Democratic centre, autocratic isolates: the changing field of international visa policies

Abstract

In the international field of visa policies, states observe how other states act in terms of global mobility control or the facilitation of wanted cross-border mobility. But towards whom do they orient themselves? And what drives nation states to cooperate with others and grant their citizens visa-free travel or not? To tackle these questions, we conceptualise visa waiver agreements as positive relations between two states. A new data collection 'Visa Network Data ' (1969/2010) provides information on all visa waiver agreements worldwide. By means of social network analysis (blockmodelling), we analyse the global structure of the network of nations in this policy field as well as its change over time. In the centre of the network we find evidence for the existence of a global model at which many others orient themselves. However, a second distinct position in the network shows a high degree of stability: Autocratic states that do not want to be involved in the exchange of these bilateral relations. ARTICLE HISTORY

How do post-colonial ties and migration regimes shape travel visa requirements? The case of Caribbean nationals

“…Thus, we see evidence that the role of post-colonial ties has been evolving dependent on the former colonial state (e.g. former British, Dutch, French colonies or US) and as geopolitical interests diverge, supporting results from other studies (Laube and Heidler 2016;Vezzoli 2015). In fact, its relevance may weaken as new strategic interests and alliances are pursued with neighbouring countries.…”

“…However, in a later paper, Neumayer (2010) refers to the likelihood of lower bilateral visa restrictions when there is a former colonial link. Laube and Heidler (2016) offer a possible explanation when they observe that the role of post-colonial ties on visa policies weakened between 1969 and 2010 as some former colonies, that is, rich Commonwealth countries, emulate the travel visa policies adopted by developed countries. This shows the oft-neglected fact that post-colonial ties are not fixed but evolve over time.…”

“…Although limited, research on travel visa requirements has identified or suggested a few determinants, such as a country's income levels, tourism, bilateral trade, cultural, religious and geographical proximity, political regimes and levels of democracy, as well as colonial links (Mau et al 2015;Neumayer 2006). The principle of reciprocity may also explain the requirement of, or exemption from, travel visas (Laube and Heidler 2016;Neumayer 2006). If a country does not have a visa for a certain nationality, the country of the benefitting nationality may also remove the visa requirement.…”

“…Thus, a division exists between a group of countries whose nationals enjoy great freedom of movement and a larger group of countries whose nationals face great levels of restriction, leading to a 'global mobility divide' (Mau et al 2015). Laube and Heidler (2016) also examine travel visa requirements in 1969 and 2010 and find that in 1969 travel visa policies were influenced by colonial ties and political alignment, that is, Western or Soviet sphere, but in 2010, these factors weakened as states clustered in groups which generally emulate the policies of democratic states.…”

The relational dimension of externalizing border control: selective visa policies in migration and border diplomacy

“…While many countries did not possess migration or even asylum laws yet, the International Air Transport Association (IATA), founded in 1945 by the airline industry, was able to collect information on travel visa requirements for an impressive number of almost 170 states by 1969. In the 1950s and 60s, states had typically implemented visa requirements for almost all foreign countries and were only starting to waive certain visa requirements for countries in their neighbourhood or countries with which they had a special historical, political or cultural link (Laube & Heidler, 2016;Neumayer, 2006). The lifting of visa requirements is usually interpreted as a friendly political gesture by government officials (Laube, 2013, p. 167).…”