restriction of migration flows to eu
157327757
Family Reunification and the Transnational Family
In an age of increased global flows and knowledge sharing across borders, is state migration policy restricting opportunities and causing harm by grounding people, often away from their families, to one particular state or region? Discussion of family reunification in countries of net immigration such as Canada, Australia, and the EU nations often pits state interests against individual rights, including the right to the family. But are states and transnational families necessarily at odds, and if so, then does this always need to be the case? This research paper first identifies a series of state goals which, at first glance, appear to be divergent from the mobility of families. However, the paper then describes opportunities to align these state interests with individual rights, notably the right to the family. The result is a 12 part framework, in table form, that for the first time analyzes and demonstrates how existing state goals that are currently used to justify the restriction of family reunification could in fact best be enhanced through an increase in family reunification, within a reimagined citizenship regime that gives freedom to and gains from transnational families' agency and resilience. FAMILY REUNIFICATION AND THE TRANSNATIONAL FAMILY TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Research Question: Reimagining Family Reunification and Mobility 1 1.2 Terminology: Transnational Families and Reunification 2 1.3 Method, Sources, and Limitations. 3 Ethics 5 1.4 Theoretical Framework: Rescaling and Re Siting Citizenship Debates 5 Chapter 2: State Concerns Regarding the Transnational Family: A Six Part Framework 13 2.1 Introduction 13 Part A1 A Strong State 14 A1.1 Sovereignty and International Law 15 A1.2 National Security and Border Control 16 A1.3 Demographic Priorities 16 A1.4 Citizenship 17 Part A2 The Welfare System 17 A2.1 Social Services 17 A2.2 Health 18 A2.3 Skills and Education 18 Part A3 Economic Gain 19 A3.1 Labour Market 20 A3.2 Economic Stability 20 A3.3 Capital 21 Part A4 International Development 21 A4.1 Development Commitments 21 A4.2 Declining Humanitarian Agenda 22 Part A5 Integration 23 A5.1 Allegiance 23 A5.2 Spatial Integration and Separation 24 A5.3 Language 24 Part A6 Family Values 24 A6.1 Family Values 25 A6.2 Marriage 25 A6.3 "Bogus" Applicants 26 Are State Goals at Odds with Family Migration? 26 Chapter 3: Aligning the State with the Family: Opportunities in Agency and Resilience 28 3.1 Introduction 28 Part B1 Global Realities and Strengthening States 28 B1.1 Stronger Global Ties 28 B1.2 Diplomatic Advantage 29 B1.3 Attract and Retain Leaders 30 B1.4 Citizenship for a Transnational World 30 Part B2 Supporting the State: Health, Wealth and Belonging 31 FAMILY REUNIFICATION AND THE TRANSNATIONAL FAMILY B2.1 Improving Social Outcomes 31 B2.2 Better Health 31 B2.3 Unpaid (Family) Labour in Private Enterprises and Households 32 Part B3 The Social, Economic and Political Power of Diasporic Communities 32 B3.1 Economic Expansion 32 B3.2 Social Educational Technological Transfers 33 B3.3 Innovation, Productivity and Competitive Advantage 33 Part B4 Family Reunification and Development 33 B4.1 Remittances 34 B4.2 Family Investment 34 Part B5 Identity and Belonging in a Transnational World 35 B5.1 New Modes of Belonging and Allegiance 35 B5.2 Increased Civic Participation and Belonging 36 B5.3 Cultural Flows and Mutually Shifting Attitudes 36 Part B6 Families Across Borders: New Modes of Togetherness 36 B6.1 Family Values 37 B6.2 Marriage 37 B6.3 Increasing Legitimate Migration 37 Opportunities for the Transnational Family and the State 38 Chapter 4: Conclusion 39 4.1 Summary 39 4.2 Current Practice: States Choose Citizens 39 4.3 Future Practice: Citizens Choose States? 41 References. 44 Appendix: Family Reunification and the Transnational Family: A 12 Part Framework (Table) 54 FAMILY REUNIFICATION AND THE TRANSNATIONAL FAMILY 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Research Question: Reimagining Family Reunification and Mobility In an age of increased global flows and knowledge sharing across borders, is state migration policy restricting opportunities and causing harm by grounding people, often away from their families, to one particular state or region? Public discussion of family reunification in countries of net immigration such as Canada, Australia, and the EU nations often pits state interests against individual rights, including the right to the family. But are states and transnational families necessarily at odds, and if so, then does this always need to be the case? This research paper offers a meta analysis rather than the existing case studies or anecdotal strategies that abound to identify hitherto little noticed opportunities for states to encourage and benefit from transnational families' agency and resilience. Studies of diasporas (which have yet to intersect strongly with family reunification literature) suggest that the gains generated from the freer flow of people between states include new trade and investment opportunities, as well as more intangible but still important social and cultural ties generated via ongoing family relationships all
