Abstract
The control of international immigration touches the core of national sovereignty. The regulation of admission is usually seen as the deepest expression of self-determination. Despite this, over the last decade immigration has become a thoroughly Europeanized policy field, and this process has significantly contributed to European integration. This chapter reconstructs the evolution of the process of Europeanization in the domain of immigration, and analyses its dynamics. It focuses on the following questions: To what extent, and why, have EU member states opted to cooperate on the highly sensitive issue of migration? What effect does Europeanization have on the rights of immigrants—do we see a restriction or an expansion of rights? The chapter demonstrates that, while national governments have chosen to Europeanize the issue of immigration primarily in order to foster and to enhance migration control, in doing so they have actually put constraints on their ability to regulate immigration, which in turn has led to an increase in the protection of immigrants’ rights.
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.
Passports have previously existed, but pervasive and systematic control of movement is closely linked to the emergence of modern nation states , as Torpey (2000) demonstrates. The French revolutionary regime, moreover, initially also used passports to control those considered ideologically unreliable or socially marginal (Mau et al. 2012, 17). For the disciplinary function of border control see Chap. 10, in this volume.
- 2.
The restricted focus on these two sets of actors does not imply that non-state actors do not play an important role in the process of Europeanization of immigration policies. However, national government s , as well as the EU institutions, hold a key position in decision-making and in the implementation of European policies. Moreover, the impact of non-state actors differs considerably. Wunderlich (2011), for instance, showed that international organizations such as IOM and UNHCR are important brokers of Europeanization when it comes to the implementation of immigration policies (see also Chap. 9, in this volume). While acknowledging the importance of think tanks and lobby groups, Boswell and Geddes (2011: 211) noted the irrelevance of grass-roots movements, concluding that mobilization on behalf of migrants (not by them) proves to be successful. Finally, Menz (2011) noted that employers ’ organizations have little influence on Europeanization in the domain of migration and asylum.
- 3.
The co-decision procedure, introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992, is referred today to as ordinary legislation procedure. In a co-decision procedure the European Parliament and the Council jointly adopt legislation.
- 4.
Approaches that equate Europeanization with restriction on migrants’ rights also ignore that Europeanization has actually led to a complex stratification of migrants’ rights. For a comprehensive discussion of the multidimensionality of migrants’ rights produced by EU law, see Carmel and Paul (2013).
References
Acosta Arcarazo, D. (2009). The good, the bad and the ugly in EU migration law: Is the European parliament becoming bad and ugly? European Journal of Migration and Law, 11(1), 19–39. doi:10.1163/157181609X410575.
Acosta Arcarazo, D., & Geddes, A. (2013). The development, application and implications of an EU rule of law in the area of migration policy. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 51(2), 179–193. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2012.02296.x.
Bonjour, S., & Vink, M. P. (2013). When Europeanization backfires: The normalization of European migration politics. Acta Politica, 48(4), 389–407. doi:10.1057/ap.2013.11.
Börzel, T. (2003). Shaping and taking EU policies: Member state responses to Europeanization (Queen’s Papers on Europeanisation 01/2003). Belfast: School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Queen’s University of Belfast. https://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofPoliticsInternationalStudiesandPhilosophy/FileStore/EuropeanisationFiles/Filetoupload,38412,en.pdf
Boswell, C., & Geddes, A. (2011). Migration and mobility in the European Union. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carmel, E., & Paul, R. (2013). Complex stratification: Understanding European Union governance of migrant rights. Regions & Cohesion, 3(3), 56–85. doi:10.3167/reco.2013.030304.
Cerna, L. (2014). The EU Blue Card: Preferences, policies, and negotiations between Member States. Migration Studies, 2(1), 73–96. doi:10.1093/migration/mnt010.
De Somer, M. (2012). Enhanced competences for the European Court of Justice: “Re-shuffling” the dynamics of EU migration policy-making? (LSE Migration Studies Unit Working Paper No. 2012/01). http://www.lse.ac.uk/government/research/resgroups/MSU/documents/workingPapers/WP_2012_01.pdf
EU. (2014). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the treaty on European Union, the treaties establishing the European communities and certain related acts. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/treaty/pdf/amst-en.pdf
Geddes, A. (2008). Immigration and European integration: Towards fortress Europe. Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.
Geddes, A. (2011a). Borders and migration in the European Union. In N. Phillips (Ed.), Migration in the global political economy: IPE yearbook (Vol. 17, pp. 193–208). Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Geddes, A. (2011b). The European Union’s extraterritorial immigration controls and international migration relations. In R. Hansen, J. Koehler, & J. Money (Eds.), Migration, nation states, and international cooperation (pp. 87–99). New York/London: Routledge.
