Selecting Immigrants in an Unjust World

Ip, Kevin K. W.

doi:10.1177/0032321719833885

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding the first criterion, states should not make an instrumental use of their presumptive right to exclude in order to maximize their own interests at any cost by, say, promoting the immigration of qualified professionals and the great fortunes to the detriment of the least qualified and worse-off (Ip, 2020). Such a policy may be considered selfish and even immoral, but not necessarily unfair.…”

Section: Assistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Global justice, individual autonomy, and migration policy

Niño Arnaiz

2024

Rev. Estud. Polít.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aunque, en principio, la justicia global no requiera de fronteras abiertas, en la práctica impone restricciones significativas a cómo los Estados pueden ejercer su derecho de exclusión. En primer lugar, los Estados ricos tienen la obligación primaria de asistir a las personas pobres en sus países de origen, y solo una obligación secundaria de acoger a aquellas que no pueden ser asistidas donde viven. En segundo lugar, el empleo de la coacción debe ser proporcional al objetivo perseguido, de manera que solo en situaciones de riesgo inminente, directo y grave están justificadas las restricciones a la inmigración. En tercer lugar, cuando sea necesario limitar el acceso, dicha limitación debe ser parcial y temporal. Los Estados deben procurar vías de tránsito alternativas y restablecer la libertad de circulación lo antes posible.

show abstract

Section: Assistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Global justice, individual autonomy, and migration policy

Niño Arnaiz

2024

Rev. Estud. Polít.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In economics, proposals for “selling” citizenship by states have been around for decades (Becker and Lazear 2013; Borna and Stearns 2002; Simon 1999). More recently, normative political theorists began to address the issue, offering defenses, and more commonly, critiques of the practice (Besson 2019; Erez, 2022; Forthcoming; Hidalgo 2016a; Ip 2020; Shachar 2017; Shachar and Baubock 2014; Shachar and Hirschl 2014; Tanasoca 2018). As the practice currently exists, the state has a monopoly on “selling,” and indeed, on “producing” the commodity which is citizenship.…”

Section: Selling Citizenship By the State And By Individualsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Erez

2022

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Should it be permissible for individuals to sell their own citizenship? In brief: no. Against recent defenses of the idea of private citizenship markets, I argue that these markets cannot be legitimately established. First, I examine existing arguments in the literature in support of such markets, and argue that they do not present sufficient reasons for justifying the establishment of private citizenship markets. Second, I argue that the very idea of private citizenship markets is a non-starter, as the privatization of citizenship allocation undermines the justification for the collective right to exclude from membership. As a result, the case for private citizenship markets fails. Finally, I consider some possible objections to my argument and potential implications of it beyond the case of private citizenship markets.

show abstract

“…The increased selectiveness is manifested by tendencies to liberalise entry and stay conditions for highly qualified labour migrants, 1 while controlling those who are not welcomed, for example, the often mentioned ‘irregular’ and low‐qualified migrants (Helbling & Kalkum, 2018). Those who are not involved in the targeted policies may end up with fewer ways to access the country of destination than before (Cerna, 2016; Ip, 2020).…”

Section: European Migration Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary Czech migration policy: ‘Labour, not people’?

Stojanov

Klvaňová

Seidlová

et al. 2021

Population Space and Place

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper offers an analysis of the Czech migration policy since the so‐called European Union (EU) migration crisis in 2015 and its key instruments when it comes to migrant workers from third (non‐EU) countries. On the basis of semi‐structured interviews with 80 experts on various aspects of migration policymaking, we identified three key features of Czech migration policymaking: (i) perception of migration as a threat, (ii) orientation on temporary labour migration and (iii) lack of coherent and systematic conceptual approach towards migration. Jointly, these features explain a central paradox of the contemporary Czech migration policy: the contradiction between a strong anti‐immigration political discourse and the actual numbers of immigrants that has been rising steadily. Similarly to other European countries, there has been a growing tendency towards selectiveness in Czech migration policy, manifested in recent instruments specifically focused on attracting highly qualified migrants. However, the selection criteria are mainly based on the country of origin, and the quotas for incoming migrants reflect the existing administrative capacities and short‐term needs of the current Czech labour market for low‐ and middle‐qualified professionals rather than long‐term economic goals and demographic needs. Since the global economic recession (2008–2010), Czech migration policies have still not genuinely considered the fact that it is people, rather than just ‘labour’, who come to the Czech Republic.

show abstract

Selecting Immigrants in an Unjust World

Cited by 5 publications

References 56 publications

Global justice, individual autonomy, and migration policy

Global justice, individual autonomy, and migration policy

Not Yours to Sell: The Case Against Private Citizenship Markets

Contemporary Czech migration policy: ‘Labour, not people’?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About