Migrant Agency and the Country of Origin in the Return Regime. The Case of State-Induced Return from Germany to The Gambia
Abstract
This dissertation investigates the contested field of return migration through the lens of migrant agency and transnational migratory and political dynamics between Germany and The Gambia. It focuses on state-induced return – deportation and Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR) – and the socio-political reconfigurations it triggers for migrants and the country to which they (potentially) return. The study is motivated by two interlinked developments: first, the increasing political and administrative efforts of European states and Germany in particular to enforce return, and second, the shift in political opportunity structures in origin countries, for example when undergoing democratic transition. The case of The Gambia, following the fall of long-term dictators Yahya Jammeh in 2016, offers a critical context in which these developments converge. The dissertation addresses the overarching research question: How do migrants facing state-induced return develop and navigate socio-political agency in the transnational migration regime? It explores (1) which forms of migrant agency emerge in the face of state-induced return; (2) how migrants position themselves vis-à-vis the institutional, discursive, and practical configurations of the return regime; and (3) how these migrant positions influence political dynamics in The Gambia. The study thereby seeks to recentre return migration studies on the post-return context and to foreground the agency of migrants and origin-state actors within transnational migration governance. Theoretically, the study draws on a power-sensitive migration regime perspective, further developed through insights from structuration theory, especially Margaret Archer’s distinction between primary and corporate agency. It integrates debates on return voluntariness, development, and political remittances, while also critically engaging with the dominant policy paradigm of reintegration. Conceptually, the dissertation proposes the notion of the return regime that is distinct from migration regimes and deportation regimes as it incorporates post-return dynamics and their entanglements with development cooperation, origin-state politics, and multi-sited migrant activism. Empirically, the study is based on a longitudinal, multi-sited qualitative case study of return migration between Germany and The Gambia. Data were collected through over 115 qualitative interviews with migrants, state and other administrative actors, and civil society representatives in both countries. The core of the empirical research includes follow-up interviews with migrants who returned from Germany via deportation or AVRR over a 2.5-year period, complemented by participant observation, document analysis, and media materials. This temporal approach allows the dissertation to trace evolving trajectories of return and capture the ways in which migrants navigate or contest their returns within the regime over time, and how changing political dynamics shape their positionings. The case of The Gambia is analytically significant due to the simultaneity of democratic transition and intensified return enforcement by Germany. It provides a ‘crucial case’ to test competing claims within the return-development nexus and to examine how origin-state sovereignty is negotiated under conditions of geopolitical asymmetry. The study identifies moments of corporate migrant agency both before and after return, including a high-profile deportation moratorium enacted by the Gambian government following transnational migrant protest. At the same time, the research reveals limited transformative agency among migrants returned from Germany themselves, many of whom struggle with stigma, economic hardship, and exclusion despite reintegration assistance. The dissertation consists of a cumulative body of five academic publications. These address (1) the differentiated political influence of two specific groups of migrants; (2) trajectories after state-induced return and the identification of AVRR as ‘slow deportation’; (3) the transnational political remittances of migrants’ anti-deportation activism; (4) the notion of ‘protective exclusion’ through the Gambian state as a postcolonial sovereignty strategy; and (5) methodological and ethical reflections on longitudinal post-deportation research. These are synthesized in this framework paper and discussed in the shared contexts of migrant agency, development, and the return regime. Overall, the dissertation challenges the normative assumptions embedded in return and reintegration policies. It demonstrates how migrant agency is shaped by structural constraints, how origin states navigate conflicting pressures in migration cooperation, and how return is not simply the closure of migration but a deeply politicized and contested constant in the return regime. By repositioning return migration as a transnational field of struggle, the study advances regime theory, contributed to critical migration and development research, and opens new avenues for postcolonial engagement with migration governance.
Full text
MIGRANT AGENCY AND
THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN
IN THE RETURN REGIME
The Case o S a e-Induced Re u n
om Ge many o The Gambia
Disse a ion
zu E langung des Dok o g ades
Dok o in de Philosophie (D . phil.)
des Fachbe eichs Kul u - und Sozialwissenscha en
de Uni e si ä Osnab ück
o geleg
on
Judi h Al ogge
aus
Be g. Gladbach
Osnab ück, im Juni 2025
iii
ABSTRACT
This disse a ion in es iga es he con es ed ield o e u n mig a ion h ough he lens o mig an
agency and ansna ional mig a o y and poli ical dynamics be ween Ge many and The Gambia.
