scholarly journals Policing Asylum Seekers’ Flight Within Europe

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-108
Author(s):  
Tom Montel
Keyword(s):  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Wage Labor ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Core ◽  
The World ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
The Eu

A critical assessment of the Dublin regulation requires a look beyond its official function of allocating asylum seekers across EU Member States. This article argues it embodies the “hidden face” of Schengen insofar as it legally fixes them in the sole country responsible for their application. Because this responsibility lies primarily with the first country of arrival, it is consistent with the core-periphery axis of division of labor in the EU. The first part of this paper examines how the Schengen/Dublin dual regime of (im)mobility might respond to the constant need for bridled labor alongside free wage labor in the world-system. However, equally constant is labor power’s propensity to evade its subsumption under capital; this is exemplified by Dubliners’ appropriation of freedom of movement through irregularity. By deserting the “plantations” of the European peripheries, those “maroons” of our present time disrupt the European geography of power and contest their assigned position in it. But the widely acknowledged failure of this regime to deter “secondary movements” does not necessarily mean it is non-effective. Attention must then be given to mechanisms of “exclusion from within” experimented on Dubliners. The second part will offer an overview of the tactics of internal rebordering that have been recently deployed in core countries and question the extent to which those attempts to recapture their flight meet the conditions for the optimization of capital’s operations.

The EU Fiscal Risk Matrix – from government debt to climate liabilities

Studia BAS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (67) ◽  
pp. 45-69
Author(s):  
Iustina Alina Boitan ◽  
Kamilla Marchewka-Bartkowiak
Keyword(s):  
World Bank ◽  
Major Conclusion ◽  
Risk Matrix ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Debt Burden ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
Fiscal Risk ◽  
The World ◽  
Main Components ◽  
The Eu

The aim of the article is to identify the main components of government overall liabilities based on the Fiscal Risk Matrix classification introduced by the World Bank in 1999, and to estimate the amount and structure of these liabilities in European Union countries (EU Fiscal Risk Matrix). The climate liabilities definition and methodology included in the EU Fiscal Risk Matrix is also a novelty of the research. The study covered EU member states in the period 2018–2019, taking into account available data from the Eurostat database. On this basis, the EU Fiscal Risk Matrix was developed with the estimated structure of the burden of government liabilities for individual countries and the EU as a whole. The article used statistical and comparative analysis. The major conclusion of our research involves the proposal to implement a unified European methodology of government overall liabilities classification based on the EU Fiscal Risk Matrix to assess the fiscal debt burden and transparency of fiscal policy.

Russia and EU Countries: Partnership for Modernization

2013 ◽  
pp. 54-61
Author(s):  
T. Romanova ◽  
E. Pavlova
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
New Classification ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The World ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Eu

The article examines how the normative power, which the EU puts forward as an ideological basis of its actions in the world, manifests itself in the national partnerships for modernization between Russia and EU member states. The authors demonstrate the influence of the EU’s normativity on its approach to modernization as well as the difference in the positions of its member countries. It is concluded that there is no unity in the EU’s approach to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and the new classification of EU member states, which is based on their readiness to act in accordance with the Union’s concept of normative power, is offered.

Developments and perspectives of health literacy in Europe

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristine Sørensen ◽  
Helmut Brand
Keyword(s):  
Health Literacy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The World ◽  
European Health ◽  
A Priority ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Abstract A decade ago the European health literacy field was in its infancy. A comparable study among EU Member States was made to explore if health literacy was as much as a concern in Europe as elsewhere in the world. This article analyses the impact of the European Health Literacy project (2009–2012). Based on the outcomes new avenues for health literacy in Europe are proposed. In spite of progress there is still a strong call for actions to make health literacy a priority in the EU.

