Daily Archives: Friday, February 12, 2016

University scholarships for refugees

Event: BSA Citizenship Study Group and the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) Standing Group on Citizenship: Political Citizenship and Social Movements

BSA Citizenship Study Group and the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) Standing Group on Citizenship:

Political Citizenship and Social Movements

University of Portsmouth,
27-28 June 2016

Sponsored by University of Portsmouth’s Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Citizenship, ‘Race’ and Belonging Research Group and the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence

Keynote Speakers:

Prof Engin Isin (The Open University)
Dr Therese O’Toole (University of Bristol)

Recent cultural, social and political events reveal how citizenship and social movements collide and interact in increasingly nuanced and complex ways. Occupy, the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt, Gezi Park, Sans Papiers, No Borders demand that we re-assess this relationship and think beyond the classification of citizenship and formal political membership. Aided by technological transformations, social movements emerge as both local/global in orientation – from environmental rights, animal rights, gender and sexual rights, migrant and refugee movements to demands for colonial reparations and indigenous land claims. Whilst traditionally understood as the enactment of civil or political ‘citizenship’, scholars have begun to explore how social movements themselves provide alternative spaces for the play, disruption and even (re)theorisation of citizenship. Importantly for Citizenship Studies, the participation of those without formal rights in social movements complicates our sovereign understanding of the citizen. Equally, whilst civil and political citizenship has usually been studied and understood as a product of European history, exploring social movements helps us recognise the global dimensions of being political as well as its radical contingency. This two day interdisciplinary conference addresses these issues by exploring how citizenship and social movements continue to reshape each other.

In exploring the interrelationship between citizenship and current social movements we call for papers across several fields of study, including political philosophy, political geography, sociology, legal studies, education and political studies. In order to understand how citizenship studies can help us understand social movements and how social movements reconfigure citizenship we are interested in research on:

• Participation; social movements as resistance; protest and contemporary rights claims.
• The development of social/political trust, social movements and political subjectivity.
• The role of identities in citizenship and social movements.
• Mobilisation, new information and communication technologies (ICTs) and social and political movements.
• New trans-nationalisation of citizenship and social movements.
• Social movements as sites for education, practice and learning.

This will be a two-day event organised around a series of keynote talks and paper presentations that will allow for the exchange of ideas and experiences.

We especially welcome abstract submissions from postgraduate and early career researchers as well as established researchers. Each speaker will be given 15 minutes to present their paper and 10 minutes each for questions.
Abstracts should be no more than 250 words and include title, author, affiliation, current position and contact email. To submit an abstract, please go to (http://portal.britsoc.co.uk/public/abstract/Abstracts.aspx) no later than Tuesday 1st March 2016.

Registration is free, but delegates must register. Lunch and refreshments will be provided.
Registration will be open after the decision on abstracts is released.

For inquiries, please contact:

Dr Nora Siklodi (University of Portsmouth, UK) nora.siklodi@port.ac.uk (Conference chair; Contact for academic and University of Portsmouth inquires related to this event)

Dr Kristoffer Halvorsrud (University of Newcastle, UK) k_halvorsrud@hotmail.com (Contact for abstract and booking related inquires, as well as BSA Citizenship study group inquires)

Prof. Trond Solhaug (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway) trond.solhaug@plu.ntnu.no (Contact for ECPR Standing Group on Citizenship inquires)

Event Invitation: Official release of ‘Look How Far We’ve Come: Commentaries On British Society And Racism?’ DVD @ Houses Of Parliament Feb. 24, 6-8.30pm

Invitation: Official release of ‘Look How Far We’ve Come: Commentaries On
British Society And Racism?’ DVD @ Houses Of Parliament Feb. 24, 6-8.30pm

I wish to invite you to the official release of the ‘Look How Far We’ve Come: Commentaries On British Society And Racism?’ DVD. This will be the first public screening of the full documentary, which was filmed over a three year period during which over five dozen contributors* contributed.