I ocuses on s a e-induced e u n – depo a ion and Assis ed Volun a y Re u n and
Rein eg a ion (AVRR) – and he socio-poli ical econ igu a ions i igge s o mig an s and he
coun y o which hey (po en ially) e u n. The s udy is mo i a ed by wo in e linked
de elopmen s: i s , he inc easing poli ical and adminis a i e e o s o Eu opean s a es and
Ge many in pa icula o en o ce e u n, and second, he shi in poli ical oppo uni y s uc u es
in o igin coun ies, o example when unde going democ a ic ansi ion. The case o The
Gambia, ollowing he all o long- e m dic a o s Yahya Jammeh in 2016, o e s a c i ical
con ex in which hese de elopmen s con e ge.
The disse a ion add esses he o e a ching esea ch ques ion: How do mig an s acing s a e-
induced e u n de elop and na iga e socio-poli ical agency in he ansna ional mig a ion
egime? I explo es (1) which o ms o mig an agency eme ge in he ace o s a e-induced
e u n; (2) how mig an s posi ion hemsel es is-à- is he ins i u ional, discu si e, and p ac ical
con igu a ions o he e u n egime; and (3) how hese mig an posi ions in luence poli ical
dynamics in The Gambia. The s udy he eby seeks o ecen e e u n mig a ion s udies on he
pos - e u n con ex and o o eg ound he agency o mig an s and o igin-s a e ac o s wi hin
ansna ional mig a ion go e nance.
Theo e ically, he s udy d aws on a powe -sensi i e mig a ion egime pe spec i e, u he
de eloped h ough insigh s om s uc u a ion heo y, especially Ma ga e A che ’s dis inc ion
be ween p ima y and co po a e agency. I in eg a es deba es on e u n olun a iness,
de elopmen , and poli ical emi ances, while also c i ically engaging wi h he dominan policy
pa adigm o ein eg a ion. Concep ually, he disse a ion p oposes he no ion o he e u n
egime ha is dis inc om mig a ion egimes and depo a ion egimes as i inco po a es pos -
e u n dynamics and hei en anglemen s wi h de elopmen coope a ion, o igin-s a e poli ics,
and mul i-si ed mig an ac i ism.
Empi ically, he s udy is based on a longi udinal, mul i-si ed quali a i e case s udy o e u n
mig a ion be ween Ge many and The Gambia. Da a we e collec ed h ough o e 115 quali a i e
in e iews wi h mig an s, s a e and o he adminis a i e ac o s, and ci il socie y ep esen a i es
in bo h coun ies. The co e o he empi ical esea ch includes ollow-up in e iews wi h
mig an s who e u ned om Ge many ia depo a ion o AVRR o e a 2.5-yea pe iod,
complemen ed by pa icipan obse a ion, documen analysis, and media ma e ials. This
empo al app oach allows he disse a ion o ace e ol ing ajec o ies o e u n and cap u e
he ways in which mig an s na iga e o con es hei e u ns wi hin he egime o e ime, and
how changing poli ical dynamics shape hei posi ionings.
The case o The Gambia is analy ically signi ican due o he simul anei y o democ a ic
ansi ion and in ensi ied e u n en o cemen by Ge many. I p o ides a ‘c ucial case’ o es
compe ing claims wi hin he e u n-de elopmen nexus and o examine how o igin-s a e
so e eign y is nego ia ed unde condi ions o geopoli ical asymme y. The s udy iden i ies
i
momen s o co po a e mig an agency bo h be o e and a e e u n, including a high-p o ile
depo a ion mo a o ium enac ed by he Gambian go e nmen ollowing ansna ional mig an
p o es . A he same ime, he esea ch e eals limi ed ans o ma i e agency among mig an s
e u ned om Ge many hemsel es, many o whom s uggle wi h s igma, economic ha dship,
and exclusion despi e ein eg a ion assis ance.
