No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

NOTE: Missing p. i of Preface

The following study serves to develop consciousness about the smaller, not very well-known,emigration from the two southern Swedish cities of Växjö and Kalmar, which are situated inthe province of Småland, to Germany between 1865 and 1914. By using the digital archive ofEmiWeb, the gender, age and marital status of the emigrants have been analyzed and theyhave been categorized into three different social classes depending on the title or occupationthey had at the time of emigration. Furthermore, the results of the research of the two citieshave been compared with each other which resulted in a lot of similarities between the citieswhere the greatest part of the emigrants were between the ages of 20 and 29, unmarried, andpart of the working class. Overall, every age group was represented which also includedindividuals over the age of 50 and children between the ages of 0 and 9. Members of themiddle class and bourgeoisie were also present but to a lesser extent. Concerning the gender among the emigrants, the results of this study show that the proportion of women is greaterthan that of men, foremost in the first of the five periods in which this study is divided. Altogether this study provides a deeper insight and understanding of which people emigratedto Germany. However, the number of unregistered emigrants hinders the capacity to present areliable and comprehensive generalization about them.

University of Macau / Faculty of Law

This study analyzes newspaper coverage of immigration reform in mainstream newspapers prior to, and following the debate in June 2007. The newspaper text is analyzed using metaphor interpretation supported by content analysis. The quantitative result categorizes the identified metaphors in three distinct metaphor categories about: immigrants and immigration, immigration policy and enforcement, and metaphors about the debate and immigration issue itself. The relative distribution of metaphors among categories is provided. Using an open coding process, emergent metaphor categories are identified. The qualitative findings describe metaphors and schemas that were potentially activated by particular metaphorical phrases in this context. Lastly, this research compares the similarities and differences of the immigration debate of the early 20th century with the contemporary U.S. and European debate.

This dissertation is about policies and attitudes toward emigration and return migration. It explores these topics in two parts. First, it asks what policies states employ to regulate emigration and what might explain the adoption of these policies and what form they take. It presents a variety of emigration-encouraging and -discouraging policies along with a rich set of examples of countries that have adopted them across the world. Using the UN World Population Policies database, it then shows how policies vary by region, with emigration-encouraging policies being more common in Asia and emigration-discouraging policies more present in Latin America. Moreover, it finds that having larger populations, receiving more remittances, being less democratic and having less state capacity are attributes of states that correlate positively with the adoption of emigration policies. Likewise, being more populous, receiving more remittances and having a lower share of the population that intends to migrate are characteristics of states that positively correlate with the adoption of policies that are more emigration-encouraging. The second part asks how social identity and economic concerns affect people’s attitudes toward emigration and return migration policies, respectively. By analyzing multiple survey experiments that were embedded in an original large-scale phone survey in The Gambia, it finds some support for the centrality of economic as well as ethnic concerns in the formation of attitudes toward emigration and return migration. These findings are in line with the main arguments developed in the dissertation. On the one hand, it argues that individuals hold other-regarding preferences, are concerned with the political demography of their country and receiving remittances when it comes to ethnicity. Which of these mechanisms is the strongest depends on the context of migration. On the other hand, people are concerned with the labor market effects of emigration in their country and therefore support policies encouraging the emigration of people with the same occupation as themselves and oppose policies encouraging their return. Regarding interaction effects, it finds some suggestive evidence that low-skilled people are more concerned with the economic dimension of migration policy than high-skilled people are. This dissertation makes essential contributions to the existing literature and policy debates as it advances our understanding of policies and attitudes toward less frequently studied areas of migration, including emigration, return migration and migration in the Global South.

No description available.

The general problem of the morality of borders is to determine what kind of borders liberal democracies ought to have. This in turn raises two particular problems. First to determine the nature of states entitlement to control the administration of political and territorial borders and second, to determine what constitutes to exercise this entitlement in fair terms. This thesis is devoted to the first particular problem. I distinguish two kinds of approaches to legitimate border control: justice-based accounts and legitimacy oriented accounts. I argue that justice-based accounts are inappropriate to frame and address the legitimacy problem of borders because they typically merely assume that a set of institutions apply to those over whom coercion is exercised. But these accounts never provide an explanation about why we (and not others) have legitimate rights over territorial borders. This standard objection shows that these views fail to reach the boundary problem, but it does not say why. In this thesis I advance an explanation. I say that justice-based accounts are unfit to address problems of borders. The idea is that justice-based is a simplified account tailored to the problem of public justification, but this simplification has removed the traits relevant to reach the boundary problem. In contrast I introduced legitimacy-oriented accounts of borders. When legitimacy is not about justice and the problem of public justification of coercion, it is about integrity and the assessment of political power from the point of view of distinct political virtues such as fairness, democratic participation, due process, and justice. Legitimacy as integrity performs a division of labour between distinct conceptions of legitimacy in order to justify political power as a whole including the kind of power that borders exercise. But integrity of international basic institutions like borders point out to porous borders as the appropriate case for liberal democracies.