The event, which marks the 50th anniversary of the 1965 Race Relations Act, will end with a Q&A which looks back in order to move forward in highlighting racism, race equality legislation and practice, and identity. Contributors and VIPs will be welcome to comment or respond to questions.

Hosted by John McDonnell MP, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, it takes place on Wednesday February 24 2016,  6.00-8.30pm at the Wilson Room,  Portcullis House,  SW1A 0AA
(visitors need to allow 10-15 minutes for security checks).

If you can attend, kindly RSVP: Awula Serwah via  btwsc@hotmail.com by Feb. 12 2016. The Look… DVD and Look Race/Racism Primer are also available  via  btwsc@hotmail.com.

Also, I’d like to bring to your attention one of our upcoming event that may be of interest: 

Culture, Appropriation, Authorship And Copyright – The Story Of ‘The Lion Sleeps Tonight’ Mar 7, 5.30-8.30pm @ University Of Westminster http://bit.ly/1SglSCM


SLS Migration and Asylum Law Section: Call for Papers/Posters

SLS Migration and Asylum Law Section: Call for Papers/Posters

2016 SLS Annual Conference at University of Oxford


This is the call for papers and posters for the Migration and Asylum Law Section of the 2016 SLS Annual Conference to be held at the University of Oxford from Tuesday 6th September to Friday 9th September.  This year’s theme is ‘Legislation and the Role of the Judiciary’.

The Migration and Asylum Section will meet in the second half of the conference on Thursday 8th and Friday 9th September and we are very pleased to announce that Professor Dora Kostakopoulou and Dr Cathryn Costello have already agreed to give a presentation.

If you are also interested in delivering a paper, please, submit an abstract of 250 words max. by midnight on Friday 18th March.  All abstracts must be submitted through the EasyChair conference system which can be accessed using the following link: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=sls2016. Full instructions on how to use the EasyChair system can be found here:  https://gallery.mailchimp.com/47624183ad52dd8428c97d3f6/files/Using_EasyChair_to_Submit_a_Paper_to_SLS_2016_02.pdf Please, contact Jed Meers at jed.meers@york.ac.uk if you experience any problems using EasyChair.

We would welcome proposals for papers on any issue relating to migration and asylum, including those addressing this year’s conference theme, whether from a doctrinal, critical, socio-legal or empirical perspective.  Alternatively, if you would like to propose a panel or roundtable discussion on a topic of current interest, please, do get in touch by e-mail to see if this can be arranged.

As the SLS is keen to ensure that as many members with good quality papers as possible are able to present, we discourage speakers from presenting more than one paper at the conference.  With this in mind, when you submit an abstract via EasyChair you will be asked to notify whether you are also responding to calls for papers from other sections.

Please, note that whilst you need only submit a proposed title and abstract at this stage, speakers will be asked to submit a copy of their draft paper no later than a week before the conference or, if that is not possible, their PowerPoint slides / handout or an extended abstract (two sides of A4).  This is to enable those who wish to read the papers in advance to do so, thereby enhancing the quality of feedback and discussion within the sessions.

We should also note that the SLS offers a Best Paper Prize which can be awarded to academics at any stage of their career.  The Prize carries a £250 monetary award and winning papers are published in Legal Studies.  To be eligible:

  • speakers must be fully paid-up members of the SLS;
  • papers must not exceed 11,000 words including footnotes (as counted in Word);
  • papers must be uploaded to EasyChair by midnight on Monday 29th August; and
  • papers must not have been published previously or have been accepted or be under consideration for publication.

Those wishing to present a poster should select ‘Submit a Poster’ within EasyChair. The SLS offers a Best Poster Prize, which carries a £250 monetary award and the winning poster will be displayed at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies in London.

We have also been asked to remind you that all speakers and poster presenters will need to register and pay to attend the conference.  As part of a new initiative this year, to reduce the number of late cancellations, speakers and poster presenters will be asked to register for the conference by the end of June in order to secure their place within the programme, though, please, do let us know if this is likely to pose any problems. Booking information will be circulated in due course.