Forced Migration Governance: In Search of Sovereignty

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 923-948 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuscheh Farahat ◽  
Nora Markard
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Third World ◽  
Forced Migration ◽  
Loss Of Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) Member States have experienced the recent refugee protection crisis in the EU as a de-facto loss of control over their borders. They find themselves unable to subject entry into their territory to a sovereign decision. In response, the Member States have sought to regain full sovereignty over matters of forced migration, both unilaterally and cooperatively, seeking to govern a phenomenon—forced migration—that by definition defies governance. Unilateral measures include forced migration caps and a search for ways to circumvent responsibility under the Dublin system. Cooperative efforts by EU Member States include the search for ways to more effectively govern forced migration at the EU level and beyond. Supranational EU efforts include the introduction of an internal relocation scheme and support for Italy and Greece in processing asylum claims in so-called “hotspots.” Beyond the EU, Member States are seeking to externalize protection responsibility to third world countries under international agreements, in particular, by returning asylum seekers to Turkey. This Article outlines the unilateral and cooperative governance efforts undertaken and shows that states' sovereign decisions over migration are significantly limited in the case of forced migrants, both by EU law and by international law.

scholarly journals "Core-Periphery" in the European Union – An Economic Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-154
Author(s):  
Ines Kersan-Škabić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Economic Indicators ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Perspective ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Eu

The heterogeneity of economic performances in the EU member states is one of the main reasons for the existence of a “core-periphery” relationship. The goal of this research is to examine various economic indicators to reveal possible divisions between the EU members. This issue emphasized the contribution of rich “core” countries to the imbalances in poorer “peripheral” EU members. By applying cluster methodology and considering the most recent data, two groups of countries were identified, the first comprising 11 countries that form the “centre” or the “core”, and the rest of the EU forming the “periphery”. Considering differences between these countries is necessary and justified for discussions about the future development of the EU that will involve differences between member states.

World-System Theory

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Chase-Dunn ◽  
Marilyn Grell-Brisk
Keyword(s):  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Latin American ◽  
World System ◽  
World Market ◽  
Modern World ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
The Core ◽  
The World ◽  
Immanuel Wallerstein

The world-system perspective emerged during the world revolution of 1968 when social scientists contemplated the meaning of Latin American dependency theory for Africa. Immanuel Wallerstein, Terence Hopkins, Samir Amin, Andre Gunder Frank, and Giovanni Arrighi developed slightly different versions of the world-system perspective in interaction with each other. The big idea was that the global system had a stratified structure on inequality based on institutionalized exploitation. This implied that the whole system was the proper unit of analysis, not national societies, and that development and underdevelopment had been structured by global power relations for centuries. The modern world-system is a self-contained entity based on a geographically differentiated division of labor and bound together by a world market. In Wallerstein’s version capitalism had become predominant in Europe and its peripheries in the long 16th century and had expanded and deepened in waves. The core states were able to concentrate the most profitable economic activities and they exploited the semi-peripheral and peripheral regions by means of colonialism and the emergent international division of labor, which relies on unequal exchange. The world-system analysts all focused on global inequalities, but their terminologies were somewhat different. Amin and Frank talked about center and periphery. Wallerstein proposed a three-tiered structure with an intermediate semiperiphery between the core and the periphery, and he used the term core to suggest a multicentric region containing a group of states rather than the term center, which implies a hierarchy with a single peak. When the world-system perspective emerged, the focus on the non-core (periphery and semiperiphery) was called Third Worldism. Current terminology refers to the Global North (the core) and the Global South (periphery and semiperiphery).

Psychopathology in refugees subjected to the Dublin Regulation: an Italian study

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Emanuele Caroppo ◽  
Pierluigi Lanzotti ◽  
Luigi Janiri
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Integrated Treatment ◽  
Post Traumatic Stress ◽  
Emotional Context ◽  
The Status ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
Post Traumatic ◽  
Dissociative Subtype ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Background. Literature shows that migrants—a generic definition for persons who leave their own country of origin—have increased psychopathological vulnerability. Between 2014 and 2017, 976 963 non-European Union (non-EU) people arrived in Italy, of which 30% for humanitarian reasons. This study is aimed at a better understanding of the experience of asylum seekers who transferred to Italy were subjected to the EU Dublin Regulation and most of them suspended in their asylum application. Methods. We elaborate a descriptive study based on a population of refugees and asylum seekers who have suffered from social and personal migratory stressful factors. Clinical data was collected between 2011 and 2013 at the “A. Gemelli” General Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Minors, elderly people, and patients who are unable to declare a voluntary consensus and economic migrants were excluded from the study. Candidates for the status of refugee or asylum seekers were included. Results. The sample consisted of 180 asylum seekers aged 25.52 ± 5.6 years. Most frequently diagnosis was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (53%), subthreshold PTSD was reported in 22% of subjects. We found phenomenological patterns highly representative of PTSD of the dissociative subtype. Around 20% of the sample suffered from psychotic symptomatology. Conclusions. Loss of the migratory project and the alienation mediated by chronic social defeat paradigm may trigger a psychopathological condition described by the failure to cope with the negative emotional context of social exclusion and solitude. A common and integrated treatment project is needed, with the scope of reintegrating the migrant’s personal and narrative identity.

