Speaking with one voice? The European Union's global approach to migration and mobility and the limits of international migration cooperation

ABSTRACT

Migration is comparatively weakly regulated at the international level. States are reluctant to cede sovereignty over international migration and negotiations between rich destination countries in the north and sending countries in the south must overcome asymmetries of interests. For this reason, issue-linkage is typically required to achieve north–south cooperation. This paper examines the European Union's (EU) Global Approach to Migration and Mobility as a framework for international migration cooperation. The paper argues that institutional complexity and political dynamics internal to the EU limit its capacity to reach agreement with third countries. Three internal factors are examined: contrasting approaches of the Commission and Council to the external dimension; diversity of member states’ interests in migration policy; and the different policy agendas of the European agencies. These factors result in an approach to external migration relations that is limited in scope and characterised by variable participation. Despite its apparent potential to leverage agreements from third countries, the EU emerges as an unpromising vehicle for international migration cooperation.     

In the shadow of fortress Europe? Impacts of European migration governance on Slovenia,Croatia and Macedonia

ABSTRACT

This article analyses European integration's effects on migration and border security governance in Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia in the context of ‘governed interdependence’. We show how transgovernmental networks comprising national and EU actors, plus a range of other participants, blur the distinction between the domestic and international to enable interactions between domestic and international policy elites that transmit EU priorities into national policy. Governments are shown to be ‘willing pupils’ and ‘policy takers’, adapting to EU policy as a pre-condition for membership. This strengthened rather than weakened central state actors, particularly interior ministries. Thus, in a quintessentially ‘national’ policy area, there has been a re-scaling and re-constitution of migration and border security policy. To support this analysis, social network analysis is used to outline the composition of governance networks and analyse interactions and power relations therein.     

Who do migrant associations represent? The role of ‘ethnic deservingness’ and legal capital in migrants’ rights claims in Turkey

Considering that established migrant associations often play an active role in migrants’ rights advocacy, the relationship between them and the growing numbers of irregular migrants needs careful scrutiny. Looking at the encounters between irregular Bulgarian Turkish migrants and associations established by their co-ethnics who hold Turkish citizenship in Turkey, our ethnographic evidence shows that co-ethnic migrant associations mobilise the legal frame of ‘ethnic deservingness’ with the intention of welcoming co-ethnics to the Turkish homeland. In the absence of other formal organisations for rights advocacy, associations’ appeals to this frame emerge as a civic resource for the irregular newcomers in their permanent residency claims. At the same time, the same frame hides unequal power relations within co-ethnic communities, that is, newcomers’ peripheral positions within associations and the economic costs of filing claims via associations. This situation creates a representational gap in the associational context between its active members with higher legal capital and irregular newcomers with lower legal capital. Tackling the problem of representation determined by the legal hierarchy, this study questions whether migrant associations should still be considered important political actors when undocumented/irregular migrants outnumber regulars—especially with regard to the immediate political/legal actions they require.     

‘Refugees welcome?’ The interplay between perceived threats and general concerns on the acceptance of refugees – a factorial survey approach in Germany

The on-going migration of refugees to Europe has fuelled debates about the indigence of refugees and the perceived legitimacy of individual claims for asylum in different receptive countries. With a substantial body of research that has investigated the antecedents of attitudes towards immigrants, evidence on whether those underlying assumptions hold true for refugees as well remains scarce. The paper applies the framework of Intergroup Threat Theory to arrive at competing hypotheses with regard to the acceptance levels of refugees. We use pooled data from two probabilistic samples drawn in the German city of Dresden and apply a confounded factorial survey design to extend previous research on attitudes towards refugees. We find that natives perceive political persecution and war as justified reasons for seeking asylum in Germany, while socio-demographic characteristics of respondents and refugees are of minor importance. Foremost, the individual level of respondent’s fear of crime represents a crucial moderator of the perception of refugees as threatening.