We look forward to your submissions,

With best wishes,

Dr Diego Acosta Arcarazo   and Dr Violeta Moreno-Lax

d.acosta@bristol.ac.uk    and    v.moreno-lax@qmul.ac.uk

Co-convenors of SLS Migration and Asylum Law Section

Call for Papers Europe’s crisis: What future for immigration and asylum law and policy?

Call for Papers

Europe’s crisis: What future for immigration and asylum law and policy?

Migration and Law Network 2016 Conference: 27-28 June, in association with Queen Mary University of London

The European Union is today faced by significant movements of refugees and migrants from places which have experienced war or economic or environmental pressure. Combined with recent terrorist attacks, these developments have led some to doubt the viability of the EU migration framework. At the same time, they have led to arguments for new action by EU institutions and agencies, and by neighbouring countries. New forms of solidarity have been sought by some states and sections of public opinion, but rejected by others. Given the current sense of crisis, there are great uncertainties as to the future direction of the EU migration framework, as well as its content.

Against this background, we invite papers from any discipline which address legal and policy aspects of the ongoing EU migration crisis. Among the questions that papers may wish to address are the following:

·      What is the nature, and what are the sources, of the EU crisis concerning migration?

·      What should be the legal, policy and operational responses to the European migration crisis?

·      Is solidarity among states and peoples possible inside the EU? Does solidarity apply also externally, towards non-EU countries?

·      What is, and what should be, the role of neighbouring and transit states in controlling migration towards the EU?

·      Are there lessons from elsewhere – including the Americas, South East Asia and Australia – for the experience in the EU and its surrounding region?

·      Are new international norms and approaches needed to accommodate contemporary migration flows?

We welcome papers from academics, researchers with other organisations, and from advanced PhD students.

Abstracts of no more than 200 words alongside the author’s affiliation and contact details should be sent to MLNconference2016@qmul.ac.uk no later than 15 February 2016.

The 2016 conference is being organised by

Prof. Valsamis Mitsilegas, Head of Law Department, Queen Mary

Prof. Elspeth Guild, Jean Monnet Professor, Queen Mary & Radboud University, Nijmegen

Prof. Bernard Ryan, University of Leicester

Dr. Prakash Shah, School of Law, Queen Mary

Dr. Violeta Moreno-Lax, School of Law, Queen Mary

Niovi Vavoula, School of Law, Queen Mary

The Migration and Law Network

The Migration and Law Network was set up in 2007 to promote migration law as a subject within United Kingdom universities. It is overseen by a steering committee of academics and other professionals in the immigration law field. It runs the Migration and Law mailing list for those who work in the field, for which subscription requests may be made at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/migrationlaw. Further information about the network or mailing list may be obtained from the network’s co-chairs, Bernard Ryan (bernard.ryan@le.ac.uk) and Prakash Shah (prakash.shah@qmul.ac.uk).

Call for Papers: Precarious citizenship: Young people who are undocumented, separated and settled in the UK

Birkbeck University of London & Migrant and Refugee Children’s Legal Unit. 

Call for Papers Precarious citizenship: Young people who are undocumented, separated and settled in the UK

 A one-day conference at Birkbeck, University of London to be held on June 1st 2015 for academics, practitioners and activists interested in how precarious citizenship impacts on separated youth as they live and transition to adulthood in the UK. Organised by the Department of Geography, Environment and Development Studies and Pears Institute for the Study of Anti-Semitism at Birkbeck, and Migrant and Refugee Children’s Legal Unit.

Please submit a title and abstract (150 words) and a brief bio (150 words) to k.wells@bbk.ac.uk by 5 pm on March 15th 2016.

We welcome papers that: 

  • Focus on young people who were not aware of their precarious citizenship until State intervention in their lives (going into LA Care; family proceedings; removal/detention of family; police involvement/checks) or when they attempt to access post-school opportunities and services (housing, employment, benefits, higher education etc.) and who were/are Looked After Children by the Local Authority or whose families do not have high levels of economic and/or social capital with which to secure their immigration status and/or who are estranged from their family
  • Focus on the political mobilisation of young people around citizenship and immigration rights (we are particularly interested in papers from activists and/or those young people)
  • We welcome papers from academics, campaigners, activists and practitioners.


