Forced Migration in a Moral Polity and the Public Role of Migration Research

Abstract

Many countries in Europe receiving refugees are signatories to human rights conventions, and we can thus speak of a moral polity. Yet we also find externalisation of migration control and widespread refusal to receive forced migrants. This observation raises three questions. First, in what sense can we speak of a moral polity around forced migration? In other words, what are the existing elements of a global regime around forced migration? Second, how is the discrepancy between human rights declarations on the one hand and restrictive policies on the other hand reflected in exclusion and inequalities? This question is placed in the context of the externalisation of control which has spurred the securitisation of migration with respect to socio-psychological, political-legal, and economic aspects. The main argument is that the dissonance between moral proclamations, on the one hand, and inaction on norms combined with externalisation of migration control on the other, has contributed to an increase in irregular migration and a decrease in protection for forced migrants and their families. In short, the consequences of externalisation are mostly the exact opposite of what has been declared or intended. Third, in conclusion, given the crucial importance of the politics and policies around forced migration, deeper reflection is needed concerning the public involvement of social scientists who deal with forced migration. Two interventions by social scientists are discussed in more detail. The argument is that the major role of migration research beyond the academic realm is not primarily to engage in policy advice and consultancy but to play an active role providing meaning and orientation for participants and audiences in public debates.