for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
Followed Journals
Journal you Follow: 0
 
Sign Up to follow journals, search in your chosen journals and, optionally, receive Email Alerts when new issues of your Followed Journals are published.
Already have an account? Sign In to see the journals you follow.
Journal Cover Migration Studies
  [18 followers]  Follow
    
   Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
   ISSN (Print) 2049-5838 - ISSN (Online) 2049-5846
   Published by Oxford University Press Homepage  [372 journals]
  • Re-thinking the politics of migration. On the uses and challenges of
           regime perspectives for migration research
    • Authors: Horvath K; Amelina A, Peters K.
      Pages: 301 - 314
      Abstract: The aim of this special issue is to critically assess the potential of regime theory for migration research. Against the background of contemporary political dynamics, regime terminology has become rather popular in migration studies. There has, however, been little debate on the foundations and implications of the very notion of ‘regime’. Although regime is anything but a unified concept, in this article we argue that there are commonalities in analytical perspectives useful for migration research. Current usages in migration research are informed by at least four different strands of theory building that differ in their epistemological, ontological, and methodological foundations: (i) international relations—notions of regimes as international regulatory frameworks, (ii) conceptualizations informed by welfare regime theories, (iii) regime notions that stem from the French regulation school, and (iv) regime theories inspired by governmentality studies. The collection of articles in this special issue mirrors this constellation. The contributions come from different disciplinary and methodological backgrounds, employ different regime notions, and focus on a wide range of aspects of contemporary European migration politics. While it seems crucial to acknowledge this conceptual variety, we argue that there are also important points of convergence between these strands of theory building: attention to the complexities and contradictions of regulatory practices, a focus on normative and discursive orders, and consideration of relations of power and inequality. This specific simultaneity of variety and convergence may open spaces for academic debates that move beyond established conceptual and methodological boundaries.
      PubDate: 2017-09-18
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx055
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • ‘We must do it gently.’ The contested implementation of the IOM’s
           migration management in Morocco
    • Authors: Bartels I.
      Pages: 315 - 336
      Abstract: The expanding character of European migration policies has widely been studied in terms of either the ‘externalization’, ‘exterritorialization’ and ‘external governance’ of migration control or the ‘empowerment’ of third countries using migration issues in international negotiations. The ways in which the emerging transnational policies of migration management are actually put into practice and are thereby shaped by implementing actors, as well as the contexts to which they have been applied, have received less attention. Against this background, the article turns to the IOM’s contested implementation of migration management in Morocco. As such, it aims to extend the dominant focus of most studies on state and EU institutions, their policy, discourse and decision making towards the border zones in which their practical outcome and meaning is negotiated. Using the example of two projects implemented by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), it reconstructs the negotiation processes of international migration management on the ground. Based on the analysis of emerging control practices in Morocco, the article shows how humanitarian and neoliberal logics of governing migration complement existing security-oriented policies and, as such, contribute to the (re)stabilization and expansion of the trans-Mediterranean migration regime in times of fading legitimacy. With theoretical reference to the concept of a migration regime, the article argues that these reconfigurations are neither the result of a centrally directed ‘EUropean masterplan’ nor of a linear evolution towards more sophisticated control technologies but the contingent outcome of struggles between migration movements and the political and administrative attempts to control them.
      PubDate: 2017-08-29
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx054
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • The intra-EU mobility regime: Differentiation, stratification and
           contradictions
    • Authors: Engbersen G; Leerkes A, Scholten P, et al.
      Pages: 337 - 355
      Abstract: This article analyses the contested nature of the contemporary intra-EU mobility regime after the EU enlargement of 2004 and 2007. Migration from the new EU member states in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has evolved into one of the main migration flows within Europe, especially to Northern and Western European countries. We will analyse three dimensions of the contested nature of the intra-EU mobility regime. Firstly, we show that the current regime has contributed to a highly diverse and complex nature of contemporary labour migration. Research shows that CEE labour migrants engage in circular and temporary labour mobility, but also in mid-term and long-term settlement migration. This diversity challenges contemporary (local) integration policies. Secondly, we address forms of civic stratification, which has become an important dimension of social inequality in Europe. Civic stratification is the result of inequalities in de jure entitlements to social and economic rights or in de facto access to EU citizens’ rights. Thirdly, we deal with the contradictions between governance responses to intra-EU mobility at different levels of government. In particular, a paradigm conflict has emerged between the intra-EU ‘mobility’ frame, which defines free movement primarily as a neo-liberal, economic form of mobility by EU citizens to address temporary unbalances in European labour markets, and the local governance strategies driven by a more ‘settlement’ frame of intra-EU ‘migration’ which focuses on integration-related concerns.
