In this chapter, we argue that the local and subnational levels are of critical importance to the study of migration governance because it is there that policies are implemented and enforced. In order to better understand bottom-up dynamics in the politics of immigration, as well as the limits to top-down migration policy making, we develop an analytical framework that identifies and critically appraises grassroots and subnational responses to migration policy in liberal democratic societies. Our aim in developing this framework is to build knowledge and theory relating to the systemic interaction between local, subnational, and national immigration policy actors across a variety of liberal societies.
- Civil Society
- Immigration Policy
- Civil Society Actor
- Immigrant Integration
- Immigration Enforcement
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
Alexander Aleinikoff, T. (2002). Semblances of sovereignty: The constitution, the State and American citizenship. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Boushey, G., & Luedtke, A. (2006). Fiscal federalism and the politics of immigration: Centralized and decentralized immigration policies in Canada and the United States. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 8(3), 207–224.
Castles, S., & Miller, M. (1998). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world. New York: Guilford Press.
Cornelius, W. A. (1998). The structural embeddedness of demand for Mexican immigrant labor: New evidence from California. In M. M. Suarez-Orozco (Ed.), Crossings: Mexican immigration in interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 114–144). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cornelius, W. A., Martin, P. L., & Hollifield, J. F. (Eds.). (2004). Controlling immigration: A global perspective (2nd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Dauvergne, C. (2005). Humanitarianism, identity and nation: Migration laws of Australia and Canada. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.
Dauvergne, C. (2008). Making people illegal: What globalization means for migration and law New York. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ellermann, A. (2005). Coercive capacity and the politics of implementation: Deportation in Germany and the United States. Comparative Political Studies, 38(10), 1219–1244.
Ellermann, A. (2006). Street-level democracy? How immigration Bureaucrats manage public opposition. West European Politics, 29(2), 287–303.
Ellermann, A. (2009). States against migrants: Deportation in Germany and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, G. P. (1995). Modes of immigration politics in liberal democratic states. International Migration Review, xxix(4), 881–913.
Gibney, M. J., & Hansen, R. (2003). Deportation and the liberal state: The involuntary return of asylum seekers and unlawful migrants in Canada, the UK, and Germany. New Issues in Refugee Research, Working Paper 77.
Good, K. (2009). Municipalities and multiculturalism: The politics of immigration in Toronto and Vancouver. Toronto, ON: Toronto University Press.
Guiraudon, V. (1998). Citizenship rights for non-citizens: France, Germany, and the Netherlands. In C. Joppke (Ed.), Challenge to the nation-state: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States (pp. 272–318). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hollifield, J. F. (1992). Immigrants, markets, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hollifield, J. F. (2004). The emerging migration state. International Migration Review, 38(3), 885–912.
Jacobson, D. (1996). Rights across borders: Immigration and the decline of citizenship. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Jacobson, D., & Ruffer, G. B. (2003). Courts across borders: The implications of judicial agency for human rights and democracy. Human Rights Quarterly, 25(1), 74–92.
Joppke, C. (1998a). Asylum and state sovereignty: A comparison of the United States, Germany, and Britain. In C. Joppke (Ed.), Challenge to the nation-state: Immigration in Western Europe and the United States (pp. 109–152). New York: Oxford University Press.
Joppke, C. (1998b). Why liberal states accept unwanted immigration. World Politics, 50, 266–293.
Lahav, G., & Guiraudon, V. (2000). Comparative perspectives on border control: Away from the border and outside the state. In P. Andreas & T. Snyder (Eds.), The wall around the west: State borders and immigration controls in North American and Europe (pp. 55–77). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Legomsky, S. H. (1987). Immigration and the judiciary: Law and politics in Britain and America. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Meyers, E. (2002). The causes of convergence in Western immigration control. Review of International Studies, 28, 123–141.
Money, J. (1997). No vacancy: The political geography of immigration control in advanced industrial countries. International Organization, 51(4), 685–720.
Money, J. (1999). Fences and neighbors: The political geography of immigration control. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Ramakrishnan, K., & Wong, T. K. (2010). Immigration policies go local: The varying responses of local governments to low-skilled and undocumented immigration. In Varsanyi, M. (Ed.), Taking local control: Immigration policy activism in U.S. Cities and States. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Sassen, S. (1996). Losing control? Sovereignty in an age of globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.
Soysal, Y. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: Migrants and postnational membership in Europe. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
The Globe and Mail. (July 24, 2004). Refugee approval rates vary widely, p. A1.
The New York Times. (May 31, 2007). Wide disparities found in judging of asylum cases, p. A14.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2008). Report to congressional requesters: U.S. asylum system—significant variation existing in asylum outcomes across immigration Courts and Judges. Washington, D.C.
van der Leun, J. (2003). Looking for loopholes: Processes of incorporation of illegal immigrants in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Varsanyi, M. (Ed.). (2010). Taking local control: Immigration policy activism in U.S. Cities and States. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Editors and Affiliations
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gravelle, M., Ellermann, A., Dauvergne, C. (2012). Studying Migration Governance from the Bottom-Up. In: Anderson, B., Gibney, M., Paoletti, E. (eds) The Social, Political and Historical Contours of Deportation. Immigrants and Minorities, Politics and Policy. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5864-7_5
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5863-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5864-7