The Global Indicator Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) identifies seventeen goals with related targets and indicators of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and only one target includes an explicit reference to migration processes and policies. Under Goal 10 “Reduce inequality within and among countries,” target 10.7 concerns the facilitation of “orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration, and mobility of people, which includes the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies” that should be measured through four related indicators, three of which are potentially relevant to refugees. After exploring what the International Rescue Committee defines as “refugee gap” concerning SDGs (2019) in their report “Missing Persons: Refugees Left Out and Left Behind in SDGs,” this article reconfigures this gap as a multidimensional concept, and seeks to provide insights on which further steps could be undertaken to bridge it. The main analytical threads identified in this process include: 1) the partial availability of data concerning refugees” progress towards SDGs due to current data disaggregation policies and practices; 2) the limited presence of refugees in voluntary reporting activities by States; and 3) the conceptual framework behind target 10.7, as well as the methodology used to measure progress of three (out of four) indicators toward this target. The focus on target 10.7 and related indicators is aimed at checking their ability to provide information on how refugees’ access to fundamental rights and well-being are taken into account in the assessment of so-called “well managed migration policies.” From a methodological point of view, our analysis has also been supported by semi-structured interviews with the main experts on the issue, having key roles both in the conceptualization of the SDG refugee gap and in the definition and proposal of three selected indicators. To conclude, this article will ask whether and to what extent the refugee gap is still present despite the inclusion of a new refugee dedicated indicator in 2020 and despite the UNHCR’s advocacy efforts to include the forcibly displaced dimension in disaggregation policies. Moreover, it will investigate how such a gap can potentially be closed and whether the definition of “well-managed migration policies” is sufficiently comprehensive, is able to involve refugees in the assessment of progress towards SDGs and is consistent with the SDGs-linked principle of “leaving no one behind.”
Abstract. During the biennium 2013-2014 Syrian refugees started to reach Italy through Mediterranean seaborne migration routes, from Libya and Egypt. Their presence contributed to partially modifying the configuration of the incoming migration flows to Italy, both in terms of socio-demographic composition and access to the European asylum system. Data shows that most of the Syrian refugees who landed in Italy between 2013 and 2014 decided to pursue their journeys to Northern Europe, by overcoming the restrictions imposed by the Dublin Regulation. The article focuses on the phenomenon of transit, as an interesting standpoint from which to observe certain acts of agency and resistance, put in place by refugees in order to "choose the country where to live": the refusal to provide fingerprints during identification, the organization of hunger strikes, the secondary mobility per se. Moreover, the article attempts to shed light on the relational and socio-political context in which these practices have taken shape, by focusing on the construction of relationships with activists and volunteers, and the (explicit and tacit) processes of negotiation which refugees conducted with police authorities and other stakeholders.
Keywords
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.