Conference Agenda

Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).

Session Overview
Panel 507: Citizenship, Migration and Governance
Tuesday, 03/Sep/2019:
1:05pm - 2:35pm

Session Chair: Tudi Kernalegenn, UC Louvain
Location: Room 12.09

Show help for 'Increase or decrease the abstract text size'

European Governance of Displacement from the Perspective of Connectivity and Mobility

Nuno Ferreira

University of Sussex, United Kingdom

This paper presents some preliminary results from the TRAFIG project. TRAFIG is a project that introduces a novel perspective on protracted displacement situations (PDS) that will improve the protection and resilience of refugees and enhance trust and cooperation between refugees and host communities. It considers the transnational and local connectivity of displaced people and host communities as well as their capability of mobility as socioeconomic and socio-psychological resources that displaced people use and upon which their resilience relies. The project will develop a rapid assessment tool to identify the most vulnerable groups in PDS and to analyse interactions between displaced and host communities. As an evidence-based tool for creating impact, it will support policymakers and practitioners to enhance the self-reliance of displaced people as well as host-refugees relations through tailored programming and policy development. The project is based on a novel concept of transnational figurations of displacement that combines the figuration model – a meso-level approach emphasizing the networks of interdependent human beings – with the transnationalism approach and state-of-the-art knowledge on forced displacement. Through comparative empirical research, both qualitative and quantitative, in camps and urban settings at sites in Asia, Africa, and Europe, TRAFIG will answer the following questions: (1) How do displaced people gain access to and make use of humanitarian and migration policies and programmes? (2) Why and how do displaced people live in vulnerable situations and sustain their livelihoods? How can policy support their self-reliance? (3) How do transnational networks shape refugees’ experiences and trajectories? (4) Which processes structure relations between displaced people and host communities? (5) What are the medium and longterm economic impacts of PDS?

In this presentation, we explore the European legal and policy framework within which the TRAFIG project will be carried out. More specifically, we will take stock of and understand the existing legal, policy and institutional frameworks addressing protracted displacement situations by the EU and member states and in individual EU countries. Furthermore, we will explore how these frameworks relate to the existing legal, policy and institutional frameworks addressing protracted displacement situations on the global level.

New Governance and Migration: Changing Priorities in EU Mobility Partnerships

Paul James Cardwell, Rachael Dickson

University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

Migration remains an area of importance in EU relations with other states. A number of initiatives have been pursued that see responsibility for managing migration become shared, such as the so-called EU-Turkey deal and the EU-Jordan compact. In this vein, a reinvigoration of mobility partnerships has occurred. Initially a tool of the European Neighbourhood Policy, these cooperation frameworks are being utilised with strategic countries of transit and origin such as Tunisia and Morocco. This paper analyses the cooperation and assistance within these frameworks using the lens of new modes of governance to assess the legal relationships and oversight contained. It will highlight a reliance on looser mechanisms with scope for adaptation to changing circumstances, and argue that a preference for this style of governance can have implications for rights and legal certainty.

Taking cooperation under the umbrella of the Tunisian and Moroccan mobility partnerships, the paper will examine developments in the areas of Visa Facilitation and Readmission, and show how assistance with migration has become a condition for further cooperation in other policy areas, such as trade and development. The paper will also present further analysis to show that more formal legal mechanisms could be used which would add clarity to the law, and offer preliminary conclusions as to risks the EU faces in prioritising looser governance arrangements.

Are Refugees Subjects of the European Union Law?

Sílvia Morgades-Gil

Universitat Pompeu Fabra

According to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union since the Van Gend and Loos judgment (1963), both States and individuals are subjects of EU law. This is one of the main distinguishing features of EU Law, in contrast with International law. The assertion of subjectivity of individuals in EU law was made before the creation of a European citizenship and even before the common market was established. With the Treaty of Amsterdam, the EU started to develop an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFS&J) through policies and legal instruments on police and judicial cooperation, migration and asylum. The legal status of third country nationals started to be addressed expressly in EU law, in order to facilitate the de facto freedom of movements of people in the Schengen area (the geographical area were the main objective of the AFS&J that is the mobility of people is effective). The idea that refugees were also subjects of EU Law because they are covered by the personal scope of EU norms on international protection is, however, not entirely devoid of doubts. In the paper, it will be defended that in parallel to the logic of European integration, an intergovernmental approach is still dominant in the AFS&J. This approach has an impact on the subjective position of refugees, as third country nationals, with regard to EU Law, and has negative effects regarding to the protection of Human Rights such as the right to an effective remedy.

The Securitization of EU External Migration Control and Mechanisms: The Manipulation behind the Cooperation

Amy Beth Manktelow

Nottingham Trent University, United Kingdom

Securitization is a precursor for manipulation as an actor is more willing to do what it can to protect itself from perceived threats, even is this means the manipulation of established norms and structures in a field. This paper will concentrate on the manipulative behaviours demonstrated by actors in the field of external migration control. Manipulation is not a behaviour or concept often discussed in International Relations. It had a brief period of popularity when academics such as de Rivera (1965), Janis (1982) and Riker (1986) who sought to understand the link between psychology and international actor’s behaviour. Little has progressed from this period, however, it is an important behaviour as it signifies a distinctly negative and potentially destructive element of a relationship between actors. As Bourdieu discusses the field is a set of actors whose behaviours determines their position within it (Bourdieu, 1984). If manipulative behaviour has the possibility of allowing an actor to self-determine their position it is a viable outcome that any actor would try to change a situation, policy or negotiation to their advantage. In context to external migration control in the EU, advantages that could be gained are changes to free movement, use of regional structures for national gain, reduction in the admittance of refugees, for example. Gaining advantage in these areas could also mean that states are able to reposition themselves closer to the most powerful actor of the field. Therefore, manipulative behaviour can have national and international advantages. The paper will be discussing some of the theories that have developed out of the concept of negative behaviours of international actors and the effect this has on foreign policy. It will then demonstrate how manipulation can be recognised in the domestic polices of the UK, as well as bilateral and multilateral agreements it holds with Member States and the EU. The paper will also analyse the relationship between the UK and Frontex by discussing the reports and operations that the UK participates in.