Suchergebnisse

International regimes govern how officials address specific issue areas in global politics. There is a deep and unresolved debate as to whether we can speak of an international migration regime. This article seeks to develop the theoretical language to resolve this debate. We introduce the concept of a 'distributive regime': a structure that coordinates movement and settlement control practices in ways that engender ideal distributions of populations across space. The paper demonstrates the discriminatory power of this concept by using it to shed light on analogous forms of movement and settlement control in the study of slavery and incarceration. We then suggest that we could resolve the extant debate about the status of the international migration regime by further exploring the hypothesis that contemporary migration control practices are coordinated in ways that achieve a distributive effect.

Migration and Membership RegimesM brings together ten essays on the history of settlement and migration in an analytical framework which reconceptualises the migrant-state relationship and explores the variety of membership regimes on five continents and over two millennia.

An indicator of globalization is the growing number of humans crossing national borders. In contrast to explanations for flows of goods and capital, migration research has concentrated on unilateral movements to rich democracies. This focus ignores the bilateral determinants of migration and stymies empirical and theoretical inquiry. The theoretical insights proposed here show how the regime type of both sending and receiving countries influences human migration. Specifically, democratic regimes accommodate fewer immigrants than autocracies and democracies enable emigration while autocracies prevent exit. The mechanisms for this divergence are a function of both micro-level motivations of migrants and institutional constraints on political leaders. Global bilateral migration data and a statistical method that captures the higher-order dependencies in network data are employed in this article.

This book examines convergent trends in asylum regimes around the world. It covers the main regions of the world where asylum is a critical problem: Europe, Africa and Central America. It also looks at the major issues: human rights; non-governmental organisation involvement; gender; return; comprehensive policy; European Union harmonisation; international intervention and temporary protection.

An indicator of globalization is the growing number of humans crossing national borders. In contrast to explanations for flows of goods and capital, migration research has concentrated on unilateral movements to rich democracies. This focus ignores the bilateral determinants of migration and stymies empirical and theoretical inquiry. The theoretical insights proposed here show how the regime type of both sending and receiving countries influences human migration. Specifically, democratic regimes accommodate fewer immigrants than autocracies and democracies enable emigration while autocracies prevent exit. The mechanisms for this divergence are a function of both micro-level motivations of migrants and institutional constraints on political leaders. Global bilateral migration data and a statistical method that captures the higher-order dependencies in network data are employed in this article. (British Journal of Political Science/ FUB)

AbstractIn The New Politics of Immigration, Professor Catherine Dauvergne proposes that as migration policies converge at the global level, the traditional difference between settler societies and former European colonies is becoming irrelevant. To test this argument, this article addresses the impact of externalization, militarization, detention and deportation on unaccompanied migrant children along the southern Spanish and US borders. I conclude that the combined used of these strategies is designed to keep all unwanted migrants away from the physical border of the state, regardless of their background, and prevents children from accessing specific protections. Current border policy in these two countries shows the primacy of national security concerns over human rights and supports Dauvergne's argument that distinctions between former colonies and settler societies are disappearing. The evidence considered here points towards an increasingly restrictive and punitive global border regime, but one with regional variations.

This study explores the global regulative function of migration politics. Its main aim is to rethink migration politics through an engagement with the Foucauldian governmentality perspective, which focuses on the relation between government and thought. A secondary aim is to use this perspective to explore the global description of migration and migration politics which is emerging with the currently evolving global governance of migration. Doing so, it wishes to contribute both to the study of global governmentality, i.e. to the orientation of research which applies elements from governmentality in order to understand global processes of rule, and to the study of the global governance of migration. The task is addressed at three different levels of abstraction. First, it elaborates on an understanding of the state system as a governmental regime aiming at regulating the world population, in order to understand the sovereign prerogative to control migration therein. Second, it places the regulation of movement within the historical continuity of governmental concerns with managing circulation. Third, it explores current governmental thought on migration, to this end tracing the political rationality of governing migration from the global description of migration and migration politics. Its findings suggest that when the circulation of migration is addressed as a global concern, it is being conceptualized in a way which both furthers and modifies state system governmentality. Migration is understood as a normal rather than an exceptional feature of world affairs, and societies are recognized as to a significant degree transnational in character. The commonly used term "migration management" suggests the need to take control over movements in this context. It also signals the possibility for finding rational solutions in order to optimize migration, maximizing its potential benefits and minimizing its associated dangers.

"In an international division of reproductive labour, responsibilities over domestic and care work in many high and middle income countries have increasingly been shifted towards an exploitable migrant work force. Restrictive migration regimes, gender discriminations, and flexible labour markets allow for extreme exploitation and human rights abuses rendering working conditions at times akin to forms of unfree labour. In Lebanon, domestic workers from diverse Asian and African countries experience the consequences of these global trends, while attempts to improve their situation face obstacles constituted by the complex and far-reaching structures of exploitation. However, the agency of migrants and the civil society has recently led to an increase of initiatives aimed at mobilizing and empowering workers, most notably a union for domestic workers established in January 2015. In view of these developments, the article will present the structural challenges migrant domestic workers face on global and national levels and the internal divisions that constrain collective organisation and resistance. Particular attention will be paid to inequalities in the international division of reproductive labour and to the social relations and interests which perpetuate the continuous exploitation of migrant workers making a profound change of conditions without substantial collective and transnational mobilisation unlikely." (author's abstract)