Search

Begin New Search Topic Border Control Political Geography Global Focus

1. Using Risk Analysis to Shape Border Management: A Review of Approaches during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author:
Kelley Lee, Julianne Piper, and Jennifer Fang
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
The near universal adoption of travel measures by governments to control the spread of COVID-19 has proved controversial during the pandemic. National responses have been highly varied and frequently changing, and the use of travel measures—ranging from advisories and screening to quarantine, testing, immunity certification, and restrictions on entry—has been poorly coordinated across jurisdictions. Particularly in the early stages of the crisis, this created chaos for travelers and the travel sector, and caused significant economic and social harms. Many governments also failed to clearly communicate the rationale for using travel measures, the evidence underpinning them, and the measures’ role within overall pandemic response strategies. There is now substantial evidence that these measures’ early and stringent use by some governments during the initial stages of the pandemic slowed the importation of the virus and reduced its onward transmission. Yet, there is also growing recognition of weaknesses in the quality of evidence available to inform policy decisions. Evaluating the appropriateness of travel measures and applying them effectively during future public-health emergencies will depend on international consensus on methodologies that lead to a more harmonized and coordinated approach and to greater public trust in policy decisions. This report presents a comparative analysis of 11 publicly available methodologies used to assess travel-related risks during the pandemic—those of Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States, International Civil Aviation Organization, International Air Transport Association, World Health Organization, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and European Union. It offers a set of lessons learned and recommendations, including a proposed decision instrument that could improve the use of risk analysis for border management during future public-health emergencies.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, International Organization, Governance, Border Control, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Taiwan, South Korea, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Global Focus, and United States of America

2. Digital Health Credentials and COVID-19: Can Vaccine and Testing Requirements Restart Global Mobility?

Author:
Lawrence Huang
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
More than two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, rising vaccination levels and widespread testing in many countries are giving governments and the public increasing confidence in international travel. A central part of efforts to restart mobility are digital health credentials, which verify a person’s vaccination, testing, and/or recovery status. These credentials help to minimize the risk of travelers carrying the virus, and unlike paper credentials that must be manually inspected in airports and at borders, digital credentials can be automatically verified. But even as digital health credentials are becoming increasingly common, gaps in international coordination and technical integration issues between different credential systems remain. As a result, migrants and travelers moving between—and at times within—countries must navigate a complex maze of digital systems. This report examines the implications of digital health credentials for international travel and for immigrants’ and travelers’ access to domestic services and venues that also use such credentials. It also explores the implications for specific groups: tourists and business travelers, students, labor migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, and unauthorized migrants. Finally, it offers policy recommendations to facilitate mobility and minimize risks for people on the move.
Topic:
Health, Immigration, Border Control, Employment, Mobility, Vaccine, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Rebooting the Asylum System? The Role of Digital Tools in International Protection

Author:
Hanne Beirens
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic is changing the way asylum systems use technology. After the initial pause on asylum processing in many countries, officials have turned to digital tools to revive these systems—and increasingly, to reimagine how they work. From the further digitalization of identification and security-check processes to chatbots that help asylum seekers register their protection claims and interviews conducted remotely via video call, such tools have permeated every corner of migration, asylum, and border management systems. This is particularly the case in Europe, where the 2015–16 migration and refugee crisis kickstarted a first round of growth in this area. With digital tools here to stay, the time is ripe to examine what impact their use has on people and processes, and how digitalization may interact with other developments in the international protection field. This report—part of the Beyond Territorial Asylum: Making Protection Work in a Bordered World initiative led by MPI and the Robert Bosch Stiftung—catalogues the use of digital tools in protection systems in Europe and elsewhere, and reflects on what the ramifications could be for humanitarian protection in the years to come. “Digitalization in and of itself is no universal cure,” the author writes, “and depending on how such efforts are carried out, they could obstruct the asylum process and violate asylum seekers’ rights as easily as they could facilitate or protect them.” This report highlights both the potential benefits of the increasing use of digital technology in different stages of asylum processes as well as key challenges and risks that need to be addressed, including concerns about data privacy, opaque decision-making, and how technology changes the nature of human communication.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Infrastructure, Border Control, Refugees, Asylum, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Mass Migration as a Hybrid Threat? – A Legal Perspective

