Search

Begin New Search Topic Migration Publication Year within 10 Years

521. Refuges: Benediction or Curse To Cameroon's Economy, 1982-2017

Author:
D. N. Keming
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
African Heritage Institution (AfriHeritage)
Abstract:
The present study focuses on the contribution of refugees to the growth of Cameroon’s economy. Its focus spanned from 1982 when the UNHCR country office was officially established to 2017 with the collapse of Boko Haram’s pressure on Cameroon. It assesses the benefits and liabilities of refugees to Cameroon’s economy within the time frame. This is experimented through the size of the refugee population, capital transfer, employment opportunities, commerce, and the agriculture industry. These themes were arrived at with the help of primary, secondary, and tertiary data; and construed with mixed methodologies. The work reveals that on a comparative score, refugees are largely a blessing than a curse to the economy of Cameroon. In spite of their constructive role, they also constitute, to a negligible extent, liabilities to the development of Cameroon. The paper therefore argue that refugees should seize to be seen as burdens, but rather as powerful economic actors if properly exploited by recipient countries. Although they may constitute major security and social problems like theft, robbery, population explosion and health challenges, they are manageable. Besides, even without refugees, no country is devoid of security and social challenges.
Topic:
Security, Migration, Refugee Issues, Refugees, and Social Order
Political Geography:
Africa and Cameroon

522. Turkey’s Refugee Policy under the Shadow of the Neo-ottomanism: A Source of Silent Conflict?

Author:
Gülsen Kaya Osmanbaşoğlu
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Academic Inquiries
Institution:
Sakarya University (SAU)
Abstract:
Along with Turkey’s changing refugee policy from the Eurocentric, secular nation-state ideology to the neo-Ottomanist one on the state level, there also exist main handicaps on the micro power level concerning the successful coordination of the refugee issue with full respect of the human rights. Economic, cultural and especially political factors play a role in the relationship between Syrians and Turkish residents. Fragmentation within the Syrian community living in Turkey is also evident. On the other hand, different from the state policy, Turkish people implicitly show their reluctance towards this migration wave without creating a social turmoil. In this line, it is suggested here that Neo-Ottomanism, as a rising trend, helps a considerable majority of the society to take a moderate stance towards the immigration flux.
Topic:
Human Rights, Migration, Syrian War, and Neo-Ottomanism
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Syria

523. The Rise of Metropolitanism: The International Order and Sub-national Actors

Author:
Kelly M. McFarland
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Abstract:
The growth and international clout of cities and sub-state actors has been unparalleled in recent decades. These players seek agency in the international arena, forming networks for cross-border cooperation on issues like climate change, health, transnational crime, and migration. ISD’s working group report, “The Rise of Metropolitanism: The International Order and Sub-national Actors,” explores how mayors, governors, and other sub-state actors both challenge and contribute to diplomacy at the national and international levels. How will these new networks find their voice in the international arena?
Topic:
Climate Change, Crime, Diplomacy, Health, International Cooperation, Migration, Transnational Actors, Urban, and Cities
Political Geography:
Global Focus

524. The Future of Mobility and Migration within and from Sub-Saharan Africa

Author:
Loren B. Landau, Caroline Wanjiku-Kihato, and Hannah Postel
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
African migration—its drivers, dynamics, and consequences—increasingly features in European and global policy debates.Through an examination of existing data on African mobility, this report argues there are few reasons to expect dramatic changes in the sources, directions, or nature of migration within and from sub-Saharan Africa. In the coming 30 years, economic inequality (within the continent and between Africa and Europe), climate change, persecution, and conflict will continue to encourage ever-diversifying movements to cities, to neighboring countries, and beyond Africa. The vast majority of those moving will stay within their countries of citizenship or move to neighboring countries; about one-fifth of sub-Saharan migrants will seek passage to Europe, Australasia, or North America. Although the proportion of Africans migrating internationally may not substantially increase in the decades ahead, the onset of the continent’s demographic boom will result in many more Africans on the move. Ironically, current development investments intended to sedentarize would-be migrants or reduce fertility (and hence the number of potential migrants) are only likely to intensify movements. For sub-Saharan African economies to absorb the surplus labor, African states would almost universally need to sustain two decades of economic growth at a pace previously unseen in global history.
Topic:
Migration, Displacement, Mobility, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, and Sub-Saharan Africa

