Striving for justice and freedom in the world of migration and development - a practitioner’s perspective (original) (raw)

Striving for Justice and Freedom in the World of Migration and Development

Although migration as a subject of academic study and debate has grown in popularity, many remain complacent and uninvolved. The context of South-North migration is one of structural and cultural violence, as described by Johan Galtung, following historic periods when direct violence was acceptable practices of slavery and colonisation. The inequalities of today are a mirror of the past when analysing the global and national institutional frameworks as well as certain practices such as the hesitation of authorities in preventing and addressing the exploitation of migrant workers. People need to be more informed and involved in the fight against inequality, and in demanding fairer policies from global and national institutions that guarantee human rights for all.

Migrants: Suitable brokers of development?

Migration: is the 21st century different? In recent years migration, again, has become one of the most controversial and emotive social and economic issues. This despite its being as old as human beings who moved around to improve their living conditions, for safety and even adventure! In previous phases of globalization and since the eighteenth century, the development of the rich 'North' depended on the movement of millions of people through slavery, indenture and wage labour.

Introduction: migration and global justice

Handbook of Migration and Global Justice, 2021

Human migration is a common feature of societies, yet in today's world with the securitization of nation-state borders, migration is often conveyed as a problem and migrants as risks to the societies they wish to enter. The securitized response of states to migration is contradictory given the signals that states give about the importance of global mobility to their economies, to growth, to cultural diversity-all benefiting domestic populations. And herein lies a key conundrum for this handbook in the tensions between international and national priorities, duties, laws, and also visions for human coexistence and harmony. Deliberations on migration fit squarely within these tensions. Conceptions of global justice are articulated in a number of domains including the global resource allocation recognized as the root cause of global inequalities (Pogge 2001), as redistributive justice (Fraser 2007; Shachar 2009), articulated in new forms of membership (Bauböck 2009), as well as calls for symbolic recognition (Honneth 2004). From global justice perspectives, many writers have articulated for several decades the problems that result from the embedded nature of methodological nationalism in research, policymaking and social attitudes to human populations (Wimmer and Glick Schiller 2003; Glick Schiller et al. 2011; Faist 2010; Levitt et al. 2003). This methodology proceeds from the assumption that human populations are not only contained but metaphorically sealed within the 'container' of a nation-state, with the nation-state providing identity, resources and protections for members. While international law (particularly human rights), and so many other regulatory systems, operate with the human as the core concern, the nation-state system continues to prioritize members/citizens. Indeed, in the face of the rapid changes associated with globalization, which have decentred the state in some respects, the legal power to determine who is and is not admitted to territory and recognized as a citizen is one remaining arena of state control. Instead, commentators such as Satvinder Juss (2006) argue that migration should be recognized as both a moral and an economic imperative that is in line with what he calls 'global public interest'. One key outcome for migrants from the contradictions inherent in restrictive models of border control and citizenship in otherwise deregulated globalized political and economic systems is exclusion from basic rights such as healthcare, education and social welfare. The serious consequences of differential treatment by nation-states of citizens and others have been brought into sharp relief by the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the official designation of the pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization, restrictions on mobility, border closures and myriad other micro-changes to rules, regulations and policies that relate to access to healthcare, social welfare provisions, the right to work and other 'basic rights' are now evident in most states across the globe. This is despite consistent rhetoric from United Nations (UN) bodies urging a unified response to a problem of genuinely global scale. Accompanying these restrictions and measures is the political rhetoric by leaders of many nation-states, invoking a closed-border, citizens-only vision of who requires protection

Reframing the Debate on Migration, Development and Human Rights

The relationship between migration, development, and human rights is a topic of growing interest among international organisations, academics, and civil society organisations. To varying degrees, international organisations such as theWorld Bank and the International Organization for Migration see remittances as anessential tool in the development of migrant-sending, underdeveloped countries. They also envisage international migration management as a core element in the design and implementation of migration policies that are apparently beneficial for all parties.We argue that this perspective, which has dominated the academic and policy agendas, is essentially onesided, de-contextualised, reductionist, and misleading. It overlooks the realm of neoliberal globalisation and unequal development in which contemporary migration is embedded. It also disregards human and labour rights as central and intrinsic elements of coherent migration and development policies, as well as the exploitation, social exclusion, human insecurity, and criminalisation suffered by international migrants. In addition, it masks most of the fundamental contributions made by migrants to the destination countries and ignores the costs of migration for the countries of origin; costs that go far beyond the overemphasised ‘positive’ impact of remittances. The purpose of this article is to provide some key elements for reframing the debate on migration, development, and human rights with particular emphasis on the promotion of a comprehensive, inclusive, and human-centred alternative agenda.

Migration and justice in the era of sustainable development goals: a conceptual framework

Sustainability Science

Migration and mobility are major characteristics of societies worldwide. The reasons for and pathways of migrations vary, as do perceptions of migration. Political debates are often organised normatively: the debate on the sustainable development goals presents migration foremost as a development issue resulting from global inequalities. The problems faced by particular migrants, and what a more sustainable approach to migration would look like are, therefore, often lost in political debates. We aim to address those gaps: the article conceptualizes, based on established academic debates, how sustainability in migration can be addressed systematically, which aspects are important for a more sustainable migration process and which trade-offs and injustices exist from several perspectives. We create a conceptual framework of sustainability in migration processes, building on the concepts of inter- and intragenerational justice, commonly accepted as the core of the sustainability concep...