EU Multi-layered Migration Governance and the Externalization of French Migration Management: Analysis of Political Dynamics Driving the Construction of Complex Migration Regime

  • Mitsuru UemuraEmail author
Part of the Evolutionary Economics and Social Complexity Science book series (EESCS, volume 11)


In the 2010s, extreme right-wing parties gained more popularity in member countries of the EU than academic scholars expected. The issue of migration, pertinent in each member country, led to the rise of the extreme right-wing parties. In particular, at the beginning of 2015, a split of opinion occurred between and within EU member countries regarding the acceptance of a large number of refugees into to the EU. In this situation, asylum seekers are considered a threat to national security, and the extreme right-wing parties that promoted an anti-immigrant mentality gained popularity among the people. In this regard, it is clear that the immigration control is related to not only an increasing welfare burden but also national security, which is a major problem in a political sphere for national sovereignty.


  1. Aglietta M, Leron N (2017) La double démocratie: Une Europe politique pour la croissance. Édition du Seuil, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyer R (2015) Économie politique des capitalismes: Théorie de la régulation et des crises, La Découverte, ParisGoogle Scholar
  3. Bretherton C, Mannin LM (eds) (2013) The Europeanization of European politics. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeGoogle Scholar
  4. Carrera S, Hernadez R, Sagrera I (2012) Mobility partnerships: ‘insecurity partnerships’ for policy coherence and migrant workers’ human rights in the EU. In: Kunz R, Lavenex S, Panizzon M (eds) (2012), pp 97–115Google Scholar
  5. Chou M-H, Gibert M (2012) The EU-Senegal mobility partnership: from launch to suspension and negotiation failure. J Contemp Eur Res 8(4):409–427Google Scholar
  6. Council of the European Union (2003) Council directive on the right to family reunification. Brussels, 2003/86/EC (28 February 2003)Google Scholar
  7. Council of the European Union (2008a) Joint declaration on a mobility partnership between the European Union and the Republic of Cape Verde. Brussels (21 May 2008)Google Scholar
  8. Council of the European Union (2008b) European pact on immigration and asylum. Brussels, 24 September 2008Google Scholar
  9. Council of the European Union (2009) Council directive on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of highly qualified employment. 2009/50/EC (25 May 2009)Google Scholar
  10. European Commission (2011) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council evaluation of EU readmission agreement. Brussels, 23.2.2011 COM(2011) 76 finalGoogle Scholar
  11. European Commission (2014) Déclaration conjointe pour le partenariat de mobilié entre la Tunisie, l’Union Européenne et ses États members participantsGoogle Scholar
  12. European Commission (2016) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The European Council and the Council “Second progress report: first deliverables on the partnership framework” with third countries under the European Agenda on migration, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  13. European Commission (2017a) Fourth progress report on the partnership framework with third countries under the European agenda on migrationGoogle Scholar
  14. European Commission (2017b) Fact sheet questions and answers: making return and readmission procedures more efficient. Brussels, March 2017Google Scholar
  15. European Commission (2017c) Fact sheet: relations between the EU and TunisiaGoogle Scholar
  16. European Commission – DG Home Affairs (2013) Evaluation on the application of the Return Directive (2008/115/EC), 22 October 2013Google Scholar
  17. Faist T, Ette A (2007) The Europeanization of national politics and politics of immigration between autonomy and the European Union. Palgrave Macmillan, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guiraudon V (2000) European integration and migration policy: vertical policy-making as venue shopping. J Common Mark Stud 38(2):251–271Google Scholar
  19. Guiraudon V (2010) Les effets de l’européanisation des politiques d’immigration et d’asile. Politique européenne no° 31: 7–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jurje F, Lavenex S (2014) Trade agreements as venues for ‘market power Europe? ’ The case of immigration policy. J Common Mark Stud 52(2):320–336Google Scholar
  21. Kunz R, Lavenex S, Panizzon M (eds) (2012) Multilayered migration governance. The promise of partnership. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. La Cimade (2009) Document d’analyse les accords relatifs à la gestion concertée des flux migratoires et au codéveloppment Version Actualisé. (20 Octobre 2009)Google Scholar
  23. Lavenex S (2006) Shifting up and out: the foreign policy of European immigration control. West Eur Policies 29(2):329–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Le gouvernement français (2008) European pact on immigration and asylum version I Draft of 25.01.08. Scholar
  25. Loi n° 1981–1139 du 24 décembre 1981 autorisant l’approbation d’un accord entre le Gouvernement de la République française et le Gouvernement de la République du Sénégal sur la formation en vue du retour et de l’insertion dans l’économie sénégalaise des travailleurs ayant émigré temporairement en France Accord signé à Dakar le 1er décembre 1980Google Scholar
  26. Loi n° 2006–911 du 24 juillet 2006 relative à l’immigration et à l’intégrationGoogle Scholar
  27. Miyajima T (2009) Social integration and exclusion of immigrants: the French equality questioned. The University of Tokyo Press, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  28. Okabe M (2014) The study of the EU migration control as foreign policies: the reconstruction of borders and the diffusion of norms. Doctoral thesis, The University of TokyoGoogle Scholar
  29. Panizzon M (2012) Franco-African pacts on migration: bilateralism revisited in multilayered migration governance. In Kunz, Lavenex, Panizzon (eds) (2012)Google Scholar
  30. Secrétariat général des affaires européennes (2011) Consultation relative à l Approche globale sur les migrations, QuestionnaireGoogle Scholar
  31. Tsuchiya T (2009) The development of EU common migration policies: the prosperity of “immigrants” and “ours”. J Takasaki City Univ Econ 52(3):11–24Google Scholar
  32. Yasue N (2012) The EU and France: the swaying tricolor in the European integration. Horitsu Bunka-sha, KyotoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations