Measuring ‘Well-Governed’ Migration: The IOM’s Migration Governance Indicators

  • Corey RobinsonEmail author
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)


This chapter examines how the International Organization for Migration (IOM) intervenes in global migration governance through the production of knowledge and the deployment of technical expertise. It analyses the IOM’s Migration Governance Indicators, a migration governance benchmarking metric created to define well-governed migration, evaluate institutional capacity to manage migration and monitor state progress towards the implementation of the migration-related targets contained in the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. It argues that the Migration Governance Indicators translate the meaning of well-governed migration into material form and make it possible for the IOM to govern at a distance by issuing symbolic judgements regarding states’ institutional capacity to manage migration. While the IOM describes itself as a non-normative organisation acting in the service of states, the Migration Governance Indicators serve a social and political purpose. Far from being politically impartial, the Migration Governance Indicators empower the IOM by consolidating its expert authority, enrolling various actors into the agenda of well-governed migration and legitimising its newfound institutional identity as the UN migration agency.


Migration management Inter-governmental organisations Global governance Benchmarking Expertise 

Works Cited

  1. Andrijasevic, R., and W. Walters. 2010. The International Organization for Migration and the International Government of Borders. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 28 (6): 977–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett, M., and M. Finnemore. 2004. Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barry, A. 2001. Political Machines: Governing a Technological Society. London: A&C Black.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2013. The Translation Zone: Between Actor-Network Theory and International Relations. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 41 (3): 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Betts, A. 2010. The Refugee Regime Complex. Refugee Survey Quarterly 29 (1): 12–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ———. 2011. Global Migration Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Betts, A., and G. Loescher, eds. 2011. Refugees in International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bhagwati, J. 2003. Borders Beyond Control. Foreign Affairs 82 (1): 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Broome, A., and J. Quirk. 2015. Governing the World at a Distance: The Practice of Global Benchmarking. Review of International Studies 41 (5): 819–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Corry, O. 2013. Constructing a Global Polity: Theory, Discourse and Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis, K.E., B. Kingsbury, and S.E. Merry. 2012. Introduction: Global Governance by Indicators. In Governance by Indicators: Global Power Through Quantification and Rankings, 1–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geiger, M., and A. Pécoud. 2012. The Politics of International Migration Management. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Geiger, M., and A. Pécoud, eds. 2013. Disciplining the Transnational Mobility of People. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 2014. International Organisations and the Politics of Migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 40 (6): 865–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hale, T., and D. Held, eds. 2011. Handbook of Transnational Governance. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  16. Hansen, R., J. Koehler, and J. Money. 2011. Migration, Nation States, and International Cooperation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. IOM. 2010. World Migration Report: The Future of Migration Governance and Regional Consultative Processes. At
  18. ———. 2013. International Migration and Development: Contributions and Recommendations of the International System. At
  19. ———. 2016a. IOM Becomes a Related Organization to the UN. At
  20. ———. 2016b. International Dialogue on Migration No. 26: Follow-Up and Review of Migration in the Sustainable Development Goals. At
  21. ———. 2016c. Measuring Well-Governed Migration: The 2016 Migration Governance Index. At
  22. ———. 2016d. Measuring Well-Managed Migration: The Migration Governance Index. Presentation by Leo Abruzzese, Economist Intelligence Unit. At
  23. ———. 2017a. International Dialogue on Migration. At
  24. ———. 2017b. International Dialogue on Migration 2017: Strengthening International Cooperation on and Governance of Migration Towards the Adoption of a Global Compact on Migration in 2018. At
  25. ———. 2017c. World Migration Report 2018. At
  26. Kalm, S. 2012. Liberalizing Movements? The Political Rationality of Global Migration Management. In The Politics of International Migration Management, ed. M. Geiger and A. Pécoud, 21–44. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Koslowski, R., ed. 2011. Global Mobility Regimes. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Kunz, R., S. Lavenex, and M. Panizzon. 2011. Multilayered Migration Governance: The Promise of Partnership. Abingdon: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lavenex, S. 2016. Multilevelling EU External Governance: The Role of International Organizations in the Diffusion of EU Migration Policies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 42 (4): 554–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin, S.F. 2014. International Migration: Evolving Trends from the Early Twentieth Century to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Pécoud, A. 2015. Depoliticising Migration: Global Governance and International Migration Narratives. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sending, O.J., and J.H. Sande Lie. 2015. The Limits of Global Authority: World Bank Benchmarks in Ethiopia and Malawi. Review of International Studies 41 (5): 993–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. UN. 2017. High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF). At
  34. ———. 2018. Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. A/CONF.231/1. 10 December. At
  35. UN General Assembly. 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1. 21 October. At
  36. ———. 2016. Agreement Concerning the Relationship Between the United Nations and the International Organization for Migration. A/RES/70/296. 5 August. At

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.York UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations