No description available.

The dissertation examines one of the most remarkable and controversial developments in the recent history of European integration, namely the institutionalization of a regional policy regime to manage the continent’s frontiers. By adopting this regime (known in policy circles as ‘Schengen’), European governments have in fact relinquished part of their sovereign authority over the politically sensitive issue of border control, thereby challenging what for a long time was the dominant national approach to policy-making in this domain. In order to account for the regime’s emergence and success, a constructivist analytical framework centred on the notion of ‘cultures of border control’ is advanced. From this perspective, the adoption of a regional approach to govern Europe’s frontiers is the result of the evolution of a nationalist (‘Westphalian’) culture—or set of background assumptions and related practices about borders shared by a given policy community—into a post-nationalist one (‘Schengen’). The cultural evolutionary argument elaborated in the dissertation captures the unique political dynamics that have characterized border control in Europe in the last two decades and offers a more nuanced account of recent developments than those available in the existing European Studies literature. It can also shed light on current trends defining European politics beyond border control (e.g., Europe’s policy towards its neighbours) and on other attempts to regionalize border control outside Europe (e.g., the proposal for a North American security perimeter).

Grenzen sind soziale Tatsachen, die sich räumlich manifestieren – etwa wenn Schmuggler und Grenzschützer an Grenzübergängen aufeinandertreffen und in ritualisierter Form Bedingungen und Möglichkeiten des Grenzübertritts aushandeln. Das Grenzgeschehen wird in diesem Beitrag in soziologisch-ethnologischer Perspektive am Beispiel des Kaliningrader Grenzgebiets betrachtet.

Global people movement passes through cress-border by economic prosperity. Each nation loosens the factor of national safety for economic advantage, let cress-borders people movement is free and convenience. After 911 terrorist attacked, cross-border people movement is challenge to focus events again. At the same time, the safety of border management is suspected again, include legal and illegal migration, ex: human traffic, smuggle, terrorist attack. The plan of migration policy is attraction and admission about professional and high-tech personnel. In addition, it is relaxed stay and residence of professional for limit of border management. Each nation considers the problems about national benefits and border management because the demand of each nation is diffident. It will have the balance to comment blesses it to push aside the effect. Each nation cooperates about border control of global people movement, and makes land settlement policy importantly.

The dissertation examines one of the most remarkable and controversial developments in the recent history of European integration, namely the institutionalization of a regional policy regime to manage the continent’s frontiers. By adopting this regime (known in policy circles as ‘Schengen’), European governments have in fact relinquished part of their sovereign authority over the politically sensitive issue of border control, thereby challenging what for a long time was the dominant national approach to policy-making in this domain. In order to account for the regime’s emergence and success, a constructivist analytical framework centred on the notion of ‘cultures of border control’ is advanced. From this perspective, the adoption of a regional approach to govern Europe’s frontiers is the result of the evolution of a nationalist (‘Westphalian’) culture—or set of background assumptions and related practices about borders shared by a given policy community—into a post-nationalist one (‘Schengen’). The cultural evolutionary argument elaborated in the dissertation captures the unique political dynamics that have characterized border control in Europe in the last two decades and offers a more nuanced account of recent developments than those available in the existing European Studies literature. It can also shed light on current trends defining European politics beyond border control (e.g., Europe’s policy towards its neighbours) and on other attempts to regionalize border control outside Europe (e.g., the proposal for a North American security perimeter).

Globalization has expanded the travelling privileges of certain populations (namely for those in the West) while it has simultaneously resulted in restrictions on the movement of the more racialized and impoverished populations. The economically disadvantaged groups are subjected to strict border control policies such as stringent visa requirements (to stop them before they migrate), border infrastructure (to curb their mobility while they are travelling across international borders), and detention policies (after they arrive in the host country). The corresponding challenges are particularly taxing and traumatic for vulnerable populations, especially minors. Using qualitative methodology, this research explores the interview-based accounts of nine asylum-seeking children and young adults regarding their migration experiences with border control policies (during their migration) and administrative detention procedures in Canada. Drawing on Criminology of Mobility as a conceptual framework, the findings of this study demonstrate that border infrastructure endangers young asylum seekers’ lives as it compels them to pursue more precarious means, such as using the services of human smugglers or crossing international borders from isolated and dangerous crossing points. The findings of this research also suggest that juvenile asylum seekers may be experiencing border control policies and immigration detention more negatively because of their age-related vulnerabilities.

