Search results

PART I: Introduction to Migration Studies -- Chapter 1. An introduction to migration studies: the rise and coming of age of a research field -- Chapter 2. Migration Histories -- PART II: Conceptual approaches: migration drivers, infrastructures, and forms -- Chapter 3. Migration Drivers: why do people migrate? -- Chapter 4. Migration infrastructures: how do people migrate? -- Chapter 5. Digital migration infrastructures -- Chapter 6. Migration forms: what forms of migration can be distinguished? -- Chapter 7. Labour migration -- Chapter 8. Family migration -- Chapter 9. Humanitarian migration -- Chapter 10. Lifestyle migration -- Chapter 11. Student mobilities -- Chapter 12. Irregular migration -- PART III: Conceptual Approaches: Migration Consequences -- Chapter 13. Migration and the nation -- Chapter 14. The contested concept of 'integration' -- Chapter 15. Transnationalism -- Chapter 16. Cities of migration -- PART IV: Transversal Themes -- Chapter 17. Locating race in migration and diversity studies -- Chapter 18. Gender and migration -- Chapter 19. Migration and development -- PART V: studies of migration policies, governance, and politics -- Chapter 20. Migration Governance -- Chapter 21. The governance of migration-related diversity -- Chapter 22. Citizenship & migration -- Chapter 23. Public opinion and the politics of migration -- Chapter 24. Migration policy indicators -- PART VI: methods in migration studies -- Chapter 25. Qualitative methods in migration research -- Chapter 26. Quantitative methods in migration research -- Chapter 27. Migration statistics -- Chapter 28. How to predict future migration: different methods explained and compared -- Chapter 29. A future agenda for migration studies.

This book explores the role of complexity in the governance of migration and diversity. Current policy processes often fail to adequately capture complexity, favouring 'quick fix' approaches to regulation and integration that result in various forms of alienation: problem alienation, institutional alienation, political alienation and social alienation. Scholten draws on literature from gender and environmental governance to develop 'mainstreaming', an approach that reframes migration as a contingent and emergent process made up of complex actor networks, rather than a one-size-fits-all policy model. By ensuring actors understand and respond to complexity, migration research can contribute to reflexivity in policy processes, help to promote mainstreaming, and prevent alienation. The result will be of interest to students and scholars of migration and governance studies, with a focus on policymaking and integration.

Why do processes of policymaking on migration and (migration-related) diversity so often seem 'out of control'? This article proposes a new conceptual framework for understanding the role of complexity in the governance of migration and diversity. Complexity literature argues that complex problems like migration and diversity require complex approaches. However, migration literature shows that policy processes in these areas often fail to capture complexity, for instance through 'quick fixes' in migration regulation or on a strong belief in state-led 'immigrant integration.' This results in what will be conceptualised as 'alienation' from issue developments in migration and diversity, which comes in various forms: problem, institutional, political and social alienation. Alternatively, 'mainstreaming' is conceptualised as a governance approach that does try to capture rather than deny complexity. This requires, however, a rethinking of migration and diversity governance as a generic approach that does not treat migration and diversity as 'stand-alone' topics, that is oriented at the whole (diverse) population, that involves complex actor networks and a contingent and emergent process rather than a one-size-fits-all policy model. By helping actors to understand and respond to complexity, researchers can contribute to reflexivity in policy processes and help to promote mainstreaming and prevent alienation.

