Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Preface -- 1. The Politics of Immigration Control -- 2. Testing the Hypotheses -- 3. The Political Geography of Immigration Control -- 4. Immigration and Race Relations in Britain -- 5. Immigration in the French Fifth Republic -- 6. Immigration Control in Australia with Kimberly Cole -- 7. Conclusions -- References -- Index

Abstract
David Leblang and Benjamin Helm's 2023 book, The Ties That Bind. Immigration and the Global Political Economy, provides evidence that state governance affects the levels of emigration as well as international migrants' choice of destination. States that provide higher levels of public goods generate fewer emigrants while states that provide access to citizenship and non-discrimination attract more immigrants. Leblang and Helms then show that migrants, having moved across borders, facilitate international capital flows, including remittances, foreign direct investment, and portfolio investment. These flows, in turn, reduce the number of future emigrants. Their presentation falls short by failing to acknowledge the adjustment costs that may arise because of the temporal and geographic imbalances in generating revenues to expand public goods in the host state to accommodate the new arrivals. Moreover, their policy recommendation for enlarging temporary labor migration programs fails to acknowledge longstanding criticisms of these plans because of their potential for worker exploitation and the tendency of temporary migrants to remain in the destination country.

Since the Second World War, globalization has been underpinned by a liberal international order, a rules-based system structured around the principles of economic interdependence, democracy, human rights and multilateralism. However, the relationship between international mobility and the liberal international order (LIO) is contested. In the article, I disaggregate 'international mobility' into three regimes: the travel regime, the voluntary (labour) migration regime, and the refugee regime—each governed by distinct norms and operating procedures. I outline the characteristics of the LIO that pertain to international mobility and provide evidence to demonstrate that none of the three dimensions of international mobility—travel, migration, and asylum—reflects these characteristics. Given the LIO principles enumerated above, the exclusion of international mobility from the LIO is surprising. I survey the scholarship on the LIO and international mobility and argue that the exclusion of international mobility from the LIO rests on benefits provided to core states by the status quo ante governing international mobility. That is, the status quo ante permits countries of destination to determine the level and type of cross-border mobility. Thus, international mobility continues to be underpinned by the play of state preferences rather than the principles of the LIO. The COVID-19 pandemic is likely to shape these norms and operating procedures in ways that reinforce the status quo.

"Comparative Immigration Policy" published on by Oxford University Press.