The disse a ion consis s o a cumula i e body o i e academic publica ions. These add ess (1)
he di e en ia ed poli ical in luence o wo speci ic g oups o mig an s; (2) ajec o ies a e
s a e-induced e u n and he iden i ica ion o AVRR as ‘slow depo a ion’; (3) he ansna ional
poli ical emi ances o mig an s’ an i-depo a ion ac i ism; (4) he no ion o ‘p o ec i e
exclusion’ h ough he Gambian s a e as a pos colonial so e eign y s a egy; and (5)
me hodological and e hical e lec ions on longi udinal pos -depo a ion esea ch. These a e
syn hesized in his amewo k pape and discussed in he sha ed con ex s o mig an agency,
de elopmen , and he e u n egime.
O e all, he disse a ion challenges he no ma i e assump ions embedded in e u n and
ein eg a ion policies. I demons a es how mig an agency is shaped by s uc u al cons ain s,
how o igin s a es na iga e con lic ing p essu es in mig a ion coope a ion, and how e u n is no
simply he closu e o mig a ion bu a deeply poli icized and con es ed cons an in he e u n
egime. By eposi ioning e u n mig a ion as a ansna ional ield o s uggle, he s udy
ad ances egime heo y, con ibu es o c i ical mig a ion and de elopmen esea ch, and opens
new a enues o pos colonial engagemen wi h mig a ion go e nance.
Keywo ds:
e u n mig a ion, mig a ion egime, Assis ed Volun a y Re u n and Rein eg a ion (AVRR),
depo a ion, e u n-de elopmen nexus, mig an agency, poli ical emi ances, The Gambia
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
Diese Disse a ion un e such das umkämp e Feld de Rückkeh mig a ion aus de Pe spek i e
mig an ische Handlungs ähigkei sowie ansna ionale mig a ions- und poli ische
Dynamiken zwischen Deu schland und Gambia. Im Fokus s ehen s aa lich induzie e
Rückkeh p ozesse – Abschiebung sowie eiwillige Rückkeh und Rein eg a ion (Assis ed
Volun a y Re u n and Rein eg a ion, AVRR) – sowie de en sozialpoli ische Auswi kungen au
Mig an *innen und das Land, in das sie (po enziell) zu ückkeh en. Zwei mi einande
e knüp e En wicklungen bilden den Ausgangspunk de S udie: e s ens die zunehmenden
poli ischen und adminis a i en Ans engungen eu opäische S aa en und de EU, insbesonde e
Deu schlands, Rückkeh s ä ke du chzuse zen, und zwei ens sich e ände nde poli ische
Möglichkei ss uk u en in He kun ss aa en, e wa im Zuge demok a ische Übe gangsp ozesse.
De Fall Gambia, wo 2016 de langjäh ige Dik a o Yahya Jammeh ges ü z und eine
demok a ische Übe gangs egie ung eingese z wu de, bie e einen analy isch au schluss eichen
Kon ex , in dem sich diese Dynamiken übe schneiden.
Die Disse a ion geh de übe geo dne en Fo schungs age nach: Wie en wickeln und
na igie en Mig an *innen, die on s aa lich induzie e Rückkeh be o en sind, sozial-
poli ische Handlungs ähigkei (Agency) im ansna ional Mig a ions egime? Konk e wi d
un e such : (1) Welche Fo men mig an ische Handlungs ähigkei en s ehen angesich s
s aa liche Rückkeh ano dnungen? (2) Wie posi ionie en sich Mig an *innen gegenübe den
ins i u ionellen, disku si en und p ak ischen Kon igu a ionen des Rückkeh egimes? und (3)
Welche poli ischen Dynamiken im He kun sland beein lussen diese mig an ischen
Posi ionie ungen, und wie wi ken diese wiede um au diese Dynamiken zu ück? Die S udie
ziel dami au eine Rezen ie ung de Rückkeh o schung au den zei lichen und äumlichen
Kon ex nach de Rückkeh und ück mig an ische sowie he kun ss aa liche Ak eu *innen
s ä ke ins Zen um ansna ionale Mig a ions egime.
