The Promise of a Subject-Centered Approach to Understanding Immigration Noncompliance

In the context of sharply increasing levels of international migration, development actors across Southeast Asia have begun to focus their attention on programming intended to make migration safer for aspiring and current migrant workers. These projects, however, typically begin with the assumption that more regular, orderly migration is also safer for migrants, an idea built into the language of the Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Compact on Migration. This article questions this assumption. It takes as its starting point the observation that migrant workers who move through legal channels do not systematically experience better outcomes among a range of indicators. Based on data collected from Cambodian, Burmese, Laotian, and Vietnamese labor migrants recently returned from Thailand, this work highlights the limits of regular migration to provide meaningfully "safer" experiences. Although migrants moving through regular channels report better pay and working conditions than those who moved through irregular channels, they also systematically report working conditions that do not meet legal standards, and routinely experience contract substitution. In other areas, regular migrants generally fare similarly to or worse than irregular migrants. They are more likely to experience deception and to have written or verbal agreements broken in migration processes. On arrival in Thailand, they routinely have their documents held, and they are more likely than irregular migrants to experience harassment and abuse both in the migration process and at their worksites. They are also more likely to return involuntarily and to struggle with financial insecurity and indebtedness after returning. These findings challenge mainstream development discourses seeking to promote safer migration experiences through expanding migration infrastructure. At the same time, they highlight the need for policymakers, development actors, and migration practitioners to reconsider the conflation of "safe" with "regular and orderly" migration throughout their programming.

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Regular Migration Safer Migration? Insights from Thailand

Bylander

2019

“…• identify the nation's evolving labor, family, or humanitarian needs that might be met through immigration, including on a state and local level; • identify shortages in skills and occupations necessary to promote that nation's economic competitiveness; • assess the labor market contributions and other trajectories of those who enter via different categories of admission, including family-based visas; • propose adjustments in legal admission levels and categories to reflect the nation's needs, interests, and fluctuations in its economy; • conduct research on the views of immigrants on US immigration policies in order to strengthen the legal immigration system, develop strategies to advance policy goals, and better understand and address noncompliance with the law (Ryo 2017); and • champion access by researchers to relevant datasets in order to build a more extensive evidence base on which Congress and the executive can make policy judgments in this area.…”

Section: The Importance Of Flexible Evidence-based Immigration Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(CFR 2009, 49) To that end, the paper endorses previous calls for an independent commission to advise Congress and the executive on US labor market and economic needs that might be met by immigrants. Such a commission could also study the perspectives and perceptions of immigrants regarding the US immigration system in order to create stronger legal immigration policies, develop new strategies to achieve US policy goals, and promote greater compliance with the law (Ryo 2017). The paper also proposes that the United States rely upon the abundant datasets, indices, state rankings, and reports on the conditions that drive migration, in order to target its development and diplomatic interventions; anticipate and plan for large-scale migration; and inform its refugee admission and humanitarian parole priorities.…”

Section: Fix the Legal Immigration Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

National Interests and Common Ground in the US Immigration Debate: How to Legalize the US Immigration System and Permanently Reduce Its Undocumented Population

Kerwin

Warren

2017

The conventional wisdom holds that the only point of consensus in the fractious US immigration debate is that the system is broken. Yet, the US public has consistently expressed a desire for a legal and orderly immigration system that serves compelling national interests. This paper describes how to create such a system. It focuses on the cornerstone of immigration reform, 1 the legal immigration system, 2 and addresses the widespread belief that broad reform will incentivize illegal migration and ultimately lead to another large undocumented population. The paper begins with an analysis of presidential signing statements on seminal immigration legislation over nearly a century. These statements reveal broad consensus on the interests and values that the United States seeks to advance through its immigration and refugee policies. They constitute additional common ground in the immigration debate. To serve these interests, immigration and refugee considerations must be "mainstreamed" into other policy processes. In addition, its policies will be more successful if they are seen to benefit or, at least, not to discriminate against migrant-sending states. Not surprisingly, the US immigration system does not reflect the vast, mostly unanticipated changes in the nation and the world since Congress last meaningfully reformed this system (27 years ago) and last overhauled 1 Effective legal immigration policies constitute the cornerstone of reform because, without them, the immigration enforcement system and any eventual legalization program will not be able to deliver on their promises. 2 The paper treats US refugee admissions as a form of legal immigration. The National Interests Served by US Immigration and Refugee Policies All the partisans in the immigration debate agree that US immigration and refugee policies should serve the nation's interests, begging the question: What interests? Presidential

“…• conduct research on the views of immigrants of the US immigration system in order to strengthen legal immigration programs and better understand and address noncompliance with the law (Ryo 2017); and…”

Section: The United States Should Prioritize the Gathering And Dissemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…experience integration policies (Ryo 2017). 35 Even ideologically aligned federal, state, and local administrations may differ on immigration enforcement and integration issues, given their distinct institutional imperatives.…”

Section: The Us Immigration System Should Reflect Liberal Democratic mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving beyond Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Trump: Principles, Interests, and Policies to Guide Long-Term Reform of the US Immigration System

Kerwin

2017

Executive SummaryThis paper introduces a special collection of 15 papers that chart a course for long-term reform of the US immigration system. The papers look beyond recent legislative debates and the current era of rising nationalism and restrictionism to outline the elements of a forward-looking immigration policy that would serve the nation's interests, honor its liberal democratic ideals, promote the full participation of immigrants in the nation's life, and exploit the opportunities offered by the increasingly interdependent world. This paper highlights several overarching themes from the collection, as well as dozens of proposals for reform. Together, the papers in the collection make the case that:• Immigration policymaking should be embedded in a larger set of partnerships, processes, and commitments that respond to the conditions that force persons to migrate.• The US immigration system should reflect liberal democratic values and an inclusive vision of national identity.• It is incumbent on policy and opinion makers to publicize the broad national interests served by US immigration policies.• Policymakers should, in turn, evaluate and adjust US immigration policies based on their success in furthering the nation's interests.• The United States should prioritize the gathering and dissemination of the best available evidence on migration and on the nation's migrationrelated needs and programs, and should use this information to respond flexibly to changing migration patterns and new economic developments.• Immigrant integration strengthens communities and represents an important, overarching metric for US immigration policies. Journal on Migration and Human Security 542• The successful integration of the United States' 43 million foreign-born residents and their progeny should be a national priority.• An immigration federalism agenda should prioritize cooperation on shared federal, state, and local priorities.• An immigration federalism agenda should recognize the federal government's enforcement obligations; the interests of local communities in the safety, well-being and participation of their residents; the importance of federal leadership in resolving the challenges posed by the US undocumented population; and the need for civil society institutions to serve as mediators of immigrant integration.• Immigration reform should be coupled with strong, well-enforced labor standards in order to promote fair wages and safe and healthy working conditions for all US workers.• Fairness and due process should characterize US admission, custody, and removal decisions.• Family unity should remain a central goal of US immigration policy and a pillar of the US immigration system.• The United States should seek to craft "win-win" immigration policies that serve its own interests and that benefit migrant-sending states.• US immigration law and policy should be coherent and consistent, and the United States should create legal migration opportunities for persons uprooted by US foreign interventions, trade policies, and...