Global partnerships in governing labour migration: the uneasy relationship between the ILO and IOM in the promotion of decent work for migrants

Abstract

This paper examines the multi-actor and multi-sited character of global labour migration governance as a sphere in which various organisations seek influence on the direction of global policy via various methods. We focus on the relational dynamics between the two key organisations which engage in the governance of labour migration, yet which have fundamentally different mandates and modes for governing: the ILO and the IOM. This paper contributes to the existing literature on global migration governance and the role of international organisations by applying the concept of ‘global partnerships’ to our examination of the relationship between those two key international organisations in the field of migration. We characterise the evolving ILO–IOM global partnership as an uneasy alliance along a “competition/clash-cooperation spectrum” and argue that, in order to manage the competing-cooperating dynamics, a type of strategic ILO–IOM partnership has emerged, an alliance which has also been driven by the blurring of public and private realms in new global migration governing forms and formats. The ultimate question raised by these developments is whether this global partnership will promote or obstruct the advancement of the decent work policy agenda for migrant workers.

Regulating recruitment and contracting of migrant fishers from Indonesia

“…However, as of 15 August 2023, only one recruitment agent was certified globally. 8 Both standards draw primarily on recruitment norms in ILO conventions, but the process for adopting them was different (Piper and Foley, 2021). The ILO developed its standard in consultation with its constituents, namely, governments, workers and employers.…”

Decent Work, Social Justice, Status-Quo: The ILO as a World Organization

“…The world organizations approach moves away from past scholarship on the ILO, which has focused on its historical evolution and contemporary efficacy (Maul, 2019;Helfer, 2007;Standing, 2008;Louis & Ruwet, 2017;Baccaro & Mele, 2012), and its specific actions around certain policy areas, such as labour migration (Piper, 2022;Piper & Foley, 2021). Some of these works have touched on the different aspects of the world organizations approach.…”

“…Some of these works have touched on the different aspects of the world organizations approach. Piper (2022) and Piper and Foley (2021), for example, have focused on the ILO's external partnerships and generation of world order within the field of migration, pointing to the way in which ILO partnerships with both other transnational organizations, as well as local groups and individuals, have impacted the ILO's actions in dealing with labour migration. Baccaro and Mele (2012), Louis (2019), and Louis and Ruwet (2017), amongst others, have further focused on the ILO's internal operation, particularly in the context of its 1990s new governance transformation, wherein former Directors-General (DG) Michel Hansenne and Juan Somavia sought to transform the ILO's internal process and standard-setting mechanisms in response to accusations of inef-Open Journal of Political Science ficacy.…”

I'm Keeping My Baby: Migrant Domestic Worker Rights at The Intersection of Labour and Immigration Laws

“…However, by September 2021 the Convention had only been ratified by 56 states. Regarding migration policy development, an uneasy global partnership has emerged between the International Labour Organization (ILO) and International Organization for Migration (IOM) to promote international cooperation amongst nation states (Piper and Foley 2021). Of particular relevance to the present discussion is that international law and the activities of organisations do not constitute a labour migration regime capable of constraining law and policy at the national level.…”