525. South Korea’s Migrant Policies and Democratic Challenges After the Candlelight Movement

Author:
Darcie Druadt
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
South Korea’s deliberate liberalization of migration controls has facilitated the entry and stay of new types of residents from various ethnic, political, and national backgrounds. With this demographic shift comes new questions for the South Korean polity in terms of its expectations of rights and duties of residents in the country. South Korean citizenship has, until the past decade, been largely premised on belonging in two fields: shared ethnic descent and contributions to the nationstate development project. However, new residents, who are ethnically diverse and who contribute to the national project, are seeking greater rights and social welfare provisions just as Korean nationals are ambivalent about their inclusion in the democratic body politic. As a result, the migrant policies bring into sharper relief the contours of democratic discourse in South Korea today. Drawing from six months of immersive fieldwork conducted in South Korea, this paper analyzes the relevance of migrant rights and expectations in understanding the broader democratic challenges in South Korea. Examining the government’s institutionalization of certain migrant “categories”—namely, temporary labor migrants and so-called “marriage migrants”— the paper argues that South Korea’s treatment of diversity and the protection of individual rights should be analyzed more deeply to understand current trends in South Korean civil society and democracy.
Topic:
Civil Society, Demographics, Migration, Immigration, and Democracy
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and Korea

526. Ayselin Gözde Yıldız, The European Union’s Immigration Policy: Managing Migration in Turkey and Morocco (Book Review)

Author:
Gül Oral
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Migration has been an important reason for externalization of the EU’s policies towards nonmember third countries. Throughout the 2000s, the European Union has advanced its efforts for externalization of its immigration policies with the aim of providing security, stability, and prosperity in the neighborhood due to emerging demographic, economic and security problems. The book aims to conceptualize the external dimension of the EU’s immigration policy and its implications for non-member third countries by carrying out a comparative case study for assessing to what extent the EU has achieved to externalize its immigration policy. Accordingly, the author examines why the EU has been forming an external dimension to its immigration policy and how it aspires to impress the immigration policies of non-member countries beyond its borders (p.2). While evaluating the external dimension of the EU’s policy and its implication for transit countries, Yıldız takes into consideration security and development aspects of migration and discusses which of those aspects have become more influential for forming the EU’s external actions and practices.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Migration, Immigration, European Union, and Book Review
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Morocco

527. Disrupted: The Migration Issue

Author:
Katie Washington
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Feminist Foreign Policy
Abstract:
This issue focuses on the theme of Immigration, Refugees & Trafficking, which was chosen by our members and supporters. Our contributors challenge the problematic, and often racist, Western-centric approaches to immigration, refugees, and trafficking, and unpack the complex connections between gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality that are embedded in the lived realities of the people impacted directly and heavy-handedly by current foreign policy on the issue. It brings together the voices of academics, practitioners, students, and individuals who are currently living in “perpetual wait” waiting for asylum claims to be formalised. Alongside our written contributions, you will find artwork and poetry engaging with this theme. A feminist foreign policy brings all voices to the table, through whichever medium they choose to express themselves, challenging the academic and un -inclusive paradigm it is embedded in. However, the views and opinions expressed in this issue represent the respective contributors and not CFFP as an organisation; our goal is simply providing a platform for those voices, particularly those that have previously been marginalised, for open discussion and debate. After much consideration, we have recently made several changes to Disrupted, namely transitioning from a print-journal to a digital journal. You will still be able to purchase copies of the journal at our events, but to improve accessibility, we have decided to manage Disrupted primarily online. This means that we can focus our efforts on reaching more people, readers and contributors, and ensuring we are providing a much-needed feminist critique to foreign policy. Thank you for supporting this publication. Disrupted is a volunteer-run CFFP UK project and in alignment with our overarching organisational goals, we are proud to lead the way in making foreign policy more feminist, more transparent, and more intersectional. With your support, we’re amplifying a different and more nuanced conversation that can better inform policy decisions and begin to alleviate global inequality. We hope you enjoy and learn from this journal, but we also urge you to consider contributing to our next issue. From articles to artwork, we are always looking for new contributors and we are eager to hear (and see) new voices and fresh perspectives.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Gender Issues, Migration, Women, and Feminism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