Significant numbers of young people who are settled in the UK (some 120,000) do not have British citizenship. Many have no ‘lawful’ status to remain in the UK whilst cuts to legal aid and fast-paced changes to immigration laws fuelled by a hostile anti-immigrant climate mean that this trend may indeed get worse with numbers rising. Many of these young people may have lived in the UK for many years and consider themselves to be British. Indeed, they may not be aware of their precarious citizenship until they leave school and try to apply for bank accounts, jobs, benefits or university or when they are leaving care or following a family breakdown. Their precarious status arises from the combination of their transition out of childhood, which gave them a degree of protection or insulation from immigration laws, and the discriminatory character of immigration law that means for many of these young people, despite being settled in the UK for many years, once they reach adulthood they cannot secure their British citizenship.

The purpose of this conference is to increase awareness of the precarious citizenship of this group of young people in the UK; to share empirical and theoretical knowledge about contemporary and historical forms of precarious citizenship at the intersection of youth and immigration; to develop a network of academics and practitioners who can take forward the study of precarious citizenship in young people’s lives, and to contribute to theoretical and policy development focused on this group; to engage with activists on effective political mobilisation of youth.

The conference is financially supported by Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities, and Migrant and Refugee Children’s Legal Unit.

Nato launches naval patrols to return migrants to Turkey



Military alliance sends three warships, backed by planes, to intercept migrants and refugees in admission from EU that it is failing to cope with flow of people.

Nato has sent a patrol of three warships to intercept migrants trying to reach Greece by sea and send them back to Turkey, as Europe steps up efforts to contain the refugee crisis.

The mission has been agreed and ordered to the Aegean sea in less than 24 hours, an extremely rapid move for the alliance. Nato normally spends months deliberating over decisions and agreeing details.

The German-led patrol will be backed by planes that can monitor the flow of people attempting illegal crossings. Greece and Turkey have agreed that any migrants they intercept will be sent back.

View original post 703 more words

Daily News and Updates on Refugee and Forced Migration Studies 02/12/2016

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Daily News and Updates from ReliefWeb 02/12/2016

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

New Journal Research Articles for Refugee and Forced Migration Studies 02/12/2016

  • “As United Nations (UN) peacekeeping evolved from interposition forces to multidimensional missions, the UN adjusted its peacekeeping principles and allowed a wider use of force. As the latest adjustment, the Security Council adopted a new mandate for UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo creating the ‘Force Intervention Brigade’, described as the first contingent of troops to conduct targeted offensive operations against armed groups. However, this role of the UN as an enforcement actor within a non-international armed conflict was not prepared by an assessment of the rules applicable to UN missions. These rules provide the Force Intervention Brigade with an ambiguous double status being at the same time a specially protected peacekeeping force and a party directly engaged in hostilities. As a consequence, peacekeeping missions as a whole are put at a higher risk of failing to perform their assigned mediation between the conflict parties and of themselves becoming the target of attacks. As a preliminary policy advice, I propose a clear distinction between peacekeeping and peace enforcement troops with a view to protect the peacekeeper’s perceived legitimacy and to reconcile the status of peace enforcement troops with the law applicable to the conflicts they, in fact, became a party to. “


  • “The majority of Palestinians in Denmark have followed a route from villages in Palestine via camps in Lebanon to housing projects in Denmark. Whereas it is well known that the camps were modelled after the villages, it is less well known that the housing projects are referred to and enacted as camps. Based on fieldwork among Palestinians in the Danish camps, this article explores why my interlocutors describe their current lives as a catastrophe. Al-Nakba literally means the catastrophe and, in Palestinian national discourse, it is used to designate the event of 1948, when the Palestinians were expelled from their homeland. However, according to my interlocutors, al-Nakba never stopped, but continues in the present. To understand this phenomenon, I suggest that it is conducive to think of al-Nakba as a reverse national myth, a figure of un-becoming, which is replicated in the present. I argue that, unlike the spectacular catastrophes in Palestine and later in Lebanon, life in the Danish camps is characterized by minor mundane catastrophes that are each so small that they barely register or elicit a moral response, but nevertheless erode the lives of my interlocutors. “


