This paper is concerned with the ethical issues arising for researchers engaged in the study of irregular migration. Based on the authors' research experiences, the paper goes beyond analysis of ethical dilemmas and aims to provide some guidance to researchers in this field. Irregular migration is by definition an elusive phenomenon as it takes place in violation of the law and at the margins of society. The very nature of this phenomenon raises important issues, including the sensitivity and vulnerability of the research subjects and a whole series of other ethical issues to be addressed both when conducting fieldwork with irregular migrants and also at the later stage of data analysis, processing and dissemination. The paper first considers various methods in researching irregular migration and defines research ethics. It then discusses the differences between sensitivity and vulnerability and their particular implications for irregular migration research. Next, the paper looks at the ethical challenges arising from fieldwork and discusses the sensitive issues involved in the relationship between researcher, irregular migrant and society. Finally, it discusses the question of disseminating findings (both qualitative and quantitative) to wider audiences. In conclusion, we highlight the key points that we consider to be important when studying irregular migrant populations. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article examines first the emergence and construction of the concept of transit migration and the political framework and discourses that brought about this concept. It goes on analysing how this reinforces the EU's efforts to externalise its migration policy and integrate non‐EU countries into a comprehensive migration control policy. Second, it critically surveys the state of the art, analyses causes and conditions of transit migration, identifies its geography and discusses some methodological and analytical pitfalls and difficulties of researching transit migration. Finally, in the conclusions a structuralist approach is taken and it is suggested that a clear‐cut typology could be developed by rigid comparison. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article empirically analyses the political and legal construction of irregular migration across selected member states of the European Union. First, it considers how policies lay the preconditions for irregular migration. Second, it explores the role of politics and law in generating irregular migration. Thus, it carves out diverse and divergent practices across the EU and argues that these are related to divergent legal and political cultures among the member states. This reveals that regulations that are meant to prevent unwanted migration often have unintended side-effects and instead encourage irregular migration which is conceptualised as a policy gap and policy failure. The conclusion drawn from this is that some irregular migration can be avoided and that there is scope for accordingly reforming national laws.

This article introduces the subject of this special issue and presents the papers that follow. It traces the origins of the label ‘transit migration’ to discussions of what was called the ‘new migration’ in the early 1990s. These migrations related to the particular geopolitical context at the end of the Cold War. Though they established the pre‐emptive rationale whereby concern is focused as much on potential migration as on actual movement, there have been four substantial changes since then. As the geopolitical context has changed, so has the geographies of migration, with a general shift of attention from east‐west to south‐north; the technological supports of migration have improved, allowing migrants easier, cheaper access to different routes; the categories of migrant have proliferated and finally similar movements may be observed all over the world though only those in the vicinity of Europe are labelled as ‘transit’. This leads us to a critical stance around the term ‘transit’ that is common to all papers in this special issue. Nevertheless, despite the problematic term, there is something worthy of attention amongst these new developments around the fringes of Europe. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

No abstract

Recent migration 'crises' raise important geopolitical questions. Who is 'the migrant' that contemporary politics are fixated on? How are answers to 'who counts as a migrant' changing? Who gets to do that counting, and under what circumstances? This forum responds to, as well as questions, the current saliency of migration by examining how categories of migration hold geopolitical significance-not only in how they are constructed and by whom, but also in how they are challenged and subverted. Furthermore, by examining how the very concepts of 'migrant' and 'refugee' are used in different contexts, and for a variety of purposes, it opens up critical questions about mobility, citizenship and the nation state. Collectively, these contributions aim to demonstrate how problematising migration and its categorisation can be a tool of enquiry into other phenomena and processes.

The concept of clandestine or illegal migration dates back to the 1930s but only became prominent during the 1980s and 1990s. It is an umbrella term that refers to a complex set of conditions and embraces various patterns. Instead of applying the conventional but crude legal/illegal dichotomy this article suggests a fine-tuned analysis of clandestine migration on a scale between the two poles. This contribution surveys the state of the art and discusses various approaches in clandestine migration research; it aims at clarifying as yet blurred definitions, discusses often problematical quantitative aspects, and gives an overview of various major patterns in clandestine migration. Finally, in reflecting on the specific conditions that determine clandestine migration, it argues that this phenomenon is a social construct of the 21st century.