Author:
Sascha Dov Bachmann and Anthony Paphiti
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
Migration as a weapon sounds like a policy statement by resurgent nationalistic parties (and governments) in the West. However, politics and the human cost aside, what if an adversary (both state and non-state actor) does exploit the current global crisis of mass migration due to globalization, war, and political unrest? This article will look at the ongoing mass migration to the European Union within the wider security context of the so-called hybrid threats and/or ‘grey zone’ tactics. It looks at the various legal categories of migration as how the law can be weaponized as so-called ‘lawfare’ to undermine the existing legal frameworks distinguishing between legal and illegal migration. The authors recognize the possibility that this article will be used as an argument by the political actors involved for their nationalistic and anti-migration politics and policies. Yet, we believe that the potential of abusing the current vacuum for political gains along ideological party lines makes it necessary to provide a wider legal-security focused perspective on mass migration.
Topic:
Security, Migration, Immigration, Law, Border Control, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Why U.S. Immigration Barriers Matter for the Global Advancement of Science

Author:
Ruchi Agarwal and Patrick Gaule
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
While talent can be born anywhere, few places specialize in nurturing it. Accordingly, talented individuals have pursued opportunities abroad for centuries. For instance, Aristotle moved from Northern Greece to Athens to attend Plato’s Academy and then to Macedonia to tutor a young Alexander the Great. More recently, the United States has emerged as a hub for foreign talent, playing an outsized role in the global knowledge network of scientific activity in recent decades. However, the recent introduction of restrictive immigration policies in the United States may adversely impact scientific activity. While studies have examined the potential negative impact of restrictive U.S. immigration policies on U.S. competitiveness in science and innovation, there has been less focus on understanding how U.S. immigration barriers may in turn impact scientific activity globally. In this context, our work studies the impact of U.S. immigration barriers on global knowledge production and examines which policy actions are more likely to help advance the global knowledge frontier.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Immigration, Border Control, and Research and Development
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

6. Immigration Policy as Foreign Policy

Author:
Howard Duncan
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Immigration policy has taken centre stage in the social sciences over the past 20 years. Despite the proliferation of articles and books in this field, very little attention has been paid to immigration policy as foreign policy. It is domestic policy that prevails in the literature, most notably about the effects of immigration on destination societies. This article distinguishes the domestic and foreign policy aspects of immigration policy, acknowledging as it does so that foreign policy is virtually always an expression of national self-interest. It concludes with observations on the realist and idealist/liberal approaches to international relations theory including with respect to the recently adopted United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration and the United Nations Global Compact on Refugees. Its purpose is to draw attention to this neglected aspect of immigration policy and to encourage others to explore it in greater detail, from the perspectives of both individual states and the world’s international institutions.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Migration, Sovereignty, United Nations, Immigration, and Border Control
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Hostile Environment: How Immigrants Became Scapegoats with Dr. Maya Goodfellow

Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Mile End Institute, Queen Mary University of London
Abstract:
In this event, Maya Goodfellow discussed her new book 'Hostile Environment: How Immigrants Became Scapegoats' in conversation with Tim Bale, Co-Director of the Mile End Institute.m
Topic:
Border Control, Immigrants, Discrimination, and Xenophobia
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Perspectives on the Content and Implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration

Author:
Kevin Appleby
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Kevin Appleby, senior director of international migration policy at CMS and SIMN, highlights issues that have been controversial in negotiations on the Global Compact on Migration in his piece, “The Global Compact on Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration: Will It Live Up to Its Name?” The author — who has been centrally involved in the process leading to the compact — offers recommendations to resolve issues related to regularization, border enforcement and return, the rights of irregular migrants, information firewalls, and the protection of migrants in vulnerable situations.
Topic:
Migration, Immigration, Border Control, and Regulation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Kidnapped, Trafficked, Detained? The Implications of Non-state Actor Involvement in Immigration Detention