K L Clancy
154396486
Possible impacts of Turkish application of Schengen visa standards
With regard to the EU's progressive abolition of internal borders and its ever stricter external border controls, it has often been stated that freedom of movement for some means restriction for others. The EU, regardless of its internal governance model, will inevitably operate in a 'neighbourhood' characterized by increasing population pressures, decreasing state authority and greater immigration flows. In order to protect its internal structure (the area of freedom, security and justice) the migration policies of member states in general, and their external border policies in particular, have to be harmonized. Not only that, but the EU will have to create a zone of friendly states around itself and export as much of these border controls as possible to these 'aspirant states' turning them into a buffer zone against migratory flows. The basic dilemma between Turkey's implementation of the Schengen acquis arises at this point: Turkey demands concrete membership guarantees similar to those given to the remaining 12 candidate states before changing her immigration, asylum and visa policies. The EU, on the other hand, refuses to provide such concrete guarantees for eventual membership. As a result, Turkey fears the negative consequences like disruption of border trade, becoming a dumping area for refugees, and financing the costs of these policy changes on her own. The aim of this paper is to make a comparison between the remaining candidate states and Turkey in terms of pros and cons of applying Schengen standards. Its main arguments can be stated as follows: the EU states that it cannot grant Turkey full membership before she complies with the membership criteria, of which Justice and Home Affairs reforms are a part. Turkey, on the other hand, operates under the premises of regional and bilateral relations so long as EU membership does not become certain. In terms of visa policy, this means that Turkey would adopt the Schengen acquis to the extent she receives a more structured approach from the EU, especially in terms of membership guarantees and burden sharing. In the absence of such an approach, the results of applying Schengen standards would be disruptive for regional and bilateral relations, and convert Turkey into a buffer zone against migratory flows for the EU. As in the case of customs union, such a development would reduce Turkey's cards and cement her 'special status' as a country that consumes EU policies for the sake of an eventual membership, but never receives one.
Mehmet Ali Tugtan
158862083
The effects of European integration and the business cycle on migration flows: a gravity analysis
This paper explores how European integration, economic fluctuations, and the interactions of these factors affect bilateral migration flows. It focuses on how migration flows developed in the wake of the establishment of the European Monetary Union, and whether migration flows became stronger, and more responsive to economic fluctuations, in the euro area. It estimates a gravity equation of bilateral gross migration flows on a global sample and on a sample restricted to the first 12 members of the euro area. It is found that unemployment is a strong and robust determinant of bilateral migration flows both globally and in the euro area. EU accession and the lifting of labour market restrictions on new member states had a large effect on gross migration flows. While mutual euro area membership is not associated with an overall rise in migration, it is associated with increased flows from countries where unemployment is high to those where it is lower. Migration flows among the euro area 12 have been on an increasing trend since the late 1990s; after falls in 2009 they picked up again in 2010 and 2011. The evidence overall suggests that labour mobility plays an increasing role in the adjustment to asymmetric shocks in the EU and the euro area.
Alfonso Arpaia Aron Kiss Balazs Palvolgyi Alessandro Turrini
153033079
Economic impact of migration flows following the 2004 EU enlargement process a model based analysis
This paper shows that the migration induced re allocation of labour resources across countries following the 2004 EU enlargement process has already brought sizeable economic benefits for the enlarged EU. In addition, the simulation results suggest that once the present temporary restrictions on the flow of EU10 workers come to an end and the long run migration potential of around 3 million is eventually realised, the economic gains may easily match those from a further integration of the EU's goods and capital markets. At the level of the individual "sending" and "receiving" countries, the overall economic impact of migration is essentially determined by the speed of adjustment of labour and capital; by the skill characteristics of the migrant and native populations; and by the actual size of the migration flows.
