Tutorial 3: Border control and unintended consequences Flashcards
Why and in what way do current governments try to regulate and control international migration?
Why? To monitor in and out-migration + Political fear of threat to state sovereignty + keep voters engaged
In what way? Restrictive regulation policies: border enforcement, exit policies, integration policies, legal and stay policies
Border control = not restrictive but might be stimulating
Can we understand the gap between political rhetoric and actual policy outcomes: explanations?
3 gaps: Discursive, implementation & efficacy
4 possible explanations for such gaps:
Neo-Marxists
Client politics perspective
Embedded legal constraint perspective
External legal constraint
What are possible unintended consequences of stricter border controls?
o Categorical substitution
o Spatial substitution
o Reverse flow substitution
o Inter temporal substitution
o Relation between migratory movements and the costs of migration?
Border control: idea if costs = rising => people do not migrate (neoclassical approach) -> however migration = still happens
What are migrant actions and outcomes at the border, with regard to restrictive border enforcement?
H1A: shift in geography of crossing border stems from border enforcement -> decrease crossing at traditional location
H2A: increase in payed guides/coyotes stems from border enforcement
H3A: border enforcement increased costs of migration + increased costs coyotes
H4A: border control only modest effect on likelihood of apprehension + apprehended migrants = free to try again
H5A: more enforcement => more death
Conclusion: border enforcement => modest effect on probability of apprehension and no effect on probability of entry + did effect migrant’s behavior
Does restrictive border enforcement lead to less migration?
No, merely leads to different routes, payed guides, …. ->
What effect does border enforcement have on migrant departure and return decisions, with regard to restrictive border enforcement?
H6A: initiation of undocumented migration = not reduced by greater border enforcement -> contextual factors which increase likelihood:
- employment growth and US
- not related to the availability of visas
- GDP growth
- not related to Mexican wage rates
-> contextual factors which decrease likelihood:
- human capital -> the more years of education and occupational skills
- ownership of land
- towns and cities > rural villages
H7A: rising border enforcement => lower probability of returning to Mexico -> contextual factors which lower likelihood return:
- employment growth & rising wages
- lower homicide rate!
- low wages in Mexico
- human capital
=> from male migration to family migration
H8A: border enforcement => lower likelihood of return migration from an additional trip
What are some migration policies regarding the results of the study by Massey, showing the unintended consequences of border enforcement
- Do nothing
- Accept Mexican migration as a natural component of ongoing economic integration under NAFTA
- Manage migration in ways that benefit both nations while protecting to the degree possible rights and interests of both migrants and natives
- Policies encouraging return migration ->remitting US earnings, paying tax refunds, making legal immigrants eligible for US entitlement for even if they return to
What does control mean related to states?
= ability of states to monitor population movement through administrative tools such as population registers, residence permits and censuses
-> NOT prevention/restriction of migration
Why is migration seen as a ‘safety valve’ to origin countries?
Migration = ‘safety valve’: to reduce discontent and generate remittances
What is the exit revolution?
- industrialization/capitalism => decrease the need for employers to prevent workers from leaving
=> exit revolution: started in Europe => huge transatlantic emigration of Europeans between 1820 and 1920
Demonstrate the ambiguous relationship between origin countries and emigrants?
PRO:
o take active steps to support citizens’ welfare and rights in destination countries Eg. Mexican state: defends rights + helps obtain ID
o diaspora engagement policies -> encourage remittances and investments + political causes
o Expatriate voting
o Eg. India policy: give special status to Indian heritage population
HOWEVER:
o often spy on emigrants out of fear of political activism Eg. authoritarian emigrants to democracies!
Demonstrate the potential clash between expatriate voting and integration policies
The main clash between origin and destination countries:
- an extension of policies through participation in origin country elections -> symbolic + instrumental function
=> tensions w destination countries:
* Infringement on sovereignty
* Fuel xenophobic discourses -> migration fosters double loyalties and unwillingness to integrate
How can migration be a weapon of weak state?