Geddes, A., & Hadj-Abdou, L. (forthcoming). An unstable equilibrium: Freedom of movement and the welfare state in the European Union. In G. Freeman, & N. Mirilovic (Eds.), Handbook on international immigration. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Groenendijk, K. (2006). Family reunification as a right under community law. European Journal of Migration and Law, 8(2), 215–230. doi:10.1163/157181606777975003.
Guiraudon, V. (2000). European integration and migration policy: Vertical policy-making as venue shopping. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(2), 251–271. doi:10.1111/1468-5965.00219.
Hansen, P. (2010). More barbwire or more immigration, or both? EU migration policy in the nexus of border security management and neoliberal economic growth. The Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, 11(1, Winter/Spring), 89–101.
Hollifield, J. F. (1992). Immigrants, markets, and states: The political economy of postwar Europe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Joppke, C. (2011). European immigration policies: Between stemming and soliciting still. In E. Jones, P. M. Heywood, M. Rhodes, & U. Sedelmeier (Eds.), Developments in European politics 2 (pp. 220–240). Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kaunert, C., Léonard, S., & Hoffmann, U. (2013). Venue-shopping and the role of non-governmental organisations in the development of the European Union asylum policy. Comparative Migration Studies, 1(1), 179–200. doi:10.5117/CMS2013.1.KAUN.
Kicinger, A., Weinar, A., & Górny, A. (2007). Advanced yet uneven: The Europeanization of Polish immigration policy. In T. Faist & A. Ette (Eds.), The Europeanization of national policies and politics of immigration: Between autonomy and the European Union (pp. 181–200). Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lahav, G., & Luedtke, A. (2013). Immigration policy. In C. Bretherton & M. L. Mannin (Eds.), The Europeanization of European politics (pp. 109–122). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Luedtke, A. (2009). Uncovering European Union immigration legislation: Policy dynamics and outcomes. International Migration, 49(2), 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2435.2009.00588.x.
Mau, S., Brabandt, H., Laube, L., & Roos, C. (2012). Liberal states and the freedom of movement: Selective borders, unequal mobility. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Menz, G. (2011). Stopping, shaping and moulding Europe: Two-level games, non-state actors and the Europeanization of migration policies. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(2), 437–462. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02123.x.
Messina, A. M. (2007). The logics and politics of post-WWII migration to Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Peers, S., Guild, E., Acosta Arcarazo, D., & Groenendijk, K. (2012). EU immigration and asylum law (Vol. 1). Leiden: Brill.
Radaelli, C. M. (2000). Whither Europeanization? Concept stretching and substantive change. European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 4(8), 1–25.
Reslow, N. (2010, June 23–26). Explaining the development of EU migration policy: The case of the mobility partnerships. Paper prepared for the fifth Pan-European conference on EU politics, Porto, Portugal. http://www.jhubc.it/ecpr-porto/virtualpaperroom/008.pdf
Richardson, J. (Ed.). (2012). Constructing a policy-making state? Policy dynamics in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sassen, S. (2007). Response. European Journal of Political Theory, 6(4), 433–446.
Schuman, R. (1963). Pour l’Europe. Paris: Éditions Nagel.
Swyngedouw, E. (2014). Excluding the other: The production of scale and scaled politics. In R. Lee & J. Wills (Eds.), Geographies of economics (pp. 167–176). Oxon/New York: Routledge.
Talani, L. S. (Ed.). (2012). Globalization, migration, and the future of Europe. Oxon/New York: Routledge.
Torpey, J. (2000). The invention of the passport. Surveillance, citizenship and the state. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vedsted-Hansen, J. (2004). Denmark. In I. Higgins & K. Hailbronner (Eds.), Migration and asylum law and policy in the European Union: FIDE 2004 national reports (pp. 65–87). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wolff, S., & Trauner, F. (2011). A European migration policy fit for future challenges. In S. Wolff, F. Goudappel, & J. de Zwaan (Eds.), Freedom, security and justice after Lisbon and Stockholm (pp. 63–78). The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.
Wunderlich, D. (2011). Europeanization through the grapevine: Communication gaps and the role of international organizations in implementation networks of EU external migration policy. Journal of European Integration, 34(5), 485–503. doi:10.1080/07036337.2011.611385.
Zweig, S. (1943). The world of yesterday (p. 409). New York: Viking.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Abdou, L.H. (2016). The Europeanization of Immigration Policies. In: Amelina, A., Horvath, K., Meeus, B. (eds) An Anthology of Migration and Social Transformation. IMISCOE Research Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23666-7_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23666-7_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23665-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23666-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)