  • “This paper analyzes the determinants of migration duration focusing on family composition and human capital. A utility maximization model is built to show that migrants face a trade-off between avoiding psychic costs from leaving family members and accumulating wealth to support their consumption. The empirical analysis on Mexican men’s US experience carried out using the hazard model shows that marriage and children, which imply a heavier financial burden, are negatively associated with migrants’ duration in the USA. Fathers with more young children under age 12 stay even shorter, because taking care of them is time intensive.”


  • “Inspired by the idea of safe citizenship this article queries the possibilities of safety in an age of securitization. It challenges the cosmopolitan worldview and its iteration of a global cosmopolitan citizen. It champions an account of affective citizenship, narration and attends to the trauma of exile. It offers an account of exile before suggesting an institutional design premised on politicization. This design, it is argued, facilitates moments of storytelling fostering individual empowerment. This unorthodox rendering of agency allows the traumatized exile to negotiate the world as it is, not as it could be, as a potential ‘safe’ citizen.”


  • “This article discusses asylum seekers and the right to work in the UK. Differential access to the labour market is one of the ways in which the state maintains a distinction between British citizens, who ‘belong’, and non-citizens who do not. While such a policy approach garners widespread support amongst the general public of citizens, it does not go uncontested. This article discusses a UK-based campaign, ‘Let Them Work’, which has sought to influence the government in extending the right to work to asylum seekers. In doing so, it demonstrates the ways in which the stratified regime of citizenship rights is contested politically, and explores how such contestation troubles the exclusive privileges of citizenship by enacting mobile solidarities from marginalised spaces.”


  • “This article aims to critically examine the development of alternatives to immigration detention policies. In the European Union, the emergence of alternatives to detention in the immigration framework is a relatively new phenomenon, strongly inspired by the criminal framework and enshrined in a movement of increased regulation of the immigration detention regime. Through promoting this notion, civil society has sought to engage in a constructive dialogue with States on the use of detention and the possibility to use less coercive and more human rights compliant approaches when dealing with migrants. In Europe, while these campaigns have yielded some positive results, one can question whether, when implemented, they have led to a humanisation of migration policies or, on the contrary, to an increase in the criminalisation of migrants. In view of the above, this article introduces briefly the different understandings of what are alternatives in the framework of immigration detention. Secondly, it analyses their current state of implementation in the EU European Union, both from the legal and political perspective. From this analysis, some opportunities and risks associated with such developments are presented. Finally, possible ways forward are proposed to support civil society’s positioning on this issue. “


  • “Border procedures have so far received little attention in the legal literature dealing with European asylum law. Literature on immigration detention in Europe has also neglected the use of detention in border procedures. This is remarkable because one of the reasons that Member States resort to border procedures can be traced back to the centrality of territorial presence within the modern State for the enjoyment of rights. The triangular relationship between an application for international protection, refusal of entry, and a deprivation of liberty has remained imprecise. This indeterminacy has had important repercussions for the way in which the right to liberty has been protected at the borders of Europe. However, the way in which the Recast Asylum Procedures Directive circumscribes Member States’ use of this procedure is unprecedented. This article uses the Dutch implementation of the Asylum Procedures Directive in order to unpack the above-mentioned triangular relationship between an application for international protection, refusal of entry, and a deprivation of liberty. It will show that European Union regulation in this area is distinctive because it entails recognition of the fact that, when it comes to the enforcement of migration control, individual rights are at stake. “