Theo e isch basie die A bei au eine mach sensiblen Pe spek i e au Mig a ions egime,
e wei e um Einsich en aus de S uk u ie ungs heo ie, insbesonde e Ma ga e A che s
Un e scheidung zwischen p imä e und ko po a i e Handlungs ähigkei . Sie g ei Deba en
zu Rückkeh -F eiwilligkei , s aa liche En wicklung und poli ischen Remi ances au und se z
sich k i isch mi dem dominan en Rein eg a ionspa adigma in de Rückkeh poli ik auseinande .
Konzep ionell schläg die Disse a ion das Konzep eines eigens ändigen Rückkeh egimes o ,
das sich on Mig a ions- und Abschiebe egimen abheb , indem es die zei liche und äumliche
Dimension nach de Rückkeh sowie die do igen Ve lech ungen des Rückkeh egimes mi
ande en poli ischen Rele anzen, En wicklungszusammena bei sowie ansna ionalem
mig an ischem Ak i ismus einbezieh .
Empi isch basie die A bei au eine longi udinal angeleg en, mul i-si ed quali a i en
Falls udie zu Rückkeh mig a ion zwischen Deu schland und Gambia. Die Da ene hebung
um ass übe 115 quali a i e In e iews mi Mig an *innen, s aa lichen und adminis a i en
Ak eu *innen sowie Ve e e *innen de Zi ilgesellscha in beiden Lände n. Im Zen um s eh
eine meh wellige In e iews udie mi Rückkeh e n aus Deu schland (Abschiebung und
AVRR), die übe einen Zei aum on 2,5 Jah en beglei e wu den. E gänzend wu den
i
eilnehmende Beobach ung, Dokumen enanalysen und Medienquellen he angezogen. De Zei -
sensible Zugang e laub es, die zei liche Komplexi ä on Rückkeh e läu en zu e assen,
Posi ionie ungen on Mig an *innen im Rückkeh egime nachzuzeichnen und de en
Aushandlungen im Lich sich gleichzei ig e ände nde poli ische Dynamiken zu analysie en.
De Fall Gambia is analy isch besonde s ele an au g und des gleichzei igen Au e ens eines
demok a ischen Übe gangs und eine zunehmenden Rückkeh du chse zung sei ens
Deu schlands. Die Falls udie bie e somi einen ‘c ucial case’, um konku ie ende Annahmen
im Rückkeh -En wicklungs-Nexus zu p ü en und die Aushandlung he kun ss aa liche
Sou e äni ä un e geopoli ischen Asymme ien zu analysie en. Die S udie iden i izie
Momen e mig an ische ko po a i e Handlungs ähigkei o und nach de Rückkeh – da un e
ein ielbeach e es Abschiebemo a o ium de gambischen Regie ung in olge ansna ionale
mig an ische P o es e. Gleichzei ig zeig sie die beg enz e ans o ma i e Handlungs ähigkei
un e Rückkeh e n aus Deu schland au , die o z Rein eg a ionsun e s ü zung mi
S igma isie ung, wi scha lichen Schwie igkei en und gesellscha lichem Ausschluss zu
kämp en haben.
Die kumula i e Disse a ion basie au ün wissenscha lichen Ve ö en lichungen, die in
diesem Rahmenpapie zusammenge üh und disku ie we den: (1) zu un e schiedlichen
poli ischen Ein lussnahme zweie mig an ische G uppen; (2) zu Lebens e läu en nach
s aa lich induzie e Rückkeh und de Iden i ika ion on AVRR als ‚langsame Abschiebung‘;
(3) zu den poli ischen Remi ances on mig an ischem ansna ionalem Ak i ismus gegen
Abschiebung; (4) zu S a egie de ‚p o ek i en Exklusion‘ als pos koloniale
Sou e äni ä sp axis de gambischen Regie ung; und (5) zu me hodischen und e hischen
Re lek ionen übe longi udinale Abschiebe o schung. Diese Bei äge we den im Rahmenpapie
sys ema isch mi Bezug au mig an ische Handlungs ähigkei , En wicklung(-szusammena bei )
und Rückkeh egimen e o e und disku ie .
