| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
128606
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Australia and Indonesia have engaged in cooperation on asylum policy since the late 1990s, bilaterally on immigration detention and people-smuggling agreements, and multilaterally through the Bali Process. Seen from a global perspective, this form of cooperation is one of many such bilateral and multilateral agreements that stymie the ability of asylum-seekers to gain effective and durable protection. This article argues that policy transfer theory can explain how these agreements are achieved, their political implications, and their outcome for the refugee regime and the asylum-seekers reliant on the regime for protection. In the case study of Australia and Indonesia, the authors argue that the cooperation is best understood as a form of 'incentivised policy transfer', whereby Australia has provided substantial financial and diplomatic incentives to Indonesia to adopt policies consistent with Australia's own. The implications for asylum-seekers in the Asia-Pacific region are substantial, and include an increase in the use of immigration detention in Indonesia and the introduction of border security measures that restrict the ability of asylum-seekers to reach territory where they may claim protection under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
174022
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
With rates of asylum seekers increasing across decades worldwide, why do high- and middle-income countries persistently adopt more restrictive asylum policies? By analyzing data from the cases of Canada and Turkey (1988–92), this study shows that domestic policy preferences of decision-makers and refugee determination systems constitute the factors with the highest impact on restrictive asylum policy-making. Through the use of latent content analysis of primary historical documents and elite and expert interviews and an innovative application of the ADVIAN classification method of impact analysis, this study claims that interactions among institutions are critical for the changes a country's asylum policy. Conclusions of this study challenge existing research to move beyond monocausal explanatory schemes for understanding restrictive asylum policy trends and engage with complex frameworks accounting for interacting factors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
143340
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
That the Lisbon Treaty lays the foundation for a supranational asylum and immigration policy is surprising, even more so for Liberal Intergovernmentalism (LI), whose founder Andrew Moravcsik predicts that no such development will take place. While the article uses LI as its point of departure, it shows that it runs into problems with regards to the policy area of asylum and immigration. The article therefore turns to the (neo-)functionalist concept of spillover. While working with the concept, it was deemed necessary to create a more coherent typology of different spillovers. The article suggests that the concept of spillover may be both descriptive and explanatory. With regards to descriptive spillover, it seems valuable to differentiate between widening and deepening spillovers, but concerning explanatory spillovers, more options became visible: there are unintended or intended functional spillovers, as well as unintended political, cultivated and social spillovers. The argument is illustrated through a detailed study of Sweden – a ‘reluctant European’ that within the area of asylum and immigration made a fundamental U-turn with regards to a supranationalism, a change that can be described as a social spillover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
101261
|
|
|