  • “This article critically assesses the amended European Union asylum detention framework. It traces the tension reflected in the regime between protection provision and administrative imperatives, such as migration management. The research argues that the amended legislation closely frames asylum detention. A coherent regional understanding of “alternatives to asylum detention” also emerges from the legal framework. These elements have the potential to advance protection of forced migrants at global and regional levels. However, European Union asylum law also carries within it the risk of undermining protection. The research explores in this respect the broadly phrased detention grounds and advances an interpretation on the basis of Member States’ international and regional (Council of Europe) legal obligations. “


  • “This article analyses the interaction between immigration detention and the notion of vulnerability. Vulnerability dominates the contemporary legal discourse and is particularly relevant in the context of deprivation of liberty. Despite its frequent use in international, European, and European Union (EU) legislation and jurisprudence, a clear definition is lacking. However, the EU asylum directives, and mainly the Recast Reception Conditions Directive, initiate an EU approach to vulnerability. Bearing in mind this context, the present article, first, critically analyses how the EU conceptualizes the notion of vulnerability and its relationship with the notion of special needs. It then assesses how vulnerability impacts immigration and asylum detention taking into account jurisprudence from the Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights, the recast EU asylum directives themselves as well as the EU Return Directive, as it applies in this context. More specifically, the article examines the influence of vulnerability on: detention decision-making, the method of imposition of an alternative to detention, detention conditions, and the implementation in practice of alternative measures. The analysis is enriched with empirical legal findings. “


  • “Detention poses a specific challenge to refugee protection; detained asylum-seekers risk not being able to file and meaningfully pursue their claim and benefit only from restrained social and economic rights. They pay a steep human cost. Courts, the legislature, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees have made efforts to rationalise its use, with the aim to render it a truly exceptional measure of last resort. However, challenges remain and there are pitfalls in asylum detention regulation. One major challenge is non-implementation of legal guarantees in practice and insufficient control by the judge. This can nullify legal guarantees, especially in a highly sophisticated framework like European Union law, where individualisation and the necessity and proportionality requirements, are the elements that rationalise otherwise broadly phrased detention grounds. The misuse of alternatives to detention that have been established to rationalise the use of asylum detention is another, as they may paradoxically be used to enhance control over asylum-seekers instead. Finally, migration management imperatives pose distinct challenges to refugee protection, where asylum detention is used arbitrarily as a means to their end. “


  • “Consider the following example: A dark-skinned, female hospital technician was called to take a blood sample from a newborn. When she entered the room, the infant’s mother visibly recoiled, clutching her baby more tightly, and exclaimed, “I don’t want you touching my baby!” Witnessing the situation were a white social worker and a white nurse. The nurse quickly responded, “That’s OK, I’ll hold the baby while you draw the blood.” In anger, the technician turned and walked out of the patient’s room, without the blood sample. The social worker remained a silent bystander.

    In this commentary, we bring attention to the problem of racism in health care, and more specifically, racist acts toward health care workers. We want to highlight the relative paucity of literature in this area and to also call to action social work’s role in addressing this problem.

    Our example of a racist incident, one we suspect is quite common in health care, is reflective of a problem for all health care workers. A New York Times article by Dr. Pauline Chen (2013), titled “When the Patient Is Racist,” explores this very problem. Chen asked, “What does a doctor do if the patient discriminates?,” when, for example, a patient refuses medical treatment based on a physician’s racial identity. The question raises challenging ethical, legal, and professional dilemmas and also concerns about repeated psychic injuries for the physician. Kimani Paul-Emile (2012) argued that patients regularly refuse medical treatment based on the physician’s racial identity and that this is an “open secret” in the medical profession. How are they and other health care providers expected to respond in the face of a racial insult? But more to our point, what is social work’s role in these scenarios? Are we silent bystanders, contributing to the problem in the field … ”