Insgesam hin e ag die Disse a ion no ma i e Annahmen in Rückkeh - und
Rein eg a ionspoli iken. Sie zeig , wie mig an ische Handlungsspiel äume s uk u ell beg enz
sind, wie He kun ss aa en zwischen in e na ionalen Rückkeh an o de ungen und
innenpoli ische Legi imi ä na igie en, und wie Rückkeh nich als Abschluss, sonde n als
umkämp es und poli isie es Momen in einem sich e ablie enden Poli ik eld e s anden
we den muss. Indem Rückkeh mig a ion als ansna ionales Kon lik eld neu posi ionie wi d,
leis e die S udie einen Bei ag zu Regime heo ie, zu k i ischen Mig a ions- und
En wicklungs o schung sowie zu pos kolonialen Analyse in e na ionale Mig a ionspoli ik.
Schlagwö e :
Rückmig a ion, Mig a ions egime, eiwillige Rückkeh und Rein eg a ion, Abschiebung,
Rückkeh -En wicklungs-Nexus, mig an ische Handlungs ähigkei , Gambia
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My i s and deepes hanks go o he many in o man s who sha ed hei pe spec i es, ne wo ks,
and expe ise wi h me – especially hose e u ned mig an s who le me become pa o hei
li es du ing unse ling imes. Many o hem migh ne e know how impo an hei con ibu ion
was o me bo h pe sonally and p o essionally, and I will emain deeply indeb ed o hem.
I owe since e hanks o my supe iso s, P o . D . Helen Schwenken and P o . D . And eas
Mehle , o hei a en i e, cons uc i e, and us ing guidance. I also hank my colleagues a
IMIS. I pa icula ly hank my TRANSMIT ellows, Philipp Jung and Hamza Sa ouane, as well
as Julia S ie om WZB Be lin, who no only ga e aluable academic inspi a ion and ad ice
bu also pa ien ly pu up wi h my changing empe s and communica i e needs. Thanks o
hanging in he e oge he , despi e he odds. Dea ellow doc o al s uden s om he
Fo schungswe ks a Mig a ion und Gesellscha , hank you o he inspi ing and mo i a ing
con e sa ions and you aluable eedback on my wo k. Ano he impo an hank you goes o
Dominique Haas, who con ibu ed a clea ision in an o he wise la gely lonely analysis p ocess.
I would u he like o hank he ABI o eaching me collegial spi i , c i ical engagemen wi h
No h-Sou h ela ions and he lo e o longi udinal egional in ol emen . As he “Pa e ns o
(Fo ced) Mig a ion” clus e and he MEDAM esea ch eam shaped my schola ly pe spec i e,
hanks go o Kwaku A hin-Sam, Leonie Jegen and Ci y We e ich o you encou aging
collegiali y and inspi a ional wo k. Ou s anding F anzisca Zanke , my deepes g a i ude goes
o you o you inspi ing schola ly en husiasm and c ea i i y, o belie ing in he impo ance
o my academic con ibu ion, o you pa ience, and, mos impo an ly, you iendship.
Fu he hea el hanks go o he many ellow ‘expe s’ I exchanged wi h in o abou The
Gambia. I would no ha e been able o ge o know and unde s and he con ex wi hou you
help, Oma Cham, Lamin M. Da boe, Sanna Cama a, Jimmy Nzally, and Yahya Sonko, among
o he s. You ha e helped me ind he ed h eads ha hold my wo k oge he .
Small ema ks and ges u es can some imes ha e a g ea impac . I am g a e ul o Ma in
Adelmann, Mo i z Kös e , and Benjamin Schü ze o hei imely commen s in ea ly imes ha
dispelled my ini ial hesi a ions o pu sue a disse a ion. Fu he hanks go o Ca hy Con ad Suso,
whose commen s e-es ablished us in mysel in speci ic imes in need.
I would also like o hank he eam om he G adua e School o Social Sciences (G3S) a he
Uni e si y o Basel o a s a -up schola ship o he PhD, and especially Elísio Macamo o his
ea ly supe ision and in ellec ual inspi a ion a he ime.
