The Migration State in the Global South: Nationalizing, Developmental, and Neoliberal Models of Migration Management

Adamson, Fiona B.

doi:10.31235/osf.io/wze2p

Cited by 31 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of migration in the context of nation-building, for example, opens up the "black box" of the state and shows how processes of inclusion and exclusion were at the heart of state formation. The creation of collective national identities was often a violent process accompanied by mass displacement and the generation of large numbers of refugees (Zolberg 1983;Adamson and Tsourapas 2019). Indeed, international organizations in many cases facilitated and encouraged population displacements (Robson 2017).…”

Section: Applying a Decolonial Lens To Security Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pushing the Boundaries: Can We “Decolonize” Security Studies?

Adamson

2019

Journal of Global Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay reflects on the approaches to inclusion and exclusion put forward in this special issue and suggests a more radical alternative: the project of “decolonizing” the field of security studies. Drawing on work in decolonial thought and critical security studies, I discuss systemic-level structures of inclusion and exclusion such as global racial hierarchies, imperial and colonial legacies, and North-South inequities. Such structures both shape the material reality of the global security order, and affect knowledge production in the field of security studies itself, including the definition of what is and is not viewed as a legitimate “security issue.” I conclude by asking what a “decolonized” security studies might look like.

show abstract

Section: Applying a Decolonial Lens To Security Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pushing the Boundaries: Can We “Decolonize” Security Studies?

Adamson

2019

Journal of Global Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A close analysis of contemporary labour and forced migration flows demonstrates that they overwhelmingly occur in countries that emerged from imperial and colonial rule -from the Middle East to sub-Saharan Africa (Fargues, 2013;Quirk and Vigneswaran, 2015) and from Latin America to Asia (FitzGerald and Cook-Martín, 2014;Vezzoli and Flahaux, 2017;Zamindar, 2007). However, the manner through which colonial and imperial legacies affected the emergence of states' migration management regimes outside Europe and North America continues to be under-theorised (Adamson and Tsourapas, 2019;Chung et al, 2018). In particular, the relationship between institutional capacity, de-territorialised identities and the use of migration for processes of nation-building does not typically feature in International Relations debates on postcolonial states' migration management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The postcolonial migration state

Sadiq

Tsourapas

2021

European Journal of International Relations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of migration policymaking across the Global South is of growing interest to International Relations. Yet, the impact of colonial and imperial legacies on states’ migration management regimes outside Europe and North America remains under-theorised. How does postcolonial state formation shape policies of cross-border mobility management in the Global South? By bringing James F. Hollifield’s framework of the contemporary ‘migration state’ in conversation with critical scholarship on postcolonialism, we identify the existence of a ‘postcolonial paradox,’ namely two sets of tensions faced by newly independent states of the Global South: first, the need to construct a modern sovereign nation-state with a well-defined national identity contrasts with weak institutional capacity to do so; second, territorial realities of sovereignty conflict with the imperatives of nation-building seeking to establish exclusive citizenship norms towards populations residing both inside and outside the boundaries of the postcolonial state. We argue that the use of cross-border mobility control policies to reconcile such tensions transforms the ‘postcolonial state’ into the ‘postcolonial migration state,’ which shows distinct continuities with pre-independence practices. In fact, postcolonial migration states reproduce colonial-era tropes via the surveillance and control of segmented migration streams that redistribute labour for the global economy. We demonstrate this via a comparative study of post-independence migration management in India and Egypt, which also aims to merge a problematic regional divide between scholarship on the Middle East and South Asia. We urge further critical interventions on the international politics of migration that prioritise interregional perspectives from the broader Global South.

show abstract

“…The next section of this article discusses how our research contributes to the broader academic debate on the external dimension of EU migration policies, migration policy theory (beyond the 'Western liberal state') (Cassarino 2018;Natter 2018;Adamson and Tsourapras 2019;Tsourapas 2019), andmore generallyon preference formation in postcolonial states (Ayoob 2002;Jabri 2013). The third section presents the case-selection and methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

West African interests in (EU) migration policy. Balancing domestic priorities with external incentives

Адам

Trauner

Jegen³

et al. 2020

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies on EU-Africa migration cooperation often focus on the interests of the EU and its member states. But what do African states themselves seek to achieve with respect to migration policy? This article presents an in-depth look at Ghana and Senegal, two stable West African democracies, and assesses which types of migration policies they support, and why. We suggest that a distinction ought to be made between West African policymakers' more domestically-driven migration policy goals (to cooperate more closely with the diaspora or creating legal migration channels, for example) and internationally-induced ones (such as the reinforcement of border control capacities). Each type of policy interest is defended by an increasingly diverse set of national actors whose interests oftenbut not alwaysconverge. This distinction should be considered as a continuum, as most West African migration policy preferences are driven by domestic as well as international factors, albeit to diverging degrees. Our findings demonstrate that migration policy-making in countries targeted by international cooperation can only be studied as an 'intermestic' policy issue, reflecting the dynamic interplay of international and domestic interests.

show abstract

The Migration State in the Global South: Nationalizing, Developmental, and Neoliberal Models of Migration Management

Cited by 31 publications

References 7 publications

Pushing the Boundaries: Can We “Decolonize” Security Studies?

Pushing the Boundaries: Can We “Decolonize” Security Studies?

The postcolonial migration state

West African interests in (EU) migration policy. Balancing domestic priorities with external incentives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About