Conference Agenda

We start with the negative assumptions. What is not the circular migration both the event and the system? First, it is not a labour rotation system. Second, it is not a guest worker (temporary labour migration) scheme. What is the circular migration? It would at least be a third migratory step between two countries as an event.

Large scale consensus has been existing for more data production on the circulatory movements in the literature. There is no preference for information sources. We can state that the three possible perspectives (inward, outward, hybrid) of the exploration of international circular migration are equivalent each other from general methodological point of views. Two sorts of human circulation systems exist: homogenous and heterogenous. The periodicity of individual’s moves differs from each other in the heterogenous system. This leads us to the complex systems of mobilities where from tourism via commuting to migration a lot of kinds of human spatial mobilities connect one another within an individual’ s mobility history. In general the creation of new personal categories of spatial mobilities lag behind the highly changing socio-spatial reality This is, why, we propose a new (legal) status of mobile people, circulator. We hope that the new status imagined will be not a simple extension of the lexicon of circular migration in the context of growing xenofobic attitude and rhetoric in receiving countries if we utilize inward perspective on the homogenous quantitative data from administrative sources.

It seems to me that the creation of general and particular circulator statuses is a classical multidisciplinary and multisectoral challenge (see the row for instance: first time immigrant, first time emigrant, return immigrant /circulator/ from inward perspective). However, the potential legal status of international circulator could be situated somewhere between temporary immigrants and quasi-citizens from the angle of nations and/or integrations.

This study examines the role of multi-level governance in the context of immigration and integration policies. It explores the functions of national and sub-national governments (provinces) in managing migration and integration of immigrants, with a focus on Austria as one of the European host countries. Austria has been involved in international migration in many ways for over a century. Today 12.5% of the population have foreign nationality and almost 20% have a migration background.

The countries of Europe face different migratory challenges. Previous research has shown that migration is one of the main factors that shape and accelerate the development of urban areas. On the other hand, increased mobility has negative effects as well. Some countries pursue restrictive strategies while others allow easier access to labour markets and social systems. In general, the effective integration of immigrants is one of the key factors for progress in European convergence. The elements of the European migration policy aim to harmonise legislation and management tools and maximise the positive impact of migration flows while at the same time finding solutions to the related problems. A cross-country comparison demonstrates that these instruments and solutions still differ: There are European countries that have restrictive policies, while others are open to multiculturalism and facilitate access to equal rights, including political and social entitlements. An analysis of the strategies of the traditional host countries reveals a number of factors underlying the differences in the immigrant integration and labour market performance in these countries. Although regional differences and local responsibilities have become particularly important in recent decades, the literature focuses primarily on the national level or on capitals. It is also about the inclusion of immigrants from different perspectives. This may be because naturalisation and immigration policies are always decided at the national level. However, policies at the local level have a more direct impact.

Discussions point out, that Austrian policy on settlement and naturalisation is one of the most restrictive in Europe and take only partly into account the integration performance of immigrants, their individual abilities and life circumstances. The sub-national authorities of Austria have, however, recognised the importance of the integration of immigrants. Various integration instruments have been developed – in Graz already from the appearance of the first guest workers. Only from the year 2000 can we speak of nationwide intensive integration efforts. The cooperative attitude of the provincial governments and the priority of information transfer among the actors has positive effects on the labour market and, as a consequence, on the social as well as the economic development of a region.

Based on secondary data research and analysis of concepts and other government documents, the first part of the study summarises the structure of modern migration movements into Austria with special reference to the provinces. The second part explains how the federal government and the provinces perceive and control immigration and shows interesting similarities and differences between and within the levels.

The human mobilities have a new dimension since Second World War. The new global economy, transnational companies exponentially growing the volume of transport, tourism and migration. These processes have a serious side effect on environment, natural resources. Economic crises, wars, climate change, depletion of resources and unlooked-for diseases for instance COVID-19 give some new challenges for Mankind.

First aim of this presentation is to provide a short general introduction into some consequences of increasing level of mobilities from sustainability point of. The natural and built environments have changed dramatically in the last 60-70 years. How can we tackle that in context global environmental problems? Which expectation has changed after latest world economic crisis, COVID-19 pandemic, and war conflicts in the context of repeat human mobilities? The role of mobilities is examined not only as the environmental questions but also economic, social, and political challenges. Although it is well known that if one of macro force changes it can modify other force. However, the complex outcome of changes is intrinsically unknown. Even though predictable future has more and more extremely importance from the global to the local levels. Outline of some scenarios for the next years are involved.

Second aim of this contribution is to discuss ‘the sustainable circular mobilities paradox’ in the context of mobility-stasis axes. This is a new idea. We are aware of its relatively harsh character. So we create an abstract proto-model for spatially visualisation. The deep disputes (dialogues) are needed in order to develop some sophisticated assumptions and answers. We hope the audience will form some reflections and critics about this potential paradox.