      PubDate: 2017-07-09
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx044
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • Care as a fictitious commodity: Reflections on the intersections of
           migration, gender and care regimes
    • Authors: Lutz H.
      Pages: 356 - 368
      Abstract: Over recent decades, migrant care and domestic work in private households has evolved into an extensive global market. In the European context, the analysis of (national) welfare regimes rarely acknowledges the repercussions of this development. I will discuss the term welfare regime as introduced by Gøsta Esping-Andersen from an intersectional gender and migration perspective and suggest an amendment of the regime concept which critically scrutinizes both the de- and the re-commodification of labor area. In addition, I will use Nancy Fraser’s pressing question, of whether society can be commodities all the way down, to call into question the neoliberal understanding of the state-family-market triangle. I argue that where a market gains the upper hand and care is considered as a fictitious commodity (Polanyi), this will have serious (unwanted) effects for the development of society and its reproduction.
      PubDate: 2017-07-25
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx046
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • Asylum as construction work: Theorizing administrative practices
    • Authors: Dahlvik J.
      Pages: 369 - 388
      Abstract: This paper understands the administration of asylum as a vital element of the current migration regime in Europe, and investigates the migration regime ‘at work’ through an ethnographic case study of street-level bureaucracy. With a focus on the understudied role of social construction in the asylum procedure, I argue that the social practices of decision-making officials in determining refugee status go beyond labelling and categorization, and include the construction of facts, artefacts and (in)credibility. The argument is based on a qualitative investigation of the former Austrian Federal Asylum Office, including interviews with government officials in different positions, participant observation of asylum hearings and office life, and the analysis of documents, particularly records. While previous empirical studies of the asylum procedure tend to lack a broader theoretical embedding of their findings, this paper seeks to link empirical evidence to post-constructivist and structuration theories. Drawing on this theoretical background to explain and frame the observed practices of the asylum administration, I analyse how the diverse construction processes can be understood as a key characteristic of the present migration regime. Consequently, I argue that the perspective of structure and agency not only emphasizes the interdependence of the different levels of action but also highlights the contingency and volatility of the regime ‘at work,’ as it is necessarily reproduced and reinvented by bureaucrats in the process of determining refugee status. I conclude by pointing out that the structures of the migration regime might not be as entrenched as they seem at first glance.
      PubDate: 2017-07-04
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx043
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • Appropriating mobility and bordering Europe through romantic love:
           Unearthing the intricate intertwinement of border regimes and migratory
           practices
    • Authors: Scheel S.
      Pages: 389 - 408
      Abstract: This article introduces the notion of appropriation in debates on how to account for migrants’ capacity to defy restrictive border controls and migration policies. What the notion of appropriation better captures than concepts like agency or resistance is the multi-faceted and intricate intertwinement of border regimes and migratory practices. The article illustrates this advantage through an analysis of the phenomenon of bezness. The term refers to a migration strategy of aspiring migrants who seduce and subsequently marry European tourists as a way to gain entry to and residency in Europe. This article develops a reading of bezness as a mode of appropriation of mobility which is intertwined with the border regime in at least four ways: First, bezness is provoked by restrictive visa policies that create a highly unequal access to mobility and life opportunities. The case of bezness illustrates, second, that migrants try to recode the methods, logics and effects of mobility control into means of appropriation. Migrants’ practices of appropriation involve, third, the clandestine transgression of the norms, rules and regulations that define particular border regimes. Finally, the notion of appropriation permits to recognize that the European border regime operates as an apparatus of capture that tries to recuperate migrants’ practices in order to turn them into a driving force for its own development. The example of bezness demonstrates, moreover, that these processes of recuperation also feature the mobilization of emotions—in this case of romantic love—as technologies of government.
