The Multilevel Governance of Migration and Integration

Continuity and change in local immigrant policies in times of austerity

“…Furthermore, it demonstrates that city-level policies not only often reflect local concerns, challenges and contexts, and thus constitute a political approach to migration in their own right, but that they are also inherently influenced by national and global economic developments. It thus confirms the importance of a multi-level governance perspective, which acknowledges and appreciates the interrelationship between the global, national, regional, and local realms of policymaking, as has been recently highlighted (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2017; Scholten & Penninx, 2016). …”

Responding to Irregular Migration: High Potential of Local Governments in Turkey

“…Local governments are increasingly finding a place in international migration literature. They are seen as “the best agents” in immigrant integration, facilitators of the migration‐development nexus and transnational development cooperation (together with migrant organizations), providers of basic public services such as education, health and welfare services in some cities and collaborators of national governments in controlling migration (Alexander, ; Guiraudon and Lahav, ; Fauser, ; Graauw and Vermeulen, ; Scholten and Penninx, ).…”

“…According to Ireland (), local authorities are increasingly autonomous in their responses to the policy challenges of immigration. They complement or contradict national policies and sometimes even facilitate the introduction of new national policies (Scholten and Penninx, ). Similarly, Fauser () notes that migration governance structures are changing as local governments assume new roles in the governance process as an additional layer or “scale”.…”

“…Although national governments are still the principal actors in irregular migration policy‐making and management, the irregularization of international migration transforms all major immigration and transit countries as well as emigration countries into “countries of irregular migration”, thus compelling local governments more than ever to respond to irregular migration in their localities. Many of these countries have sizeable irregular migrant communities now and the consequences of restrictive and exclusive irregular migration policies are most strongly felt at the local level (Scholten and Penninx, ), where there are invisible members in precarious and vulnerable situations.…”

“…It should be noted that politicization and securitization are not necessarily restricted to national‐level politics and policy‐making processes, and as Varsanyi () noted, there are cases in which local governments act restrictively in security‐driven ways. However, along general lines, local responses are reported to be inclusive as they are shaped by local factors and are “driven by pragmatic problem‐solving” (Scholten, ; Scholten and Penninx, : 99). Local governments are expected to work for public safety, security, and health, crime prevention, social cohesion, avoidance of street sleeping, reduction of street prostitution, reduction of substance abuse and begging, etc.…”