2016
DOI: 10.4337/9781783476299
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Handbook on Migration and Social Policy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…With regard to integration support, a broad range of political, religious, civil society or migrant actors exist. Freeman and Mirilovic () distinguish between public policies accessible to migrants after moving to a destination country, and policies that are explicitly developed for the migrant population. Regarding the latter, Aksakal and Schmidt () observe that in different EU countries national supportive policies can emphasize particular aspects of integration, such as acculturation (language learning) in the UK, or labour market integration in Spain and Ireland.…”
Section: Migrants’ Integration and Support Initiativesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With regard to integration support, a broad range of political, religious, civil society or migrant actors exist. Freeman and Mirilovic () distinguish between public policies accessible to migrants after moving to a destination country, and policies that are explicitly developed for the migrant population. Regarding the latter, Aksakal and Schmidt () observe that in different EU countries national supportive policies can emphasize particular aspects of integration, such as acculturation (language learning) in the UK, or labour market integration in Spain and Ireland.…”
Section: Migrants’ Integration and Support Initiativesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The theoretical contributions of the Copenhagen School were first articulated in Barry Buzan's 1983 book: People, States & Fear: The National Security Problem in International Relations (Freeman and Mirilovic 2016). Buzan (1983) originally divided security into five categories: military, environmental, economic, political, and societal.…”
Section: Copenhagen School Of Security Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This two‐dimensional analysis was also proposed by former research with and Kubrin and Stewart (2006) suggesting that it is the decreased opportunities for education and unemployment that lead individuals to radicalised actions. In Freeman and Mirilovic (2016) suggest that there should be policies to increase the resilience of de‐radicalisation, especially focusing on those individuals that have an increased probability of committing an offence repeatedly. The links of socioeconomic conditions to radicalisation and acts of violence/terror are also evident for the policymakers with a National Bureau of Economic Research report (NBER, 2022) suggesting that there should be policies to prevent increasing poverty levels as an efficient way to tackling of extreme events (as the 9/11).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%