Global But Not Regional? The Role of African Regional Migration Regimes in the International Governance Architecture

Abstract

Regional organisations and migration regimes are increasingly being acknowledged in global migration policies. The global compacts for migration and on refugees adopted in December 2018 recognise the migration-related expertise and important function of regional organisations in the implementation of international guidelines and policies. But the compacts' wording is vague on the division of labour between global and regional migration regimes, and important questions remain unanswered regarding the added value and ideal role of regional migration regimes in the international system. This is particularly true for regions of the global South, whose institutional arrangements, substantive focus and performance in migration-related norm setting and implementation remain understudied. The authors contribute to filling this knowledge gap by considering two migration policy processes in the context of their overall (regional) migration governance systems and regimesthe ECOWAS Protocol for the Free Movement of Persons and the IGAD Regional Framework for Durable Solutions for Somali Refugees. Based on a qualitative research design, they find that regional migration regimes possess some comparative advantages compared with global ones, which enhance their agency. However, depending on institutional path dependencies, the degree of legalisation and the interests of powerful internal and external actors, levels of agency with regards to different migration types might show significant variation.

Regional migration governance

“…RMG is thus also about identity-formation: by including some people and excluding others, it contributes to shaping regional integrations; regions are indeed not merely preexisting (or 'natural') entities, but rather the outcome of political projects in which RMG plays a key role (Farrell et al, 2005). As noted above, not all components receive the same amount of attention across regions, which reflects differences in national/regional migration trends and realities (Dick and Schraven, 2018). Korneev and Leonov (2021) add that the nature of RMG also depends on the actors that are involved: 'home-grown' RMG pushed by local/regional actors tends to build upon economic rationality, whereas externally driven, or imported, RMG is often wrapped in security considerations.…”

“…This is more the case in regions in which borders are recent and sometimes partly artificial, and in which people keep moving from one state to another (sometimes regardless of legal and policy frameworks). Because of this greater cohesiveness, it is argued that regional regimes might bring higher benefits to migration-sending states, which hold a much weaker position within GMG (Dick and Schraven, 2018). While there are sensible arguments for states to focus on RMG, the relationship between GMG and RMG is quite complex.…”

“…By contrast, in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), intra-regional mobility constituted a central objective from the very beginning of the regional integration process (Dick and Schraven, 2018). This led to measures to establish a borderless West Africa, especially through the adoption of the 1979 Free Movement Protocol, in which three phases (right of entry, residence, and establishment) were identified to achieve free movement within the region.…”

“…As in other policy areas (Farrell, Hettne and Van Langenhove, 2005), the absence of a consistent, legitimate, and appropriate global governance system has prompted the search for alternative pathways, and the regional governance of migration has, therefore, attracted increasing interest. In broader terms, regional organisations and initiatives are gradually becoming acknowledged political players in global politics and global governance at large (Dick and Schraven, 2018). This chapter provides an overview of how and why regional migration governance (RMG) has become an important policy and research issue.…”