Author:
Michael Flynn
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Global migration challenges are reinforcing long-standing trends that involve shifting immigration control measures beyond national borders and incorporating new actors into detention systems. Proposals to shape migration management policies — including discussions on developing a Global Compact for Migration — recognize the need to involve a range of actors to implement humane and effective strategies. However, when observed through the lens of immigration detention, some policy trends raise challenging questions, particularly those that lead to increasing roles for non-state actors in migration control. This article critically assesses a range of new actors who have become involved in the deprivation of liberty of migrants and asylum seekers, describes the various forces that appear to be driving their engagement, and makes a series of recommendations concerning the role of non-state actors and detention in global efforts to manage international migration. These recommendations include: ending the use the detention in international migration management schemes; limiting the involvement of private companies in immigration control measures; insisting that the International Organization for Migration (IOM) actively endorse the centrality of human rights in the Global Compact for Migration and amend its constitution so that it makes a clear commitment to international human rights standards; and encouraging nongovernmental organizations to carefully assess the services they provide when operating in detention situations to ensure that their work contributes to harm reduction.
Topic:
Migration, Non State Actors, Border Control, and Refugees
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. The “Right to Remain Here” as an Evolving Component of Global Refugee Protection: Current Initiatives and Critical Questions

Author:
Daniel Kanstroom
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This article considers the relationship between two human rights discourses (and two specific legal regimes): refugee and asylum protection and the evolving body of international law that regulates expulsions and deportations. Legal protections for refugees and asylum seekers are, of course, venerable, well-known, and in many respects still cherished, if challenged and perhaps a bit frail. Anti-deportation discourse is much newer, multifaceted, and evolving. It is in many respects a young work in progress. It has arisen in response to a rising tide of deportations, and the worrisome development of massive, harsh deportation machinery in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Mexico, Australia, and South Africa, among others. This article’s main goal is to consider how these two discourses do and might relate to each other. More specifically, it suggests that the development of procedural and substantive rights against removal — as well as rights during and after removal — aids our understanding of the current state and possible future of the refugee protection regime. The article’s basic thesis is this: The global refugee regime, though challenged both theoretically and in practice, must be maintained and strengthened. Its historical focus on developing criteria for admission into safe states, on protections against expulsion (i.e., non-refoulement), and on regimes of temporary protection all remain critically important. However, a focus on other protections for all noncitizens facing deportation is equally important. Deportation has become a major international system that transcends the power of any single nation-state. Its methods have migrated from one regime to another; its size and scope are substantial and expanding; its costs are enormous; and its effects frequently constitute major human rights violations against millions who do not qualify as refugees. In recent years there has been increasing reliance by states on generally applicable deportation systems, led in large measure by the United States’ radical 25 year-plus experiment with large-scale deportation. Europe has also witnessed a rising tide of deportation, some of which has developed in reaction to European asylum practices. Deportation has been facilitated globally (e.g., in Australia) by well-funded, efficient (but relatively little known) intergovernmental idea sharing, training, and cooperation. This global expansion, standardization, and increasing intergovernmental cooperation on deportation has been met by powerful — if in some respects still nascent — human rights responses by activists, courts, some political actors, and scholars. It might seem counterintuitive to think that emerging ideas about deportation protections could help refugees and asylum seekers, as those people by definition often have greater rights protections both in admission and expulsion. However, the emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons. First, what Matthew Gibney has described as “the deportation turn” has historically been deeply connected to anxiety about asylum seekers. Although we lack exact figures of the number of asylum seekers who have been subsequently expelled worldwide, there seems little doubt that it has been a significant phenomenon and will be an increasingly important challenge in the future. The two phenomena of refugee/asylum protections and deportation, in short, are now and have long been linked. What has sometimes been gained through the front door, so to speak, may be lost through the back door. Second, current deportation human rights discourses embody creative framing models that might aid constructive critique and reform of the existing refugee protection regime. They tend to be more functionally oriented, less definitional in terms of who warrants protection, and more fluid and transnational. Third, these discourses offer important specific rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime, even as we continue to see weakening state support for the basic 1951/1967 protection regime. This is especially true in regard to the extraterritorial scope of the (deporting) state’s obligations post-deportation. This article particularly examines two initiatives in this emerging field: The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Expulsion of Aliens and the draft Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons developed through the Boston College Post-Deportation Human Rights Project (of which the author is a co-director). It compares their provisions to the existing corpus of substantive and procedural protections for refugees relating to expulsion and removal. It concludes with consideration of how these discourses may strengthen protections for refugees while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Cooperation, Border Control, Refugees, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, United States, Europe, France, South Africa, Germany, Australia, Mexico, and Global Focus