  • “Illegal immigration is a contentious issue on the American policy agenda. To understand the sources of public attitudes toward immigration, social scientists have focused attention on political factors such as party identification; they have also drawn on theories of intergroup contact to argue that contact with immigrants shapes immigration attitudes. Absent direct measures, contextual measures such as respondents’ ethnic milieu or proximity to salient geographic features (such as borders) have been used as proxies of contact. Such a research strategy still leaves the question unanswered – is it contact or context that really matters? Further, which context, and for whom? This article evaluates the effects of party identification, personal contact with undocumented immigrants, and contextual measures (county Hispanic population and proximity to the US–Mexico border) on American attitudes toward illegal immigration. It finds that contextual factors moderate the effects of political party identification on attitudes toward illegal immigration; personal contact has no effect. These findings challenge the assumption t”


  • “Studies demonstrate a negative association between community ethnic diversity and indicators of social cohesion (especially attitudes towards neighbours and the community), suggesting diversity causes a decline in social cohesion. However, to date, the evidence for this claim is based solely on cross-sectional research. This article performs the first longitudinal test of the impact of diversity, applying fixed-effects modelling methods to three waves of panel data from the British Household Panel Survey, spanning a period of 18 years. Using an indicator of affective attachment, the findings suggest that changes in community diversity do lead to changes in attitudes towards the community. However, this effect differs by whether the change in diversity stems from a community increasing in diversity around individuals who do not move (stayers) or individuals moving into more or less diverse communities (movers). Increasing diversity undermines attitudes among stayers. Individuals who move from a diverse to a homogeneous community report improved attitudes. However, there is no effect among individuals who move from a homogeneous to a diverse community. This article provides strong evidence that the effect of community diversity is likely causal, but that prior preferences for/against out-group neighbours may condition diversity’s impact. It also demonstrates that multiple causal processes are in operation at the individual-level, occurring among both stayers and movers, which collectively contribute to the emergence of average cross-sectional differences in attitudes between communities. Unique insights into the causal impact of community disadvantage also emerge. “


  • “This essay examines a longstanding normative assumption in the historiography of slavery in the Atlantic world: that enslaved Africans and their American-born descendants were bought and sold as “commodities,” thereby “dehumanizing” them and treating them as things rather than as persons. Such claims have, indeed, helped historians conceptualize how New World slavery contributed to the ongoing development of global finance capitalism—namely, that slaves represented capital as well as labor. But the recurring paradigm of the “dehumanized” or “commodified” slave, I argue, obscures more than it reveals.

    This article suggests that historians of slavery must reconsider the “commodification” of enslaved humanity. In so doing, it offers three interrelated arguments: first, that scholarship on slavery has not adequately or coherently defined the precise mechanisms by which enslaved people were supposedly “commodified”; second, that the normative position implied by the insistence that persons were treated as things further mystifies or clouds our collective historical vision of enslavement; and third, that we should abandon a strictly Marxian conception of the commodity—and its close relation to notions of “social death”—in favor of Igor Kopytoff’s theory of the commodity-as-process. It puts forth in closing a reconstituted conceptualization of the slave relation wherein enslaved people are understood as thoroughly human. ”


  • “This article provides new evidence on the economic assimilation of immigrants from the British Isles in Canada during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Using data from the 1901 and 1911 censuses and a pseudo-cohort methodology, we estimate both entry and assimilation effects. We find a non-negligible decline in entry earnings among successive cohorts of British and Irish immigrants, previously overlooked in the literature. Our estimates also reveal that the economic performance for Irish and older British arrival cohorts was better than previously reported. Overall, slow economic assimilation and sparse occupational mobility of immigrants have been a long-standing issue in the Canadian labour market.”


