Abstract
Making a case for return preparedness is crucial in realizing that current migration policies have disregarded so far the implications stemming from various levels of return preparedness. It could even be argued that, for having focused exclusively on the securitization of temporary labor migration, many migration countries find themselves with inadequate instruments aimed at supporting the permanent and temporary return of migrants, let alone their reintegration needs. Return preparedness is also, if not above all, an attempt to raise awareness of the evidence that, beyond established paradigms, a lot remains to be done in order to respond concretely to migrants’ rights, including their aspirations for stability and advancement in their lives.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I addressed elsewhere this notion, see Cassarino, J.-P. (2013).
- 2.
The inventory of these agreements is accessible here: http://rsc.eui.eu/RDP/research/analyses/ra/.
- 3.
Of course, the reference to dismissible priorities is oxymoronic. I use it in order to address the gap between intentions and contingencies.
- 4.
By epistemic conditions, I refer to the role of power in knowledge construction as applied to migration and asylum, from a Foucauldian standpoint.
- 5.
Very succinctly, such overt criticisms became more explicit following the 1993 entry into force of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). The EU intended to play a major role by turning migration into an issue of “common interest” and by prompting Member States to better cooperate on (and harmonize their national) migration policies. Member States have expressed their concern in numerous ways regarding the capacity of the EU institutions to deal “effectively” with “migration management.” Such developments reflected the resilient contention on competence on migration affairs between the EU, on the one hand, and its Member States, on the other.
- 6.
An evaluation report directed by Arne Strand, based on interviews with Afghan “voluntary returnees,” confirms their desire to re-emigrate for abroad owing to harsh insecure conditions and poor economic prospects in Afghanistan. See Strand et al. (2008, pp. 46–47).
- 7.
This is what Robyn Iredale and Fei Guo (2001, p. 14) observed during a survey related to Chinese returnees from Australia. The authors argue, “Although the Chinese government’s incentive programs don’t appear to have had a direct impact on people’s decision-making processes in Australia, they have provided a positive signal from the government that the social environment and policies in China are improving.”
- 8.
For a comprehensive analysis of circular migration schemes, see Piyasiri Wickramasekara (2011).
References
Blitz, B., Sales, R., & Marzano, L. (2005). Non-voluntary return? The politics of return to Afghanistan. Political Studies, 53(1), 196.
Cassarino, J.-P. (2004). Theorising return migration: The conceptual approach to return migrants revisited. International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 6(2), 253–279.
Cassarino, J.-P. (2013). The drive for securitized temporariness. In Anna Triandafyllidou (Ed.), Circular migration between Europe and its neighbourhood: Choice or necessity? (pp. 22–41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Council of Europe. (1987). Third conference of European ministers responsible for migration affairs: Conclusions. MMG-3 (87) 22, 4 June 1987. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Council of Europe. (2008). Human rights implications for voluntary return policies and programmes for irregular migrants. PACE, Motion for a recommendation presented by Mr Østergaard and others, Doc. 11483, 7 January 2008.
Council of Europe. (2010). Voluntary return programmes: An effective, humane and cost-effective mechanism for re turning irregular migrants. PACE, Resolution 1742, 2010. http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta10/ERES1742.htm. Accessed 20 April 2013.
de Bree, J. (2008). Return migration to Afghanistan: Monitoring the embeddedness of returnees. Nijmegen: Radboud University, CIDIN.
European Commission. (2005). Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and the council on common standards and procedures in member states for returning illegally staying third-country nationals. COM (2005) 391 final. Brussels: European Communities.
European Council. (2002). Proposal for a return action programme, 14673/02. Brussels: European Communities.
Iredale, R., & Guo, F. (2001). The transforming role of skilled and business returnees: Taiwan, China and Bangladesh. Wollongong: Centre for Asia Pacific Social Transformation Studies (CAPSTRANS), University of Wollongong. http://www.archive-iussp.org/Brazil2001/s30/S39_04_Iredale.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2013.
Strand, A., et al. (2008). Return with dignity? Return to what? Review of the voluntary return programme to Afghanistan. Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute.
Sward, J. (2009). Assisted voluntary return (AVR): An opportunity for development? Briefing note n. 20. Sussex: DRC on Migration, Globalisation & Poverty, Sussex University.
van Houte, M., & de Koning, M. (2008). Towards a better embeddedness? Monitoring assistance to involuntary returning migrants from Western countries. Nijmegen: Radboud University, CIDIN.
Wickramasekara, P. (2011). Circular migration: A triple win or a dead end? Geneva: International Labour Organization. http://www.gurn.info/en/discussion-papers/no15-mar11-circular-migration-a-triple-win-or-a-dead-end. Accessed 20 Apr 2013.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cassarino, JP. (2014). A Case for Return Preparedness. In: Battistella, G. (eds) Global and Asian Perspectives on International Migration. Global Migration Issues, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08317-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08317-9_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08316-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08317-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)