Illegal immigration has been a major topic of concern in the last few years in both the United States and the European Union; the policies and practices of border control and the use of detention have often been the center for political debate. Assessing the policies in the United States and the European Union in regards to how 'liberal' each are carried out through practice provides insight to the disparity between policy and practice. The thesis analyzes and compares the discourse used written into the policies, official government guidelines, and reports which focus on the approval and criticism of how the polices are put into practice through the United States and European Union government agencies; whist providing data on recent illegal immigrant trends along the U.S.-Mexican border, as well as the Greek-Turkish border. The results discovered conclude that the European Union writes more 'liberal' discourse into their policy and government guidelines than the United States; the European Union illustrates more concern for fundamental individual rights while carrying out practice along the borders; but is falling short in ensuring that Member States (such as Greece) carry out other policy areas up to European Union standards, in this case the use of detention. The implications of the thesis offer...

In the autumn of 2015 a huge amount of refugees were on the run to Sweden. The news media described the situation as a refugee crisis and border controls were initiated. The aim of this study was to examine how two Swedish newspapers, one national and one local, portrayed refugees at the time when the border controls were initiated in Sweden. The questions examined were: How are the refugees portrayed, what are the similarities and differences between Dagens Nyheter and Sydsvenskan’s portrayal of the refugees? To approach this we made two different analysis of reports from each newspaper, three from Dagens Nyheter and two from Sydsvenskan. We did a framing analysis on the text and a semiotic analysis on the pictures. Findings show that the portrayal of refugees are very similar in both newspapers. The refugees are described as inferior, but at the same time brave, well-educated and hopeful. We also found that refugees often are portrayed as “the others” and the citizens of Sweden are portrayed as “we”. Although the similarities outweighs, we found some interesting differences in the newspapers portrayal of the refugees. For example, in Dagens Nyheter the hopefulness is combined with a positive and joyful approach, while Sydsvenskan describes the hope with an uncertainty and concern about the future.

In this chapter, we draw empirical and theoretical conclusions based on the various analyses contained in this volume that focus on the European and U.S. migration regimes. We conclude that immigration policies have a multitude of unintended effects which affect both migrants and governments in the countries of origin, transit, and arrival. This chapter begins with an overview of the interest policies inside and outside the ‘defended’ territories. In the U.S. a lucrative internal market of border control has emerged, whereas the EU’s externalized border control includes the neighboring countries. The second part describes the unintended effects arising due to inconsistent general policies of the countries of arrival and origin, which often contradict the official immigration policies. Following this, the limited effect of border control measures on immigrants and their journeys are discussed. In the fourth section we explore in more detail the unintended effects in the form of new areas of cooperation, including new forms of self-organization, local interest groups, and sanctuary movements. The final section summarizes the various unintended effects and offers recommendations for decision makers in the field of migration policy.

The irregular migration over the Mediterranean Sea has become a priority on the political agenda in recent years. This paper examines whether the attempts of managing the irregular migration have constituted a process of externalisation of border control and/or migration management in the context of Italy and Libya. Specifically, a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the countries in February 2017 has been studied to determine if it can be understood as an example of externalisation. The Memorandum has been assessed using three criteria for externalisation, as identified by Paoletti (2011), as well as a model for categorising measures into ‘fencing’ or ‘gatekeeping’ strategies, presented by Triandafyllidou and Dimitriadi (2013). Additionally, a critical geopolitical perspective has been applied, aiming at identifying the Memorandum’s geopolitical implications. An examination of studies on previous agreements demonstrates that a process of externalisation has been occurring, and the analysis of the Memorandum indicates that the agreement can be understood as a part of this process. Furthermore, a number of geopolitical implications have been identified in the Memorandum, regarding power, sovereignty, borders and securitisation. Since there is no universal definition of what measures are considered to constitute externalisation, any assessments made are arguably subjective.