Gamlen, A. 2008 Why Engage Diasporas, Compas WP No.63 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Diaspora Engagement Policies: What Are They, and What Kinds of States Use Them? Centre on Migration
Policy and Society, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2006
This paper presents an original typology of diaspora engagement policies intended to facilitate comparative research. The typology is arises from a two part argument: a) that diaspora engagement policies consist of a diversity of measures aimed at (re)producing citizen-sovereign relationships with expatriates, and b) that these measures can be coordinated as part of states' attempts to manage the scale of their political and economic manoeuvres. By using the typology to systematically review the diaspora engagement policies of over 70 states, the paper questions four key assumptions in existing literature on diaspora engagement policies, establishing that they are compatible with two models of citizenship, and arguing that they are not confined to any one kind of state.
2008
This paper evaluates arguments for and against diaspora engagement policies, focusing on three main areas: origin-state interests, the mutual obligations between states and emigrants, and the cooperation among sending-states, receiving-states and migrants themselves. Firstly, it argues that globalization and transnationalism present imperatives and opportunities for migrant-sending states to pursue their interests by engaging their diasporas. Secondly, it argues that mutual obligations between sending states and emigrants call for better diaspora policy making. Thirdly, it argues that better diaspora policies are a necessary part of strengthening global migration governance. Better diaspora policy does not mean more diaspora policy but more coherent diaspora policy, in order to avoid the arbitrary inefficiencies and injustices which currently characterise state-diaspora relations in many parts of the world.
International Political Science Review
The relationship of states to populations beyond their borders is of increasing interest to those seeking to understand the international politics of migration. This introduction to the special issue of International Political Science Review on diasporas and sending states provides an overview of existing explanations for why states reach out to diasporas and migrants abroad and problematizes in important ways the idea that the sending state is a unitary actor. It highlights the need to examine the extraterritorial behaviour of agents within countries of origin, such as parties, bureaucracies and non-state actors, and to account for why and how their outreach differs. This entails looking at how outreach is conditioned by a state’s sovereignty and capacity, type of nationalism, and regime character. This special issue starts a new conversation by delving deeper into the motivations of agents within countries of origin, and how their outreach is determined by the states and regimes i...
Compas, 2006
This paper presents an original typology of diaspora engagement policies intended to facilitate comparative research. The typology is arises from a two part argument: a) that diaspora engagement policies consist of a diversity of measures aimed at (re)producing citizen-sovereign relationships with expatriates, and b) that these measures can be coordinated as part of states’ attempts to manage the scale of their political and economic manoeuvres. By using the typology to systematically review the diaspora engagement policies of over 70 states, the paper questions four key assumptions in existing literature on diaspora engagement policies, establishing that they are compatible with two models of citizenship, and arguing that they are not confined to any one kind of state.
Gamlen, A. 2014 Diaspora Institutions and Diaspora Governance, International Migration Review
International Migration Review , 2014
Why do governments form institutions devoted to emigrants and their descendants in the diaspora? Such institutions have become a regular feature of political life in many parts of the world: Over half all United Nations Member States now have one. Diaspora institutions merit research because they connect new developments in the global gover-nance of migration with new patterns of national and transnational sovereignty and citizenship, and new ways of constructing individual identity in relation to new collectivities. But these institutions are generally overlooked. Migration policy is still understood as immigration policy, and research on diaspora institutions has been fragmented, case-study dominated, and largely descriptive. In this article, I review and extend the relevant theoretical literature and highlight empirical research priorities. I argue that existing studies focus too exclusively on national-level interests and ideas to explain how individual states tap diaspora resources and embrace these groups within the nation-state. However, these approaches cannot explain the global spread of diaspora institutions. This, I argue, requires a comparative approach and greater attention to the role of efforts to create a coherent but decentralized system of global governance in the area of international migration.. All remaining errors are mine.
Relations Among The State And The Diaspora In The Context Of The Diaspora Engagement Policy
This article aims to present the ways in which contemporary states build relationships with their diasporas, and what consequences it brings for the classically understood concept of the nation state. The so-called diaspora engagement policy, increasingly popular, constitutes a challenge to the traditionally perceived state and contributes to the reconceptualization of this category (especially in the context of such attributes of statehood as sovereignty, territoriality, citizenship and loyalty). The article consists of three main parts. The first part presents the political, economic and socio - cultural potential of diasporas, which makes them significant actors in the process of shaping the contemporary international order. The second part focuses on the definition of the notion of diaspora engagement policy, its main assumptions and implementation methods (capacity building policies, extending rights and extracting obligations). The impact of the diaspora engagement policy on the classical concept of the state and its functioning is discussed in the last part of the article. It is emphasized here that the policy in question leads to relaxation of relationships between territoriality and identity (belonging) as well as sovereignty (authority). Keywords: diaspora engagement policy, diaspora, state, sovereignty, territoriality.
2006
This paper presents an original typology of diaspora engagement policies intended to facilitate comparative research. The typology is arises from a two part argument: a) that diaspora engagement policies consist of a diversity of measures aimed at (re)producing citizen-sovereign relationships with expatriates, and b) that these measures can be coordinated as part of states’ attempts to manage the scale of their political and economic manoeuvres. By using the typology to systematically review the diaspora engagement policies of over 70 states, the paper questions four key assumptions in existing literature on diaspora engagement policies, establishing that they are compatible with two models of citizenship, and arguing that they are not confined to any one kind of state.
Routledge , 2017
One important question is, what kinds of policies ‘make’ diasporas? Or in other words, what are diaspora policies? In this paper diaspora policies are defined as state institutions and practices that apply to members of that state’s society who reside outside its borders. These range from state-sponsored celebrations and awards for expatriates, to bureaucratic units dedicated to the diaspora, to external voting rights and bilateral agreements on social security and pension transferability, right through to the range of mechanisms through which origin states attempt to extract finances, expertise, and influence from their diasporas. In short, they consist of that portion of the state machinery which protrudes beyond territory. Diaspora policies are most often interpreted as facets of ‘external’ or ‘extra-territorial citizenship’ (Bauböck 1994; Laguerre 1998; Itzigsohn 2000; Lee 2004; Glick Schiller 2005; Barry 2006): by incorporating the diaspora into the state, these policies redefine or reconfigure what it means to be a member of ‘national society’.