Debt Before Departure: The Role of Informal Credit in Trapping Migrant Workers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I would suggest another review of the English language, since it sometimes lacks clarity. Otherwise, the content is original and a valuable contribution to overall migration studies. Where you state the number in Dirhams, I would suggest you also state the number in dollars, for easier comparison (for example, in the table 1 on page 7.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I suggest you proofread your article again since it sometimes lacks clarity due to some grammatical mistakes. Maybe even rereading it by yourself will allow you to correct the majority of mistakes.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments. I’ve addressed these concerns in the paper. I deeply appreciate your positive feedback. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are a few sentences that need to be corrected, that's all. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

 

Thank you very much for your thoughtful and constructive feedback on our manuscript, “Debt Before Departure: The Role of Informal Credit in Trapping Migrant Workers.” We are truly grateful for the time and care you took in reviewing the paper and offering detailed suggestions. In response, we have carefully revised the manuscript to directly address each of your comments. Below is a point-by-point explanation of how we have incorporated your recommendations into the revised version:

1. Lack of Distinct Focus or Contribution to Literature

We have sharpened the focus of the study to explicitly highlight how pre-departure informal credit systems specifically exploitative loans and recruitment fees serve as structural mechanisms of entrapment for migrant workers even before they leave their home countries. This clarification is now reflected in the revised abstract, the redefined problem statement in Section 1.2, and a newly added subsection titled “Research Aim and Contribution.”

2. Literature Review Too Vague and Not Focused on Pre-Departure Debt

We have rewritten the literature review to place the study in direct dialogue with key foundational works. This reorientation now anchors our work in the appropriate scholarly terrain and ensures theoretical alignment with existing debates.

3. Findings Overly Focused on UAE Conditions

We reorganized the findings to give priority to pre-departure mechanisms of debt and bonded labor. The first two themes now focus specifically on pre-migration debt bondage and exploitative lending practices, while later themes trace the downstream effects post-arrival. This sequencing better reflects the temporal trajectory of the migrant’s financial entrapment.

4. Unclear Contribution to the Field

We now articulate more explicitly how our study advances current understanding. Specifically, we show how emotional, informal, and structural coercion combine to create a systemic debt trap that begins before departure and evolves across borders. This unique temporal-spatial framing is outlined in the Discussion section.

5. Literature Scope Too Narrow — Excludes Africa and Latin America

We acknowledged your point and now incorporate broader comparative references to Latin American and African migration studies in both the Literature Review and the Conclusion. We also suggest this as a future research direction to position our work in a global comparative frame.

6. Introduction Is Too Narrow

We rewrote the introduction to better justify the global importance of the issue. The revised version now frames the research within the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (particularly Goal 8 on Decent Work and Economic Growth) and global labor governance. This makes the study relevant to broader international discussions on labor migration, even beyond the South Asian context.

7. Proposals 1–5 Not Helpful

We fully agree and have removed the “Proposals” entirely. Instead, we now present findings using clearly structured thematic subheadings aligned with the five core patterns identified during coding.

8. Ethnographic Label Misleading

We have adjusted our methodology description to accurately reflect that this is a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews, not an ethnographic study. This change is made throughout the paper, particularly in the Methodology section (Section 3).

9. Redundancy in Main Points

We carefully revised both the Findings and Discussion sections to ensure that each theme offers a distinct and non-repetitive insight. The progression of arguments is now more linear and less overlapping.

10. Currency Conversion to USD

All monetary figures previously listed in Dirhams have now been converted to their USD equivalents, using consistent conversion rates. This has been updated in Table 1 and all relevant quotes or discussions.

11. Methods Section Unclear (Demographics, Sampling, Recruitment)

We have expanded the methodology to specify:

• All participants were male migrant construction workers

• Aged between 22–48

• From five South Asian countries (India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka)

• Interviews were conducted both online and in-person

• Participants were recruited through snowball sampling, starting from contacts made at labour accommodation sites

These details are now included in Sections 3.2 Participant Characteristics and 3.3 Sampling and Recruitment.

12. Flow Chart of Debt Stages Recommended

We have added a visual flow chart (Figure 1) depicting the seven distinct stages of debt accumulation and entrapment. This includes corresponding excerpts from participant interviews and narrative illustrations to offer a clearer structure for readers.

 

We sincerely appreciate your valuable suggestions, which have led to a significantly stronger and more coherent manuscript. Your feedback helped us clarify our theoretical positioning, refine the methodological rigor, and sharpen the paper’s contribution to migration and labor studies. We hope the revised version now aligns with the expectations of the journal and your thoughtful recommendations.

 

Thank you once again for your guidance.

 

Warm regards,

Abdelaziz Abdalla Alowais