The key question addressed in this article is how to reconceptualise migrant integration at the level of urban governance in the face of the changing nature of migration-related diversity. There is a growing number of cities in Europe that can be defined as superdiverse cities, or cities where people with a migration background make up such a substantial part of the city population and are so diverse that it becomes difficult to speak of distinct migrant minorities. This article discusses the implications the changing nature of migration-related diversity has for urban governance. First, it argues that rather than thinking of integration in the sense of coherent national models of integration, integration should be redefined as a local issue. If it is conceptualised as a local issue, how should proper relations be developed between various levels of government in order to prevent policy decoupling or policy contradictions? Secondly, not only does this article argue that we should go through a local turn in our conceptualisation of the governance of migration-related diversity, it also pinpoints a specific direction in which local governance can develop: mainstreaming. Borrowing from the literatures of gender, disability, and environmental mainstreaming, it is argued that the structural character of migration-related diversity in contemporary cities requires a structural approach embedded in generic policies. Thirdly, the article discusses what this local turn and mainstreaming mean for relations between the local level and other levels of governance. Speaking to the literature on multi-level governance, it discusses to what extent the local turn in the governance of migration-related diversity has led to effective coordination between governance levels, or rather to evidence of what may be described as decoupling or disjointed governance. ; U radu se istražuju mogućnosti rekonceptualizacije pitanja integracije migranata na razini upravljanja gradovima uzevši u obzir promjene u području različitosti povezanih s migracijom. Sve je više europskih gradova koji odgovaraju definiciji "super-različitih", tj. radi se o gradovima gdje migrantska populacija čini znatan postotak ukupnog broja stanovnika i toliko je raznovrsna da se sve teže mogu razlikovati individualne migrantske skupine. U radu se razmatra kako različitosti povezane s migracijom utječu na upravljanje gradovima. Iznosi se teza da integracija ne bi trebala predstavljati cjelovite nacionalne ntegracijske modele, već da bi se trebala definirati kao lokalno pitanje. Tu se nameće pitanje kako urediti odnose između različitih razina upravljanja kako bi se izbjeglo razdvajanje politike (policy decoupling) te nastajanje proturječne politike. Nadalje, osim što se autor zalaže za konceptualizaciju upravljanja različitostima povezanih s migracijom kao lokalnog pitanja, u radu se predlaže smjer kojim bi lokalna vladavina mogla krenuti. Po uzoru na literaturu koja govori o ravnopravnosti (mainstreaming) u temama rodne različitosti, invaliditeta i zaštite okoliša, u radu se iznosi teza da strukturna priroda različitosti povezanih s migracijom u suvremenim gradovima zahtijeva strukturni pristup ugrađen u generičke politike. Također se govori o mogućem utjecaju lokalne definicije integracije na odnose između lokalne razine i ostalih razina upravljanja. S osvrtom na literaturu iz područja višerazinskog upravljanja govori se o mjeri u kojoj je lokalna definicija integracije dovela do učinkovite koordinacije između različitih razina upravljanja, tj. o primjerima onoga što se može nazvati razdvajanje politike ili neuslađenosti u upravljanju.

This article zooms in on the role of policy learning in non-incremental policy change. Can policy learning contribute to 'policy punctuations' or 'paradigmatic change'? This question is addressed from a constructivist angle. Within the constructivist approach debate rages on whether, and if so under what conditions, there could be a relationship between policy learning and policy change. The discourse coalition framework renounces the cognitivist concept of policy learning, whereas the critical frame analysis framework claims that critical reflection at the level of policy frames can lead to fundamental 'frame shifts'. This article reviews these two constructivist frameworks for policy analysis in terms of how they conceptualize and theorize the relation between policy learning and policy change. Besides offering a discussion of the theoretical assumptions of the two constructivist approaches that have been selected, this article offers an empirical congruence analysis of learning and change. This congruence analysis will be applied to one specific case: migrant integration policy-making in the Netherlands (2000–2015). This involves a clear case study where various non-incremental policy changes have taken place, from an integrationist to an assimilationist approach, which makes it a revelatory case for an in-depth study of policy learning and policy change.

The development of Dutch immigrant policy over the past decades has been characterised by the rise and fall of several policy frames. The role that social researchers and research institutes have played in these frame shifts has changed significantly. This article reveals that there was a clear relation between the structure of the policy-making process in the Netherlands, including the division of labour between social research and policy-makers therein, and the culture of policy-making or how immigrant integration was framed. A trend was discerned from a technocratic policy structure with a very direct role of researchers in depoliticised processes of policy-making to more engineering-like policy structures with a strong political primacy and a more selective approach to using scientific expertise for legitimating policy discourse. This article argues that these structural changes provided an important condition for the rise of a more assimilationist frame of immigrant policy in the Netherlands.

Debates on immigrant integration are often caught up in what academics and politicians like to call 'national models of integration'. Researchers and policymakers long for common ground. In the Netherlands, their symbiosis is fed by multiculturalism, something for which Dutch society has long been seen as exemplary. Still, the incorporation of migrants remains one of the country's most pressing social and political concerns. This book thus challenges the idea that there has ever been a coherent or consistent Dutch model of integration. Analysing how immigration is framed and reframed through diverse dialogues, it provides a highly dynamic understanding of integration policy and its evolution alongside migration research. Focus falls on the Netherlands of the past three decades, yet as these findings are held up to the cases of France, Germany and the United Kingdom, insights emerge to more universal questions. Just what are the current political and academic controversies all about? How can governments respond to the challenges of our time? And what contribution can social scientists make?