528. The gendered and racialized politics of risk analysis. The case of Frontex

Author:
Saskia Stachowitsch and Julia Sachseder
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
This article develops a feminist postcolonial approach to risk analysis as an increasingly central security practice in the EU’s emerging border management and security regime. For this purpose, we theorize risk analysis as a sense-making practice embedded within colonial power relations. As such, risk analysis problematizes migrants and migration in gendered and racializedwaysthatmakethemamenabletobordermanagementandother, potentiallyviolentsecuritypractices,suchasdetentions,returns,surveillance, and Search and Rescue. In an exemplary frame analysis of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency’s (Frontex) risk analysis report 2016, we show how conceptualizations of risks and solutions by this key actor are informed by gendered and racialized framings of 1) chaos and violence, 2) exploitationoftheEUeconomicandwelfaresystem,and3)humanitarianism towards 'vulnerable'? migrants. With this study, we seek to strengthen feminist and postcolonial interventions into critical security studies on knowledge, power, and expertise. By conceptualizing risk analysis as political, this article pushes critical security theory beyond understandings of security as socially constructed and towards systematically unpacking the meanings of (in)security as implicated in the reproduction of gendered and racialized power relations.
Topic:
Security, Migration, Post Colonialism, European Union, Feminism, Borders, and Risk
Political Geography:
Europe

529. Who Owns What? – Free Trade Policies, Migration Management and the Ambiguity of “Joint Ownership”

Author:
Sherin Gharib
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
The concept of joint ownership has become a buzzword since the 1990s not only in strategies of international organisations, such as the United Nations (UN), the WorldBank (WB) or the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but also in European Union (EU)foreign policy (Ejdus, 2017). Since the launch of the European Neighbourhood Policy(ENP) in 2004 joint ownership has been defined as one of its main principles.Accordingly, the EU states that “joint ownership of the process, based on the awareness of shared values and common interests, is essential. The EU does not seek to impose priorities or conditions on its partners” (European Commission, 2004, p.8). It continues by holding that there “can be no question of asking partners to accept a pre-determined set of priorities. These will be defined by common consent and will thus vary from country to country. The endorsement of these plans by the highest instance of the agreements in place will give added weight to the agreed priorities for action” (European Commission, 2004, p. 8). Thus, EU policies should be set within a partnership relation between the EU, and its counterparts and priorities should be defined by common consent. The EU aims to engage “governments and all leading local stakeholders, including national parliaments” (European Commission, 2010c cited in Jonasson, 2013, p. 47). The importance of joint ownership was reconfirmed within the revised ENP in 2015,where the EU has declared that “differentiation and greater mutual ownership will be the hallmark of the new ENP, recognising that not all partners aspire to EU rules and standards, and reflecting the wishes of each country concerning the nature and focus ofits partnership with the EU” (European Commission, 2015a, p. 2). The goal, as the EUhas claimed, is to increase cooperation with neighbouring countries to an eye-to-eye level and to follow an approach based on “both partners’ needs and EU interests”(European Commission, 2017). The revised ENP again acknowledges the importance of involving relevant members of civil society as well as social partners in consultations(European Commission, 2015a, p. 3). Despite the appearance of joint ownership in several EU documents and its use as an example of an inclusive approach, the definition offered remains quite vague. Thus, it is unclear to what extent governments, local stakeholders, civil society and social partners should co-own certain policies. Whose considerations should count and should joint ownership be operationalised within the decision-making or implementation process?How can the operationalisation of the concept be evaluated? This policy paper critically investigates the EU’s concept of joint ownership. Drawing on two case studies, namely free trade policies and migration management, the paper 7PAPERSIEMed. Who Owns What? – Free Trade Policies, Migration Management and the Ambiguity of “Joint Ownership” analyses the implications and limitations of the EU’s partnership relation with its southern neighbourhood. The paper focuses mainly on the Egyptian, Tunisian and Moroccan cases. Due to the vague definition of “joint ownership” and in order to be able to analyse the two case studies, the paper suggests, based on EU documents, two types of ownership: 1) governmental ownership and 2) societal ownership. Using this conceptualisation, the paper analyses the involvement of different stakeholders and the main beneficiaries of EU free trade policies and migration management. It argues that there is a lack of governmental as well as societal ownership within the two EU tools, Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs) and Mobility Partnerships (MP) as it is mainly the EU that sets priorities, norms and standards to be adopted by partner countries. Government representatives and civil society actors from Mediterranean Partner Countries (MPCs) perceive their relationship with the EUas asymmetric rather than based on an eye-to-eye level (personal communication with Tunisian and Egyptian officials and civil society actors, 2016-2017). The perceived reluctance to fully engage MPCs – government officials and social actors – in the implementation of EU policies has led to their growing mistrust of the EU. If ownership is applied at all, then it is often reduced to a state-centric approach even though the EU is rhetorically attached to the inclusion of actors going beyond the government. The lack of “societal” ownership becomes evident as consultative mechanisms suggested and applied by the EU to include grassroots organisations have in most cases no implications for policy-drafting processes. Thus, there seems to be a gap between what the EU refers to in official documents and the implementation on the ground. In this case, both MPs and free trade policies might exclusively serve the interests of the government and linked elites in the region – this depends on their ability to “own” certain policies rather than addressing the needs at the grassroots, such as poverty reduction or the creation of job opportunities. In this respect, the legitimacy and sustainability of EU policies is at risk (Ejdus, 2017;Dworkin & Wesslau, 2015). The paper proceeds as follows: the first part investigates the concept of ownership,illustrates several dimensions of its ambiguity, and analyses the EU’s operationalisation of the concept. Subsequently, the paper sheds light on the limits of ownership in the realm of free trade policies in general and DCFTAs in particular.The following section investigates the concept of migration management and MPs. The analysis is based on primary and secondary literature review as well as interviews conducted by the author with Egyptian and Tunisian officials and civil society actors, as well as with EU representatives in 2016 and 2017.
Topic:
Migration, Regional Cooperation, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Europe, Tunisia, and Mediterranean