Francesca D'auria Kieran Mc Morrow Karl Pichelmann
158689078
Intra EU Labour Migration: Flows and Policy Responses
The first of May 2004 marked a historical watershed. A decade and a half after the fall of the berlin wall the continent of Europe was re united in democracy, ending over 60 years of political division and hostility with the accession of eight new member states from central and eastern Europe (a8),1 followed in 2007 by bulgaria and romania (a2) one of the most important consequences of eastern enlargement has been the full or partial opening up of national labour markets to citizens of the other member states, not just within the relatively homogeneous 15 'old' member states, but for the entire EU of 25 (subsequently 27) countries. Many workers in the new member states in particular were keen to take advantage of the new opportunities to earn higher wages and broaden their experience, or even to find work at all. in Poland, for example, the number of people 'temporarily residing' in another EU country more than doubled between 2004 and 2007, reaching almost 2 million. This increase was reflected in some, but by no means all of the receiving countries: 2005 saw probably the largest inflow of foreign labour ever recorded in the Uk, hugely exceeding all prior predictions. however, other 'sending' (such as hungary) and 'receiving' (for example, sweden) countries experienced much less dramatic flows. in the accession countries, 'free movement' was seen unanimously as a fundamental right. in the EU 15 countries, accession was preceded by intensive and at times controversial debates about likely immigration flows and whether countries should immediately open up their labour markets fully, permitting unhindered labour mobility, or whether existing restrictions should be maintained for the foreseen transitional periods. these debates took place against the background of a discussion about the role of migrant labour in advanced economies and societies, in some cases rising populism and xenophobia, and, at least in some countries, still high unemployment. dire warnings were issued concerning a
Bela Galgoczi Janine Leschke Andrew Watt
53993231
MIGRATE: a FOSS web mapping application for educating and raising awareness about migration flows in Europe
Abstract. Recent years have seen a noticeable growth in migration flows from Africa and Middle East to Southern Europe, thus generating a remarkable increase of attention on media and public opinion, sometimes resulting in stereotypes and prejudices. Funded by the European Commission Joint Research Centre through the MYGEOSS program, MIGRation pATtterns in Europe (MIGRATE) aims at educating the citizens about migration fluxes in Europe using a gamification approach based on a trivia game. MIGRATE is completely developed with Free and Open Source Software. On the server side Django is used to define the models that handle all the required data and tables are created in a PostgreSQL database. Questions and answers are sent in JSON format to the client, while the geospatial layers in GeoJSON format are rendered on the map interface using OpenLayers 3. Bootstrap, HTML5 and CSS3 are used for responsive design, while the jQuery library is used to ease the JavaScript programming. All the data sources used within MIGRATE are available as full and open access with no restrictions for reuse, except for the obligation to mention the source of the input data. Exploited data sources include OpenStreetMap for geospatial information, and UNHCR, IOM, Eurostat and The Migrant's Files project for non geospatial information. Overall, data shows how the users' perceptions change while playing and that players' awareness of migration related problems increases with the number of games played. The source code of MIGRATE and the collected data are available respectively under the EU Public License (EUPL) and the CC BY 4.0 license.
Maria Antonia Brovelli Marco Minghini Candan E Kilsedar Mayra Zurbaran Martina Aiello Marco Gianinetto
59469877
Preserving Indigenous Culture or Spreading Multiculturalism Across Europe? Challenges of EU Migration Policy
One of the main consequences of the globalization process is migration flows. As the world globalizes intensively and borders become open easily the issue of migration raises. Migration has become the defining issue of the 21st century. Migration or more appropriately, human mobility is vital for global prosperity. Migrants make contributions not only for their countries of destination but for the country of origin as well, but it still remains to be the controversial issue. Sometimes this process is perceived as a positive and beneficial for the countries, but it might be transformed in a problem as well. It depends on the type of this process. Thorough analyze should be done to investigate how the migrants are treated by each country and deep analyze should be done to see what is the link between the policies and aptitudes of the migrants. It's very interesting to decipher what is the correlation between the existing migration policy of the European Union and the status quo of the migrants, more precisely how effective is the current policy. Particularly, to conclude how paper based regulations/restrictions work in practice and how effective are they. How does the European Union stipulation for the idea "Unity in Diversity" work in practice? Borders themselves may just be lines, but crossing them changes many things. For example, you may find yourself in a totally different cultural surrounding with different religion, food, language or money. Being born one meter to the right or to the left of this artificial line determines us. It is so bizarre to think that one kilometer can change all of your life.