Migration and immigration are high on any nation's agenda but have particular resonance in Europe in light of recent events. The new edition of this book has been fully updated in this respect and explores: Immigration policy in individual EU nations The treatment of migrants, including immigrant policies The development and effects of the Shengen agreement The movement towards common EU policies. It looks specifically at the contexts of Britain, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, Spain, Greece and Turkey as well as a examining the changing nature of migration dynamics in central and Eastern Europe. This book is a significant and timely analysis suitable for students of migration at any level.

AbstractMigration out of areas affected by climate change has long been considered a common adaptation strategy. More recent studies, however, claim that migration should not exclusively be seen as an escape from areas under threat, but that it can also be understood as a powerful strategy towards change and innovation in those areas. This article examines the relationship between environmental stress and migration in the Vietnamese Mekong River Delta, one of the global hotspots of climate change. Based on an extensive survey among households and interviews with key actors, our study shows that indeed environmental stress is an important factor—though not the only one—behind the development of migration corridors, particularly to Ho Chi Minh City. Low-income households are more likely to have experienced migration than high-income ones. Low-income households also account for the largest group of recipients of financial remittances, which are mainly spent on basic household needs and health care, and not on longer-term investments. Our research also shows the important role of non-financial remittances in supporting climate resilience among vulnerable (low-income) households. Actually, in the Mekong Delta case, the transfer of knowledge and skills proves to be more prominent than the sending of cash. Such skills are brought along by returning migrants, and then passed on to others, leading to a diversification of local economies so that these become more resilient to environmental degradation.

Our quest in this book was to unravel how the city of Rotterdam comes to terms with its superdiverse character. It speaks to the rapidly evolving literature on superdiversity by taking as the central case study a city that may be representative of a much broader range of cities in Europe (and beyond) that seem reluctant in coming to terms with superdiversity, and that are not ranked as global cities. The example of Rotterdam reveals the spectrum of contradictions and paradoxes that come along with this uncomfortable relationship with superdiversity. Rotterdam is both a city of inclusion, the first with a mayor of Moroccan descent, and a city of exclusion, with political discourses in the City Council that are exclusionary and sometimes outright discriminatory. The core question to be addressed in this concluding chapter is why in some cities, like Rotterdam, the transformation into a superdiverse city is more problematic and accompanied by political upheaval, while in other cities it seems to be a more smooth process. The term superdiversity is merely describing a certain reality that characterizes Rotterdam and is not used as a normative term. With this book, we want to contribute to the growing literature that is trying to explain under which conditions a superdiverse city or neighbourhood is perceived by its inhabitants as an overall positive configuration and under which conditions people perceive it as being a more negative phenomenon and it leads to a more negative discourse.

This article examines what assimilation trajectories were manifest among present-day Mediterranean Muslims and pre–World War II Jews in Dutch society. Alba and Nee conceptualized assimilation in terms of processes of spanning and altering group boundaries, distinguishing between boundary crossing, blurring, and shifting. This study carves out to what extent assimilation processes like boundary crossing, shifting, and blurring had taken place for those two non-Christian minority groups in Dutch society. This research is based on findings of recent (quantitative) empirical research into the assimilation of pre–World War II Jews in the Netherlands and on the collection of comparable research and data for the assimilation of contemporary Mediterranean Muslims. Our study suggests that processes of boundary crossing, such as observance of religious practices and consumption of religious food, and blurring, such as intermarriage, residential segregation, and religious affiliation, are much less advanced for Mediterranean Muslims in the present time. Though several factors might account for differences in boundary-altering processes between pre–World War II Jews and contemporary Mediterranean Muslims such as differences in length of stay in the Netherlands, the secularization process, and globalization, Jewish assimilation might provide us some reflections on assimilation of Mediterranean Muslims. The continuous arrival of Muslim newcomers might affect attitudes and behavior of settled Mediterranean Muslims, while policy to restrict family migration might be insufficient to stimulate Muslims to integrate in Dutch society given the quite negative mutual perceptions, the slow process of residential spreading, the continuation of observance of religious practices, and the low intermarriage rate.