Beyond academia, hanks go o all my iends who ha e suppo ed me by asking and lis ening,
hinking o and ca ing o me du ing his long phase o pe sis en insecu i y and esea ch
loneliness. Pa icula g a i ude go o Lena Ha mann and he amily o he cabin exile package,
o Sa ah Hol kamp o keeping my sociological hea ali e, o Nicole Mülle o you
encou aging disse a ion pa h, o Dominik Klapdo and Anke Wiedemann o you endu ing
commi men and genuine in e es in me as a wo king and hinking pe son.
iii
I u he hank my daugh e Lo in o sha ing me wi h a PhD p ojec du ing some ea ly yea s
o he li e. I us ha you a e going o unde s and why I de o ed all his ime and a en ion o
i despi e he emp ing dis ac ions o a mo e com o able li e ou side he o ice. Thank you o
Ga e h Hopkins o walking wi h me h ough he emo ional highs and especially he lows o
his esea ch jou ney. Wi hou you willingness o accommoda e my wo king condi ions and
you lexible ca e wo k, his disse a ion would no ha e been possible. I am also hank ul o
my mo he -in-law, Helen Wasshube , o he suppo i e ca e wo k du ing my ield s ays.
Finally, my hea el hanks go o my pa en s, Bi gi and Geo g Al ogge, o hei unwa e ing
lo e and suppo h oughou e e y s age o his p ocess and on all my jou neys, and o eaching
me o app ecia e, ques ion and look beyond my coinciden al p i ileges.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abs ac ..................................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgemen s .................................................................................................................. ii
Lis o Tables ............................................................................................................................. xi
Lis o Figu es ........................................................................................................................... xi
Lis o Abb e ia ions ................................................................................................................ xii
1 In oduc ion ......................................................................................................................... 1
2 Re u n Mig a ion and Mig an Agency in Academic Deba es ......................................... 4
2.1 The Mig a ion Regime Pe spec i e and he Re u n Regime ............................................ 8
2.2 Mig an Agency in he Re u n Regime ........................................................................... 12
2.3 Democ a iza ion, Re u n, and Poli ical De elopmen .................................................... 17
2.3.1 The Impac o Ending Au ho i a ianism on Re u n Mig a ion .................................. 18
2.3.2 The Po en ial Posi i e Bene i s o Re u n Mig a ion on Poli ical De elopmen ....... 19
2.4 S a e-Induced Re u n: Be ween De elopmen and Ex e naliza ion o Bo de Con ol .. 21
2.4.1 AVRR: A Mig a ion Managemen Tool in De elopmen Coope a ion ..................... 22
2.4.2 Deba es o e he Re u n-De elopmen Nexus and ‘Rein eg a ion’ in AVRR .......... 24
2.5 The O igin Coun y in he Re u n Regime ..................................................................... 28
3 The Gambia: Mig a ion and Re u n ............................................................................... 32
3.1 Gambian Mig a ion: An O e iew ................................................................................. 35
3.1.1 Wes e n Des ina ions ................................................................................................. 37
3.1.2 Reasons o lea e ......................................................................................................... 38
3.1.3 Gambian Mig an s’ Legal S a us in Eu ope ............................................................... 39
3.2 Re u n o The Gambia ..................................................................................................... 40
3.2.1 S a e-Induced Re u ns om Ge many o The Gambia .............................................. 41
3.2.2 Pe cep ions o Re u n in The Gambia and he Coun y’s De elopmen Agenda ...... 43
4 Me hodology and Da a ...................................................................................................... 48
4.1 Me hodological Conside a ions abou Employing a Case S udy .................................... 48
4.2 Me hodological Conside a ions o e he Role o Passing Time ..................................... 50
4.2.1 S udying a ‘Mo ing Ta ge ’ ....................................................................................... 50
4.2.2 Longi udinal Da a Collec ion and Tempo ali y as an Analy ic Lens ......................... 51
4.3 Choice o Me hods, In o man Sampling, and Rec ui men ........................................... 52
4.4 Da a and Me hods ........................................................................................................... 54
4.4.1 In e iew Da a ............................................................................................................ 54
4.4.2 Pa icipan Obse a ion .............................................................................................. 57
4.4.3 Documen s and Social Media .................................................................................... 57
4
managemen and he powe asymme ies con ained he ein also plays a ole in hese
ansna ional mechanisms o ac ion, as I p oblema ize in a me hodological a icle.
