The Emergency Management of Migration and Agricultural Workforce during the Pandemic The Contradictory Outcomes of the 2020 Amnesty Law

Abstract

The chapter aims to illustrate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and, in particular, of the of amnesty law passed by the Italian government in May 2020 for migrants working in agriculture, highlighting the continuity of the latter measure with the previous policies regulating migration and agricultural labour. For decades, these policies have managed both international migrations and domestic mobility of the seasonal labour force through an emergency approach. The chapter resorts on data collected through statistics, interviews and participant observation inside informal settlements in the South of Italy. In conclusion, we argue that the health emergency accelerates the resort to administrative and bureaucratic emergency practices in the management of migrations, thus contributing to the reproduction of an emergency frame, that relegates labourers to the role of ‘victims of exploitation’, and at the same time regulates their possibility of movement and their employment opportunities.

Fitful circulations: Unauthorized movements in the Sicilian transit zone

“…This is especially the case with fruit and fresh vegetable sector where these changes affect if a product is left to rot in the field or harvested in the shortest possible time. This phenomenon, in turn, had an impact on the mobilities of migrant workers (Baglioni et al, 2021; Dal Zotto et al, 2021). The season for the harvesting of new potatoes in Cassibile is between March and June, and migrant workers, 400–500 each year, usually reach this area searching for a job at the beginning of March.…”

Moral economy and deservingness in immigration policies. The case of regularisations in Italy

“…It is often neglected the fact that women are also involved in the sector (Avola, 2022), also suffering sexual exploitation (Cortese and Palidda, 2018). At the same time, critics have highlighted that in most of the public debate, and also in scholarship, migrant labourers have often been depicted as “victims of exploitation” (for this criticism: Dal Zotto et al, 2021), or “modern slaves” (for this criticism: Dines and Rigo, 2015; Howard and Forin, 2019), obscuring both their agency and contradictions of Italian immigration policies: forced migrations have in some way (partially) compensated the very scarce opportunities of legal entrance for working purposes (Caprioglio and Rigo, 2020).…”

Introduction: Migrants and Migration in the Eco-Pan-Syndemic Era

“…As for work, in many contexts, a significant portion of immigrants have experienced worsening working conditions-increased workloads and work rhythms, increased injuries, and decreased wages. 8 More affected by unemployment than national workers (Bonifazi et al, 2020;Ekanayake & Amirthalingam, 2021;Reddy, 2021), a substantial portion of immigrant workers have been reduced to "work fodder, " despite the risk of contagion in essential sectors such as agriculture (Dal Zotto et al, 2021;Kukreja, 2021;Martin, 2021;Rinaldi, 2021), nursing-health care (Ambrosini, 2020), and manufacturing (Asis, 2021). This occurred especially in the productive sectors characterized by a high level of informality and undeclared work, 7 In North America (the United States: Benfer et al, 2021;Despres, 2021;Gonzalez et al, 2020;Luconi, 2021;Olayo-Méndez et al, 2021;Canada: Tuyisenge & Goldenberg, 2021); in South America (Brazil: Brigido et al, 2022;Parise et al, 2021); in Asia (Hiraiwa, 2021;Reddy, 2021); in Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent (Singapore: Hayward et al, 2021;Hintermeier et al, 2021;the Philippines: Asis, 2021;Ciceri & Prigol, 2021;India: Acharya & Patel, 2021;Saikia, 2021;Bangladesh: Parvez, 2021); in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia: Hayward et al, 2021;Hintermeier et al, 2021); in Europe (Italy: Della Puppa & Sanò.…”