  • “Since the development of the immigrant enclave thesis, there has been a disagreement regarding whether the immigrant enclave hurts or benefits individual immigrants’ earnings. The controversy mainly arises from the imprecise way by which enclave participation is measured and from the difference in performance between entrepreneurs and workers. This study uses data from the 2006 Census of Canada to examine how Chinese immigrants who participate in the mainstream economy and enclave economy differ in earnings. Using “the language used most often at work” to determine enclave participation, the study finds that actual and net earnings of Chinese immigrants in the enclave are lower than those of their counterparts in the mainstream economy. However, when the interaction between human capital and enclave participation is considered, human capital brings a net negative return to enclave participants, but at the same time, a positive effect associated with enclave participation. The positive effect may be understood as coming from unmeasured ethnic and cultural features of the enclave that provide a cushion to lessen the magnitude of income disadvantages in the enclave. The study suggests that there is evidence to support both sides of the debate: enclave participants have lower net returns, but the enclave provides a cushioning effect in reducing earnings disparities. The study suggests that integration policy towards immigrants may consider immigrant enclaves as providing some support to immigrants to soften some disadvantages, but enclaves do not offer the same opportunities as the mainstream economy.”


  • “Skilled migration is an increasingly important topic for both policy and research internationally. OECD governments in particular are wrestling with tensions between their desire to use skilled migration to be on the winning side in the ‘global war for talent’ and their pandering to and/or attempts to outflank rising xenophobia. One aspect that has received relatively little attention is skilled migration from the African Commonwealth to the UK, a situation in which skilled migrants have relatively high levels of linguistic capital in the language of the host country. We focus here on the case of Zimbabwe. In spite of its popular image as a failed state, Zimbabwe has an exceptionally strong educational tradition and high levels of literacy and fluency in English. Drawing on 20 in-depth interviews of Zimbabwean highly skilled migrants, we explore the specific ways in which the communicative competences of these migrants with high formal levels of English operate in complex ways to shape their employability strategies and outcomes. We offer two main findings: first, that a dichotomy exists between their high level formal linguistic competence and their ability to communicate in less formal interactions, which challenges their employability, at least when they first move to the UK; and second, that they also lack, at least initially, the competence to narrativise their employability in ways that are culturally appropriate in England. Thus, to realise the full potential of their high levels of human capital, they need to learn how to communicate competently in a very different social and occupational milieu. Some have achieved this, but others continue to struggle.”


  • “A major question in labour market research is the extent to which discrimination in employments causes the disadvantages experienced by children of immigrants. This article contributes to the debate by utilising a correspondence test study in which pairs of equivalent résumés and cover letters—one with a Pakistani name and one with a Norwegian name—were sent in response to 900 job openings in the greater Oslo area. The results show that applicants with Norwegian names on average are 25 % more likely to receive a call back for a job interview than equally qualified applicants with Pakistani names. More refined analyses demonstrate that the effect of ethnic background on employment probabilities is larger among men than women and larger in the private sector than in the public sector, and important variations among the occupations included in the study are revealed. In an effort to separate the potentially conflating effects of gender and sector, all applications to gender-segregated occupations were removed from the analyses. Interestingly, the gender differences disappear when exclusively analysing discrimination in gender-integrated occupations by sector. In gender-integrated occupations in the private sector, the gender difference in fact is reversed, indicating that women with minority background are treated less favourably than are minority men in the private sector. These results suggest that the intersection of gender, ethnicity, and sector should be scrutinised more carefully in future field experiments.”


  • “This paper presents findings from a study that investigated the experiences of the returning Ghanaian migrants from Libya during the Arab Spring of 2011. The study used qualitative methods to explore involuntary return and reintegration of migrants in a south–south migration framework. Information from semi-structured interviews of migrants from selected communities in Ghana in addition to data from the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO) were used. The objective of the study was to find out the major difficulties returnees faced in reintegrating into their societies of origin as a result of their hasty departure and to assert the factors that may influence reintegration. The study finds that the combination factors including of high levels of family dependence on returnees, weak governance and the absence of reintegration policies may foster re-emigration.”


  • “Based on in-depth interviews with highly skilled and business Turkish nationals (HSBTN) in Canada and Germany, this study aims to explore why HSBTN decide to move and whether migration policy differences among the countries of destination affect recent migration motivations of HSBTN. It mainly focuses on the reasons and rationale of HSBTN and their explanations. This study argues that the high skilled and business migrants in general and HSBTN in particular move internationally as a consequence of individual-level gain beyond economic prospects.”


Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.