Internal migrants in EU may face tougher benefit rules

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Labour Market ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Past ◽  
Internal Migrants ◽  
Market Shocks ◽  
The Eu

Significance The EU is built around the 'four freedoms', which together form the core of the internal market. Economically, freedom of movement is meant to smooth out asymmetrical labour market shocks by allocating labour where it is needed most. In the past, intra-EU mobility has been relatively low and mostly reflected a widening welfare gap between older member states and those that joined after 2004. As a result, fears of 'welfare tourism' have risen, despite the fact that empirical evidence for it is scarce. Impacts The issue of welfare tourism will continue to dominate the debate. Who is eligible for what welfare payments in other member states will, therefore, continue to occupy courts across Europe. Because of the current refugee crisis, the rules on third-country nationals will come under scrutiny again.

Falling numbers will not ease EU migration tension

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
North African ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Eu

Subject EU immigration division. Significance Immigration to Europe has fallen substantially over the past three years, largely because of stricter rules in EU member states and enhanced cooperation with the EU's neighbours. This downward trend, however, coincides with growing tensions between member states over how to tackle immigration once migrants and refugees enter European territory. Impacts Unable to agree on an effect asylum seekers reform, the EU will continue funding African countries to stop irregular migratory flows. Disengagement of EU search and rescue assets and more reliance on under-trained North African coast guards will make sea migration deadlier. Divergent views on immigration burden-sharing could worsen foreign relations between populists in Italy and those in Hungary and Poland.

scholarly journals EU ASYLUM SYSTEM IN AND AFTER THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: DISCLOSING THE WEAKNESSES OF THE CURRENT RULES AND ASSESSING THE PROSPECTS OF THE NEW PACT ON MIGRATION AND ASYLUM

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Čučković
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Current Phase ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Emergency Situations ◽  
Human Rights Standards ◽  
The Eu

The paper analyses the influence that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the functioning of the European asylum system. The analysis is divided into three parts and addresses problematic issues associated with different stages of the pandemic. In the first part of the paper, the author outlines the asylum practices of EU Member States in the initial stage of the Covid-19 pandemic during which the pandemic was perceived as a state of emergency. By exploring the legal possibilities to derogate both from the EU asylum rules and international human rights standards, the author offers conclusions as regards limits of derogations and the legality of Member States’ practices, especially their failure to differentiate between rules that are susceptive of being derogated in emergency situations and those that are not. The second part of the paper analyses the current phase of the pandemic in which it is perceived as a 'new normal' and focuses on making the EU asylum system immune to Covid-19 influence to the greatest extent possible and in line with relevant EU and human rights rules. The author insists on the vulnerability as an inherent feature of persons in need of international protection and researches upon the relationship between the two competing interests involved – protection of asylum seekers and ensuring public health as a legitimate reason for restricting certain asylum seekers’ rights. The final part of the paper analyses the prospects of the future EU asylum system, as announced by the New Pact on Migration and Asylum in September 2020, to adapt to the exigencies of both the current Covid-19 crisis and pandemics that are yet to come. With an exclusive focus on referral to Covid-19 and provisions relevant for the current and future pandemics, the author criticizes several solutions included in the instruments that make up the Pact. It is concluded that the Pact failed to offer solutions for problems experienced during the Covid-19 pandemic and that, under the pretext of public health, it prioritizes the interests of Member States over the interests of applicants for international protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document