konumlandırılması gerektiği savunulmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Düzenli, F. (2026). Digital Social Capital: The Role and Limits of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Applications in Migrant. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 46 Sayı: 1, 386–414. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2025.46.1.1130

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (73)

  1. Aguilar, G. L. (2025). Building translator repertoire across a humanitarian translation app: Translingual practice and Tarjimly. Technical Communication Quarterly, 34 (2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2024.2372784. google scholar
  2. Amoore, L. (2020). Cloud ethics: Algorithms and the attributes of ourselves and others. Duke University Press. google scholar
  3. Aradau, C. (2023). Borders have always been artificial: Migration, data and AI. International Migration, 61 (5), 303–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.13186. google scholar
  4. Bajpai, A., Yadav, S., & Nagwani, N. (2025). An extensive bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence techniques from 2013 to 2023. The Journal of Supercomputing, 81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-025-07021-3. google scholar
  5. Beduschi, A. (2020). International migration management in the age of artificial intelligence. Migration Studies, 9 (3), 576–596. https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnaa003. google scholar
  6. Benton, M., & Glennie, A. (2016). Digital humanitarianism: How tech entrepreneurs are supporting refugee integration. Migration Policy Institute. google scholar
  7. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge. google scholar
  8. Bircan, T., & Korkmaz, E. E. (2021). Big data for whose sake? Governing migration through artificial intelligence. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8 (1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00910-x. google scholar
  9. Bircan, T., & Salah, A. A. A. (2022). A bibliometric analysis of the use of artificial intelligence technologies for social sciences. Mathematics, 10 (23), 4398. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10234398. google scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed)., Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood. google scholar
  11. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. google scholar
  12. Bovens, M., & Zouridis, S. (2002). From street-level to system-level bureaucracies. Public Administration Review, 62 (2), 174–184. google scholar
  13. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell. google scholar
  14. Collins, R. (1979). The credential society. Academic Press. google scholar
  15. Crompton, H. (2013). A historical overview of mobile learning. In Z. Berge & L. Muilenburg (Eds)., Handbook of mobile learning (pp. 3–14). Routledge. google scholar
  16. De Leon, J., De Leon-Martinez, S., Artés-Rodríguez, A., Baca-García, E., & De Las Cuevas, C. (2025). Reflections on the potential and risks of AI for scientific article writing after the AI endorsement by some scientific publishers: Focusing on Scopus AI. Actas Españolas de Psiquiatría, 53 (2), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.62641/aep.v53i2.1849. google scholar
  17. Dekker, R., & Engbersen, G. (2014). How social media transform migrant networks and facilitate migration. Global Networks, 14 (4), 401–418. google scholar
  18. Dijstelbloem, H., & Broeders, D. (2015). Border surveillance, mobility management and the shaping of non-publics in Europe. European Journal of Social Theory, 18 (1), 21–38. google scholar
  19. Diminescu, D. (2008). The connected migrant: An epistemological manifesto. Social Science Information, 47 (4), 565–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018408096447. google scholar
  20. Erduran, S., & Levrini, O. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence on scientific practices: An emergent area of research for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 46 (18), 1982–1989. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2306604. google scholar
  21. Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press. google scholar
  22. European Commission & Economic Policy Committee. (2006). The impact of ageing on public expenditure: Projections for the EU-25 Member States on pensions, health care, long-term care, education and unemployment transfers (2004-2050). European Economy Special Report No. 1/2006. google scholar
  23. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics. Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
  24. Gillespie, M., Ampofo, L., Cheesman, M., Faith, B., Iliadou, E., Issa, A., Osseiran, S., & Skuse, A. (2016). Mapping refugee media journeys. The Open University/France Médias Monde. google scholar
  25. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice Hall. google scholar
  26. Harvey, D. (1973). Social justice and the city. Johns Hopkins University Press. google scholar
  27. Ineli-Ciger, M. (2024). Resettlement by algorithm: Can artificial intelligence uphold human rights? Computer Law & Security Review, 55, 106051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106051. google scholar
  28. International Labour Organization. (2021, July 28). Talent-based matching of newcomers to employment opportunities. Global Compact on Refugees. https://globalcompactrefugees.org/good-practices/talent-based-matching-newcomers-employment-opportunities. google scholar
  29. International Labour Organization. (2025). Assisting refugees and host communities in Egypt to turn their skills into careers. https://www.ilo.org/resource/news/assisting-refugees-and-host-communities-egypt-turn-their-skills-careers. google scholar
  30. Judijanto, L. (2025). Asylum processing algorithms and epistemic violence: A review of AI's role in refugee status determination. Journal of Information, Technology and Policy, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.62836/jitp.2025.495. google scholar
  31. Kinchin, N., & Mougouei, D. (2022). What can artificial intelligence do for refugee status determination? A proposal for removing subjective fear. International Journal of Refugee Law, 34 (3–4), 373–397. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeac040. google scholar
  32. Kiron Open Higher Education. (2025). Learning beyond limits. https://www.kiron.ngo/. google scholar
  33. Latonero, M. (2019). Governing artificial intelligence: Upholding human rights & dignity. Data & Society Research Institute. google scholar
  34. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell. google scholar
  35. Liu, P., Lai, Y., & Liu, D. (2024). Artificial intelligence research in organizations: A bibliometric approach. Cogent Business & Management, 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2408439. google scholar