530. Global Perspectives on Humanitarianism: When human welfare meets the political and security agendas

Author:
Ninna Nyberg Sørensen, Sine Plambech, Paolo Cuttitta, Gioconda Herrera, Ulla Dalum Berg, and Sealing Cheng
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
Concern about the politisation of humanitarian principles and action is not new. As conflicts and emergencies have become ever more complex and the desire to hinder derived effects of cross-border movements by just about any means possible has intensified, humanitarian organisations and the work they do have nevertheless attracted increasing critical scrutiny, both within the organisations as well as from various external quarters including both governments and academics (albeit on different grounds). The Report ‘Global perspectives on humanitarianism: When human welfare meets the political and security agendas’ is based oncomprehensive research undertaken in Europe, Latin America and Asia. It takesissue with various questions and dilemmas emerging from humanitarian relief practices. Can you avoid political instrumentalization when reducing harm withoutchanging the structures that produce harm in the first place (e.g. poverty, war or insecurity)?What happens to humanitarianism when those in need of protection have different perspectives on the kinds of interventions that would relive them from suffering (e.g. access to asylum and work rather than food provisions)? And what critical lessons can be learned from exploring the wider effects of rescuing migrants from high-risk journeys as part of the governance of global migration? Apart from an introduction to humanitarianism in the context of global migration and refugee movements, the report consists of three individual case studies focusing on respectively humanitarianism enacted on the maritime EU border in the central Mediterranean; a variety of recent state-defined migration crises in Latin America deriving from Cuban, Haitian and Venezuelan mass migrations combined with massive forced return movements of nationals deported from the United States and Europe; and, finally, the tensions between asylum seekers and the organisations that pledge to assist them in Hong Kong. Together, the contributions raise important questions of the directions humanitarianism may take during moments defined as ‘crisis’.
Topic:
Humanitarian Aid, Migration, and Refugee Issues
Political Geography:
Asia, South America, and Latin America