- “migration weapon”: Eg. Turkey: used large-scale refugee migration from territories into Europe as lever to negotiate major financial concessions + promise of future visa free travel for turks into EU
Demonstrate why immigration policies are seen as a tool of state power
- Hard power: Immigration -> boost eco growth -> Eg. Australia’s post WWII policy of ‘populate or perish’
- Soft power: ability of states to achieve foreign policy and security objectives through political and cultural relations Eg. foreign students in USSR and US -> help build long-term linkages I Eg. Morocco: scholarships to sub-Saharan students => “friends of Morocco”
Define migration policies
= laws, regulations and measures that states enact and implement w the explicit objective of affecting the volume, origin, direction and internal composition
What are the 4 migration policy categories?
- policy areas
- citizenship
- migrant categories
- policy tools
-> in depth:
(1)- 4 main policy areas:
1. border controls: policies aimed at securing national territory
2. legal entry and stay policies
3. integration policies: regulate post-entry rights and integration of migrant groups into destination societies
4. exit policies -> forced/voluntary return or exit of migrants/citizens
(2) citizenship or national origin of migrants
-> Eg. “whites only”
-> Eg. EU
(3) migrant categories
-> higher/lower skilled, family, refugees, intl students, …
-> Eg. Canada: points based system
-> Eg. “wok-agreement”: legal immigration of Asian cooks who remain tied to their employer
Examine the migration policy toolbox
- border controls: policies aimed at securing national territory
o border surveillance technology, walls, carrier sanctions, ID documents, detention, … - legal entry and stay policies
o work visa, immigrant quotas, points-based system, refugee resettlement programs, … - integration policies: regulate post-entry rights and integration of migrant groups into destination societies
o citizenship courses, education, access to public housing and healthcare - exit policies -> forced/voluntary return or exit of migrants/citizens
o deportations, exit visa systems, …
Why is there a gap between what politicians say and the implementation?
- limited willingness of politicians to implement
- practical, financial and moral challenges
Define the 4 levels to analyze migration policies
- official policy discourse
- actual migration policies on paper
- implementation of policies on the ground
- Policy (migration) outcomes
What are the 3 policy gaps?
- discursive gap -> gap between states’ objectives and discourse
- implementation gap -> gap between policies on paper and their actual implementation
- efficacy gap -> degree to which implemented policies = intended effect on volume, timing, and ‘selection’ of migration
What is the explanation for policy gaps?
- neo-Marxist approaches
* Theory? Immigration policies = part of class struggle
* Explanation? Gap => making native workers believe foreigners take away jobs and depress wages => prevention of realizing shared interest of obtaining higher wages, more job security and better working conditions! - client politics perspective
* Theory? Process by which small interest groups gain disproportionate influence on political processes benefits at expense of larger public
* Explanation? Immigration policy = liberal due to effective lobbying of economic interests - embedded legal constraints
* Theory? Processes through which liberal democracies put legal constraints on power of executive to control immigration
* Explanation? Constraints limit governments prerogatives in formulating immigration policies - external legal constraints
* Theory? Countries adherence to international agreements and conventions protecting human rights and rights of migrants
* Explanation? International regime => constrain immigration policymaking of European democracies
What is the liberal paradox?
= to maintain competitive advantage, states must remain open to trade, investment and migration + movement of people involves greater political risks to maintain sovereign control of their borders
Is legalization a policy failure or policy tool?
- legalization = evidence of governmental inability to prevent the irregular entry of stay or evidence that sovereign states = able to adapt to realities of international population movements
Opponents vs proponents:
- opponents: legalization = undermines rule of law
- proponents: legalization = improvement in migrants’ overall socioeconomic and employment prospects
What are some unintended effects of policies
- Spatial substitution
o Diversion of migration via other routes or to other destinations
o Eg. Restrictions by France, BE, NL => diversification of destinations to Spain and Italy - Categorical substitution
o (Reorientation towards other legal or illegal channels ??)
o Changing of categories Eg. “become” Syrian -> category jumping
o Eg. boat migration - Inter-temporal substitution
o Affecting timing of migration in the expectation or fear of future tightening of policies
o “now or never” migration
o Eg. Dutch migration: Surinamese population migrated to NL before NL declared independence of Suriname - Reverse flow substitution
o Discouraging return and encouraging settlement
