Revisiting Borders and Boundaries: Exploring Migrant Inclusion and Exclusion from Intersectional Perspectives

Abstract

In recent years, scholarly interest in boundaries and boundary work, on the one hand, and borders and bordering, on the other, has flourished across disciplines. Notwithstanding the close relationship between the two concepts, “borders” and “boundaries” have largely been subject to separate scholarly debates, or sometimes treated as synonymous. These trends point to an important lack of conceptual and analytical clarity as to what borders and boundaries are and are not, what distinguishes them from each other and how they relate to each other. This Special Issue tackles this conceptual gap by bringing the two fields of studies together: we argue that boundaries/boundary work and borders/bordering should be treated as interrelated rather than distinct phenomena. Boundaries produce similarities and differences that affect the enforcement, performance and materialisation of borders, which themselves contribute to the reproduction of boundaries. Borders and boundaries are entangled, but they promote different forms and experiences of inclusion and exclusion. In this introduction, we elaborate the two concepts separately before examining possible ways to link them theoretically. Finally, we argue that an intersectional perspective makes it possible to establish how the interplay of different social categories affects the articulations and repercussions of borders and boundaries. The contributions in this Special Issue address this issue from multiple perspectives that reflect a variety of disciplines and theoretical backgrounds and are informed by different case studies in Europe and beyond.

(Im)moral Mobilities in a Swiss Borderland

“…Therefore, a regime of (im)moral mobilities perspective provides a theoretical framework to combine a border and a boundary perspective (Fischer, Achermann, and Dahinden 2020). Indeed, exploring the practices and discourses (re)producing a regime of (im)moral mobilitiesin Val-de-Travers or elsewheretriggers an examination of the symbolic and social boundaries of local communities while putting them into perspective with the strengtheningor notof (deterritorialized) national borders.…”

“…More specifically, through the analysis of the local deployment of the regime of (im)moral mobilities, I shed light on the interrelated social, economic, and symbolic consequences of cross-border dynamics. 3 Thereby, I aim to go beyond the dichotomy between border and boundary by combining these two perspectives (Fassin 2011;Fischer, Achermann, and Dahinden 2020). While borders refer to territorial limits defining political entities and legal subjects and to all related regulationsformal and informal -(re)produced by an unlimited number of actors (Fischer, Achermann, and Dahinden 2020), boundaries refer to the creation, maintenance, institutionalization, and contestation of social and symbolic differences (Lamont and Molnár 2002).…”

“…3 Thereby, I aim to go beyond the dichotomy between border and boundary by combining these two perspectives (Fassin 2011;Fischer, Achermann, and Dahinden 2020). While borders refer to territorial limits defining political entities and legal subjects and to all related regulationsformal and informal -(re)produced by an unlimited number of actors (Fischer, Achermann, and Dahinden 2020), boundaries refer to the creation, maintenance, institutionalization, and contestation of social and symbolic differences (Lamont and Molnár 2002). Thus, I analyze the practices and discourses that morally exclude (or include) people engaged in cross-border mobilities (a form of boundary-making practices) and that morally "seal" the national border (a form of bordering practices).…”

Legitimising exclusion through criminalisation: an ethnography of immigration detention in Switzerland

“…Yet the processes of producing borders and boundaries are highly interdependent: "[b]oundaries produce similarities and differences, which in turn affect the enforcement, performance and materialisation of borders, which themselves contribute to the reproduction of boundaries" (Fischer et al 2020: 481). Therefore, these two concepts need to be considered within a single common framework (Fassin 2011b(Fassin , 2020Fischer et al 2020). As I have shown in a recent article, the approaches of bordering and boundary-making can be usefully combined for the empirical study of immigration detention (Rezzonico 2020b).…”

“…Categories related to gender, race and social class are all very relevant in both processes of bordering and border policing as well as boundary-making between social groups or communities, and thus an intersectional approach is particularly useful to explore such interplay (Fassin 2020;Fischer et al 2020). Categories of difference are fundamental in the definition of boundaries, especially of who belongs or deserves to belong to a certain community of citizens.…”