As a coined concept ‘territorial mobility’ is a very broad term, comprising „all forms of geographical movement including flows of people over international borders at one extreme and trips to the local corner-shop at the other” (Boyle et al. 1998: 34). For the purpose of the project, a working definition of territorial mobility was constructed, incuding several components from the classical definition of migration. Firstly, territorial mobility was connected to the regional scale (the one being the one employed in the project), referring then to movements across defined regional boundaries. Secondly, it considers the significance of the changed socio-economic position acquired after the movement, as migration does (Miles 1987). And thirdly, it also acknowledges the importance of the cultural dimension (in the sense of daily practices), including the socio-cultural change that mobility brings to the everyday life of the people experiencing it (Boyle et al. 1998). It emphasizes how engaging in territorial mobility can reveal personal values and attachments, an entire world-view even, being thus an extremely cultural event (Fielding 1992). Territorial mobility in this sense is then more than a geographical movement. Given the multi-dimensional implications of these movements across space, mobility is embedded in the complexity of people’s everyday lives.
BOYLE, P.; HALFACREE, K.; ROBINSON, V. (1998). Exploring Contemporary Migration. Essex: Longman. FIELDING, A. (1992). “Migration and Culture”. In: Champion, A.; Fielding, A. (eds) Migration Prosesses and Patterns. Volume I. Research progress and prospects. London: Belhaven Press, pp. 201-212. MILES, R. (1987). Capitalism and Unfree Labour. Anomaly or Necessity?. London: Tavistock Publications.