En-Gendering Insecurities: The Case of the Migration Policy Regime in Thailand

Abstract

Th e paper examines the migration policy regime in Th ailand using a human security lens. It suggests that insecurities experienced by migrants are partly caused or exacerbated by a migration policy regime, consisting of migration laws and regulations and non-migration related policies and programs, that pushes migrants into irregular forms of mobility and insecure employment options. Th ese eff ects are worse for women migrants who have fewer resources to access legal channels while they are relegated to insecure employment in the reproductive or informal sectors. Using a gender and human security analysis, therefore, reveals how the migration policy regime, often informed by a restrictive national security approach, can clash with the human security needs of migrants by creating a large pool of unprotected irregular migrants with women occupying the most vulnerable forms of employment. In conclusion, it is suggested that this 'en-gendering' of human insecurities could be overcome if gender equality was designed into policies and guided their implementation.

Irregular maritime migration as a global phenomenon

“…Issues of human security are also addressed, as well as the tensions between national security concerns and human security, which 'broadens the scope of security analysis and policy from terri torial security to the security of people' (Gomez & Gasper, 2013), especially in relation to migration policies and the negative impacts on migrants (Doneys, 2011).…”

Human trafficking and migration control policy: vicious or virtuous cycle?

“…Admittedly, both types of policies have implications for human trafficking flows. For instance, strict regulations that restrict immigrants’ rights to work, travel or health may compel foreigners to enlist third-party intermediaries for access to illegal work options or document forgery (Doneys, 2011). Tight border controls or restrictions on exit from origin states may similarly have the perverse effect of forcing migrants to seek out third-party intermediaries (Feingold, 2005).…”