International

International

Matching Systems for Refugees
The paper addresses how to match refugees — who have been approved for resettlement — to particular areas, arguing for the importance of accounting for refugee preferences. It finds that matching systems between refugees and states or local areas are emerging as one of the most promising solutions to this question. This paper describes the basics of two-sided matching theory used in a number of allocation problems, such as school choice, where both sides need to agree to the match. It then examines how these insights can be applied to refugee matching in the context of the European Union, and explores how refugee matching might work in the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States.

Read More

The “Right to Remain Here” as an Evolving Component of Global Refugee Protection: Current Initiatives and Critical Questions
This paper considers the relationship between two human rights discourses, refugee/asylum protection and the body of law that regulates deportations. It suggests that the development of rights against removal, as well as rights during and after removal, aids our understanding of the refugee protection regime and its future. This paper argues that emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons: 1) the linkage between the two phenomena of refugee/asylum protection and deportation; 2) deportation human rights discourses embody framing models that might aid reform of the existing refugee protection regime; and 3) deportation discourses offer important rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime. It concludes with consideration of how deportation discourses may strengthen protections for refugees, while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.

Read More

Kidnapped, Trafficked, Detained? The Implications of Non-state Actor Involvement in Immigration Detention
Proposals to shape migration management policies recognize the need to involve a range of actors to implement humane and effective strategies. However, when observed through the lens of immigration detention, some migration policy trends raise challenging questions, particularly related to the involvement of non-state actors in migration control. This article critically assesses a range of new actors who have become involved in the deprivation of liberty of migrants and asylum seekers, describes the various forces that appear to be driving their engagement in immigration enforcement, and makes a series of recommendations concerning the role of non-state actors and detention in global efforts to manage international migration. These recommendations include ending the use the detention in international migration management schemes; limiting the involvement of private companies in immigration control measures; insisting that the International Organization for Migration (IOM) actively endorse the centrality of human rights in the Global Compact for Migration and amend its constitution so that it makes a clear commitment to international human rights standards; and encouraging nongovernmental organizations to carefully assess the services they provide when operating in detention situations to ensure that their work contributes to harm reduction.

Read More

International Migration Policy Report: Responsibility Sharing for Large Movements of Refugees and Migrants in Need of Protection
This inaugural report of the Scalabrini migration study centers covers responsibility-sharing for large-scale refugee and migrant populations in need. The report consists of chapters that describe the situation of refugee and migrant populations in select regions around the world and analyzes the responses of states, regional bodies and the international community.

Read More

Another Story: What Public Opinion Data Tell Us About Refugee and Humanitarian Policy
The article suggests that post-9/11 there has been a reconfiguration of refugee policy and a reconnecting of humanitarian and security interests which has enabled a discourse antithetical to the universal right to asylum. The main conclusion is that in a post-post-Cold War era, European governments have developed restrictive policies despite public sympathy. Support for the admission of refugees is not, however, unqualified, and most states and European populations prefer skilled populations that can be easily assimilated. In order to achieve greater protection and more open policies, this article recommends that human rights actors work with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its partners to challenge the anti-refugee discourse through media campaigns and grassroots messaging.

Read More

Mission to the Middle East 2017: The Plight of the Displaced
This report from a fact-finding mission to Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Greece offers findings and recommendations based on the delegation’s conversations with actors in the region, including refugees and displaced persons, care providers, representatives of the Catholic Church, their aid agencies, and United Nations officials.

Read More