Following years of economic upheavals started in 2008 (great economic crisis) and 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic) plus 2022 (war in Ukraine) the European Union and its member states did not find reliable answers to some negative effects of downturns at different spatial levels. This was highly true in East part of Europe, in the ex-socialist countries. Regional differences increased at the expanse of rural areas all crisis times. The inefficient efforts to revitalize rural countryside echoes new solutions to be empirical and theoretical bases in the past and present days. The main aim of the presentation is to investigate on the necessary elements of employment sustainability for circular people in the light of three different sorts of crises. Based on an applied research series conducted 2012-2022, the previous publication of the research results and the relevant literature the authors synthetized a general model inspired by geographical spheres for practical use of stakeholders and policymakers at regional level. The parts of the model, the interrelations, the mechanisms, and the functions between the elements will be refined under the umbrella of potential economic downturn, nowadays. Our hypothesises and guesses erected mainly from Hungarian case studies articulated in the conference are highly disputable, and we would like to discuss them with the audience.

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

The circularity is a recurring pattern of spatial mobilities in consecutive time periods of human history starting repeat moves in ancient times through nomadism till present days (Petersen 1975; Manning, 2013). However, multiple residential movements from one home to another have become increasingly frequent during the epoch of globalisation. We launched into a fierce polemic against the narrow European conceptualisation on circular migration ahead. In this presentation we try to synthetize the characteristic differences between the recognition of circular migration as a system compared to an event (a type) in the most recent literature. From analytical and practical reasons, firstly, we argue for the conceptualization of system nature of multiple return migration, namely circular migration as a whole entity. Secondly, the last phase of any circular migration system can be recognised as a simple event of migratory process which could be typified as a part of the system. In other words, the individualised migrations by serial numbers could be classified by usual migration types. The last individual migration with serial number could be classified any migration types. But this is not valid for a whole circular migration system due to their potentially mixed motivational elements. Only the classification of last sequence of system has recent importance from practical purposes. For instance, the migrants’ actual legal status would be an example in the receiving country.

In general, two sorts of human circulation systems exist: homogenous and heterogenous. The periodicity of individuals’ moves differs from each other in the heterogenous system. This leads us to the complex systems of mobilities where from tourism via commuting to migration a lot of kinds of human spatial mobilities connect one another or happen/ work in parallel within an individual’ s mobility history during his/her lifetime. The homogenous human circulation system consists of the one kind of moves made by the same persons with similar time rhythm from statistical angles within stages of individuals’ life course. Based on the Hungarian and other research on homogenous system (Illés, Kincses 2012 2018; Illés 2015 2021; White 2013 2014; Weber, Saarela 2017 2019; Monti 2020), it seems to us that the practice of life-long international circular migration characterises few circulators. The emergence of circular migration is more frequent some life stages differentiated by age, previous migratory experience and next aspiration. We may hypothesise with high probability, that the same conclusion could be valid in homogenous circular system of tourists, commuters and temporary migrants. However, the heterogenous circular mobility system may function during whole individual life cycle due to one of the symptoms of human beings on move.

Migratory movements have become more fluid and dispersed nowadays with the increase of intensity rates in different societal strata (Górny 2017; Cohen 2018). Circular migration is only a fraction of territorial mobility systems. The closure of circular migration in temporary migration arena was a conceptual fault because its proponents overlooked permanent circular migration. The permanent migration had longer tempo than temporary one from the point of view of time order. The terms temporary and temporariness were blurred. (Skeldoon 2012). Moreover, practical disadvantages have developed from the simplified concept of circular migration. The rigid temporary frame of circulation attracted the shortcomings of guest worker schemes as the representation of international temporary migration (Doomernik 2013). So, the proponents were caught in one’s own trap. Scholars argued the antihumanitarian rotation system of labour based on temporary migration scheme (Standing 1984; Deshingkar 2008). In fact, circular and rotational systems are completely different from each other. The final unit of these two systems were the same: individual. However, the individuals are changed in the rotation cycle/system, but the same individual moves within circular cycle/system. In long-term, it is possible that a rotated individual may return to the receiving country, but she/he is treated as new immigrants before substitution with someone else, a human being, who must be exploited from the economic aim of productivity/efficiency. With the utilisation of rotation scheme new and newer workers could be employed and could be exploited without considering the interest of workers in order to maximize the employer’s financial profit (Standing 2014).

In order to avoid the shortcomings of guest worker and rotation systems a new legal status must be created and implemented at global, regional, national and local levels, namely circulator.

It is worth noting that the creation of new personal categories is lagging behind the present of highly changing socio-spatial reality This is, why, we propose a new legal status of mobile people, circulator. What is interesting here as a wide spectrum of challenges may be foreseen. Circulator as a natural person and circulation as an event-system like process could be recognized within lots of spatial mobility forms and large variety of defining areas, as well. The legal formalisation is the task of representants of law, undoubtfully. However, it would be useful to cooperate with other social sciences far from mentioning in this article. It engages with the issue of multilevel governance of migration, one of the global migration research agendas underlined by Anna Triandafyllidou and Alexandra Richard-Guay (2019).