      PubDate: 2017-08-07
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx047
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • Calling for the Super Citizen: Citizenship ceremonies in the UK and
           Germany as techniques of subject-formation
    • Authors: Badenhoop E.
      Pages: 409 - 427
      Abstract: Migration and citizenship studies tend to conceive of naturalization and of citizenship ceremonies as highly ambivalent procedures. They simultaneously include and exclude migrants by granting full membership to certain migrants while separating them from national-born and other migrant citizens. Yet, existing studies with their focus on the inclusion/exclusion divide tend to overlook another key dimension of citizenship ceremonies. I argue that citizenship ceremonies should be understood as techniques of subject-formation that aim at the modification and optimization of the self-understanding and behaviour of newly-naturalized citizens by confronting them with specific expectations. Based on a Critical Discourse Analysis of ceremony speeches observed in four locations in the United Kingdom and in Germany, this article demonstrates that local state representatives encourage naturalized citizens to transform themselves to become a political, economic and cultural asset to the nation-state. In other words, ceremony speakers suggest that naturalized citizens adopt a specific kind of subjectivity which I term—in allusion to its overstraining character—the Super Citizen. My analysis shows that, although the speech is the least regulated element in both the British and the German ceremonies, the subjectivity of the Super Citizen crosses regional and national borders as speakers in all four locations engaged in the call for the Super Citizen. This finding not only questions the predominant categorization in the literature of the UK and Germany as representing ‘civic’ versus ‘ethnic’ models of citizenship. It also points to the transnational prevalence of neo-liberal and neo-national discourses in which the Super Citizen subjectivity is deeply entangled.
      PubDate: 2017-08-21
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx053
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • The failures of ‘immigrant integration’: The gendered racialized
           production of non-belonging
    • Authors: Korteweg AC.
      Pages: 428 - 444
      Abstract: The concept of ‘immigrant integration’ performs two kinds of discursive work: (1) it turns the gaze of social scientists, politicians, and the engaged public away from the actual ways in which those labelled ‘immigrants’ are full members of immigrant-receiving societies, both in terms of participation and of belonging, and (2) the focus on immigrant integration leads to a failure to attend to various political, social and economic troubles of ‘host’ societies, both those that are and those that are not related to the increased presence of those labelled ‘immigrant’. Historicizing the concept of immigrant integration in post-colonial and neoliberal social relations and drawing from over 10 years of research on headscarf debates, Sharia law, the social and economic participation of ethnic-minority women, and so-called ‘honour-based’ violence, I show how the notion of immigrant integration produces gendered and racialized non-belonging. In conclusion, I argue for a return to a focus on inequalities writ large to analyse the ways in which the problems that become attached to ‘immigrants’ cross-cut multiple groups in any given society.
      PubDate: 2017-03-29
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnx025
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • Strangers in Our Midst: The Political Philosophy of Immigration. By David
           Miller
    • Authors: Ochoa Espejo P.
      Pages: 465 - 469
      Abstract: Strangers in Our Midst: The Political Philosophy of Immigration. By MillerDavid. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016. 218 pp. ISBN 978-0-67408-890-0.
      PubDate: 2017-02-01
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnw033
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2017)
       
  • A second generation of immigrant illegality studies
    • Authors: Ruszczyk SP; Yrizar Barbosa G.
      Pages: 445 - 456
      Abstract: Everyday Illegal: When Policies Undermine Immigrant Families. By Joanna Dreby. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2015. 287 pp. ISBN 978-0-520-28340-4.
      PubDate: 2016-10-08
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnw019
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2016)
       
  • Contesting “the” immigrant experience—diverse refugee and immigrant
           communities in the US
    • Authors: Ludwig B.
      Pages: 457 - 465
      Abstract: Unsettled: Cambodian Refugees in the NYC Hyperghetto. By TangEric. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2015. 234 pp. ISBN 978-1-43991-165-5.
      PubDate: 2016-12-07
      DOI: 10.1093/migration/mnw027
      Issue No: Vol. 5, No. 3 (2016)
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 54.81.116.187
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-