  36. Madianou, M. (2019). Technocolonialism: Digital innovation and data practices in the humanitarian response to refugee crises. Social Media + Society, 5 (3), 1–13. google scholar
  37. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Migration and new media. Routledge. google scholar
  38. Matlin, S. A., Claron, I. M. M., Merone, J., Netto, G., Takian, A., Zaman, M. H., & Saso, L. (2025). Artificial intelligence in migrant health: A critical perspective on opportunities and risks. The Lancet Regional Health – Europe, 57, 101421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2025.101421. google scholar
  39. McAuliffe, M., Blower, J., & Beduschi, A. (2021). Digitalization and artificial intelligence in migration and mobility: Transnational implications of the COVID-19 pandemic. Societies, 11 (4), 135. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc11040135. google scholar
  40. Memon, A., Given-Wilson, Z., Ozkul, D., Richmond, K., Muraszkiewicz, J., Weldon, E., & Katona, C. (2024). Artificial intelligence (AI) in the asylum system. Medicine, Science, and the Law, 64. https://doi.org/10.1177/00258024241227721. google scholar
  41. Migrant Help. (2024). Asylum services. https://www.migranthelpuk.org/pages/category/asylum. google scholar
  42. Mixed Migration Centre. (2025). AI, surveillance and the privatisation of migration management. Mixed Migration Review 2025. https://mixedmigration.org/. google scholar
  43. Molnar, P. (2020). New technologies, new challenges: Artificial intelligence and human rights in refugee law and policy. UNHCR. google scholar
  44. Morgan, H. (2024). Everyday digital dis/connection: Locating slow violence in (non)encounters with the UK asylum state. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 49, e12674. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12674. google scholar
  45. Morozov, E. (2013). To save everything, click here: The folly of technological solutionism. PublicAffairs. google scholar
  46. Nalbandian, L. (2022). An eye for an 'I': A critical assessment of artificial intelligence tools in migration and asylum management. Comparative Migration Studies, 10, 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-022-00305-0. google scholar
  47. Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press. google scholar
  48. OECD. (2023). International migration outlook 2023. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b0f40584-en. google scholar
  49. Office for National Statistics. (2020). Modern slavery in the UK: March 2020. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/modernslaveryintheuk/march2020. google scholar
  50. Ogunola, A. A. (2025). Leveraging AI to empower refugees and minority communities: Reducing poverty, crime rates, and advancing workforce integration. International Journal of Research, 6 (1), 2792–2810. google scholar
  51. Olugbode, A., & Olugbode, O. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence on labour migration and diversity. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9 (10), 5708–5721. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000468. google scholar
  52. O'Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction. Crown Publishers. google scholar
  53. Patuzzi, L., Benton, M., & Embiricos, A. (2019). Social innovation for refugee inclusion: From bright spots to system change. Migration Policy Institute Europe. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/social-innovation-refugee-inclusion-bright-spots-system-change. google scholar
  54. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster. google scholar
  55. Refugees.AI. (2024). Annie™ MOORE: Matching and Outcome Optimization for Refugee Empowerment [Resettlement.tech]. https://www.resettlement.tech/. google scholar
  56. Rinaldi, A., & Teo, S. A. (2025). The use of artificial intelligence technologies in border and migration control and the subtle erosion of human rights. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 74 (1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589325000090. google scholar
  57. Sayad, A. (2004). The suffering of the immigrant. Polity Press. google scholar
  58. Selwyn, N. (2011). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Continuum. google scholar
  59. Sharmin, S. (2025). Refugee resettlement & AI-powered resource allocation: Optimizing social services for displaced populations. Journal of Public Administration Research, 2 (1), 13–36. google scholar
  60. Simmel, G. (2015). Bireysellik ve kültür (T. Birkan, Çev). Metis Yayınları. google scholar
  61. Singerman, D. (2007). The economic imperatives of marriage (Middle East Youth Initiative Working Paper No. 6). google scholar SkillLab, & The World Bank. (2026). Closing the implementation gap: The LMIS for a skills-first labor market COLABORA Community of Practice. https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/dc8d858d4e98ff9cc49623c79cb44aa7-0370022026/original/COLABORA-Feb-2026-SkillLab-Closing-the-Implementation-Gap-Lina-Solero-ENG.pdf. google scholar
  62. Soperla, V. (2025). AI-enhanced data migration strategy for legacy systems. International Journal of Research in Computer Applications and Information Technology, 8 (2), 55–89. https://doi.org/10.34218/IJRCAIT_08_02_005. google scholar
  63. Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. Bloomsbury Academic. google scholar
  64. Stewart, L. S. (2024). Fair and efficient asylum procedures and artificial intelligence: Quo Vadis due process? Computer Law & Security Review, 55, 106050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106050. google scholar
  65. Tarjimly. (2025). 2024 impact report. https://www.tarjimly.org/. google scholar
  66. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2000). Replacement migration: Is it a solution to declining and ageing populations? United Nations. https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/. google scholar
  67. Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Polity Press. google scholar
  68. van Doorn, N. (2017). Platform labor: On the gendered and racialized exploitation of low-income service work in the on-demand economy. Information, Communication & Society, 20 (6), 898–914. google scholar
  69. Wall, M., Campbell, M. O., & Janbek, D. (2017). Syrian refugees and information precarity. New Media & Society, 19 (2), 240–254. google scholar
  70. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. University of California Press. google scholar
  71. Zhang, S. (2024). A visualized bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence based on Biblioshiny (2014–2023). Scientific Journal of Technology, 6 (7), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.54691/j4ddc779. google scholar
  72. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs. google scholar
  73. Simmel, G. (2015). Bireysellik ve kültür (T. Birkan, Çev). Metis Yayınları. google scholar