T V Todria
158376659
Stan ta normativno pravove reguliuvannia migratsiyi bizhentsiv ta shukachiv pritulku u IeS iak institutsiinii bazis upravlinnia mizhnarodnimi migratsiiami State and legal regulation of refugees' and asylum seekers' migration in EU as institutional basis of management of international migrations
According to the analysis of World Bank data on the dynamics of migration indicators in Europe and Fragile State Index data the authors determine the groups of EU countries in geo economic risk, which forms the pushing factors in the refugee flow formation. The geographic structure of refugees' migratory flows to the EU is analyzed and the migration corridor dynamics is determined, in particular, it is found out that the overwhelming majority of refugees arrive to the EU through the Central and Eastern Mediterranean channels. In addition, It is determined that strengthening military and political instability in Africa and the Middle East, the tight policies and institutional mechanisms for crossing the EU's borders cause the increased flows of illegal migrants entering the EU in dangerous ways, in particular through the Mediterranean Sea, where a significant number of such persons, especially women and children, die. In addition, EU countries are structured by their migration policies (views on immigration, using of quantitative restrictions on immigration including highly skilled workers) As a result of the legal document study, the authors establish the system of documents identifying the institutional frameworks for the refugees' and asylum seekers' migratory flow management. Za rezul'tatami analizu danikh Svitovogo Banku pro dinamiku pokaznikiv migratsiyi u Ievropi, a takozh pokaznikiv reitingu nediiezdatnosti derzhav vstanovleno grupi krayin IeS za rivnem geoekonomichnogo riziku, iakii formuie faktori vishtovkhuvannia pri formuvanni potokiv bizhentsiv. Proanalizovano geografichnu strukturu migratsiinikh potokiv bizhentsiv do IeS ta viznacheno dinamiku migratsiinikh koridoriv, zokrema viznacheno, shcho perevazhna chisel'nist' bizhentsiv potrapliaie v IeS cherez Tsentral'nii ta Skhidnii Seredzemnomors'ki kanali. Krim togo, strukturovano krayini IeS za napriamami migratsiinoyi politiki (pogliadami na immigratsiiu ta vikoristanniam kil'kisnikh obmezhen' shchodo immigratsiyi, v t.ch. visokokvalifikovanikh pratsivnikiv) Za rezul'tatami vivchennia sistemi normativno pravovikh dokumentiv vstanovleno sistemu dokumentiv, shcho viznachaiut' institutsiini ramki upravlinnia migratsiinimi potokami bizhentsiv ta shukachiv pritulku.
Viktor Valeriiovich Ievdokimov Katerina Volodimirivna Shimans'ka
214776818
Intra EU youth mobility: aspirations and reality of return migration to Latvia
Intra EU mobility is a multifaced process, entailing various forms of mobility, including cross border commuting, seasonal and other short term migration, as well as circular and more permanent migration. Indeed, contemporary migration patterns in Europe show an increase in, and diversification of, migrant flows as a result of differences in wealth levels, the removal of restrictions on the free movement of labour, reduced transportation and communication costs, the expansion of formal and informal labour recruitment networks, and initiatives by governments and employers to recruit labour into specific economic sectors. Besides, all of these mobility forms coexists in a rapidly changing landscape of European migration. All across Europe young people are among the most mobile groups and intra EU mobility has been composed of a high share of youth. Since the first EU enlargement towards the East in 2004, both rural regions and urban areas of Latvia have witnessed the large scale emigration of young and skilled people. In the following years, out migration from Latvia has been associated with the economic recession that occurred due to the global financial crisis of 2007 2008. The return migration of Latvian nationals in recent years has increased but remains modest. The ultimate outcome of youth return migration depends on whether the returnees have accumulated or depleted their human, financial and social capital during their migration experience. Against this backdrop our study discusses migration aspirations, previous experience and actual return behaviour of Latvian youth. We aim to explore the relationship between migration aspirations and actual behaviour considering the connections between return and circular migration. The focus is on the geographical mobility of young adults (defined as those aged between 16 and 35) At the same time, we acknowledge that 'youth' and 'young adults' are flexible categories. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of our study are based on several data sets including the results derived from the Horizon2020 YOMOBILITY project. The results highlight the differences between Latvians, depending on their willingness (or not) to return. The observed increase in circular patterns reveals that Latvians benefit from their stay abroad. Our findings suggest that young returnees perceive migration as valuable and enriching experience. We also distinguish our results between mobile students and higherand lower skilled workers.
Zaiga Krisjane Elina Apsite-Berina Guido Sechi Maris Berzins
158778659
MIGRATION RELATED RESTRICTIONS BY THE EU MEMBER STATES IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE 2015 REFUGEE "CRISIS" IN EUROPE: WHAT DID WE LEARN?
The article explores the actual and potential negative effects of selected restrictive measures undertaken by the European Union Member States on the protection of asylum seekers and refugees in Europe and its near vicinity, and the lessons learned from the post 2015 migration and refugee 'crisis' in the EU. The article aims to provide a legal assessment of these measures and their consequences from the perspective of international and EU law. The selected restrictive measures employed by the Member States in relation to or post 2015 refugee 'crisis' that are analysed in the article, relate to restrictions in the area of border controls: reintroduction of Schengen control at EU internal borders; physical barriers built along the borders of EU Member States and closure of external borders; other restrictions through legislative changes related to fast track procedures and the increased use of detention. The research demonstrates that the restrictive measures analysed have already caused and will raise concerns resulting in legal actions at national, as well as European courts, the latter being far less favourable to accepting the arguments of "unexpected migration flow" protection of national security or public order as justification for such measures. The article suggests that the lessons learned from the post 2015 refugee 'crisis' have been limited, and restrictive tendencies continue, including new trends in the upcoming revision of EU asylum legislation.
Lyra Jakuleviciene