As I will make clea in he ollowing discussions o he s a e o esea ch and heo y, my esul s
he e o e lie a he in e sec ion o de elopmen and democ acy s udies and mig a ion s udies.
The ‘case’ o The Gambia o e ed and ac ually demanded his dual pe spec i e due o he e-
a angemen o he socio-poli ical cons ella ion i was in wi h ega ds o i s poli ical sys em,
emig a ion pa e ns, and geopoli ical ela ions. My analyses can u he be insigh ul o o he
cases in which his cons ella ion unde goes changes, such as Sy ia.
This amewo k pape is s uc u ed as ollows: Sec ion 2 o e s a li e a u e discussion ha maps
he mul idimensionali y o e u n and si ua es my app oach wi hin ele an empi ical and
heo e ical esea ch s ands. The sec ion closes wi h a summa y able ou lining he key hemes
and esea ch gaps o which his disse a ion con ibu es. Sec ion 3 p o ides a hema ic
in oduc ion o The Gambia, linking he coun y’s poli ical his o y wi h i s mig a ion dynamics,
poli ics, and mig a ion- ela ed discou ses. I also includes s a is ical accoun s o mig a ion om
The Gambia and s a e-induced e u n o The Gambia. Sec ion 4 gi es an accoun o and e lec s
on he me hodology and da a unde lying my esea ch. Sec ions 5 and 6 o m he analy ical co e
o his disse a ion: Sec ion 5 p esen s he indings o my s udy by summa izing he i e
publica ions ha make up his cumula i e disse a ion and closes wi h an o e iew able o he
publica ions. Sec ion 6 syn hesizes he key insigh s and discusses hei con ibu ion o he h ee
main schola ly ields o which my wo k speaks. Sec ion 7 concludes wi h e lec ions on he
disse a ion expe ience and o e all indings.
2 RETURN MIGRATION AND MIGRANT AGENCY IN ACADEMIC DEBATES
Re u n has always been pa o he mig a o y imagina y, ye i s concep ual and empi ical
ele ance in mig a ion s udies has only inc eased and di e si ied in ecen yea s. This e olu ion
e lec s b oade shi s in how mig a ion is expe ienced, go e ned and heo ized. In he ea ly
phases o mig a ion esea ch, e u n was la gely ea ed as he assumed endpoin o a linea
mig a ion cycle, ei he ma king pe sonal success – mainly a e economic mig a ion – o policy
closu e – o en a e con lic . Mo e ecen ly, i has eme ged as a si e o con es a ion o e bo de
con ol, de elopmen pa adigms, and mig an agency.
Agains his backd op, his sec ion in oduces key deba es ha ha e shaped he s udy o e u n
mig a ion, emphasizing how e u n has come o be concep ualized and go e ned ac oss ime and
space. I ocus on schola ship ha has in luenced my hinking abou e u n, as a p ocess si ua ed
wi hin ansna ional mig a ion egimes, shaped by policy, social ela ions, and con es ed
knowledge p oduc ion. In pa icula , I desc ibe how concep s o olun a iness, de elopmen , and
mig an agency ha e been p oblema ized o e ime, and how hese deba es ha e led o
di e en ia ed, pa ly con es ed, amings. My app oach builds on and con ibu es o he g owing
body o wo k ha conside s e u n no as he end o mig a ion, bu as a poli ically and socially
embedded p ocess in which mig an s, s a es and ins i u ions in e ac ac oss bo de s. To s a wi h,
I loca e my esea ch wi hin he de elopmen s o he e u n mig a ion esea ch ield mo e b oadly.
5
Fi s ly, my esea ch builds on he o ma ion o he e u n esea ch ield ha has come o ind
i s main conce n in he cons ained olun a iness o e u n mobili y. This esea ch emphasis is
con ingen , and esona es wi h he social and poli ical con ex s in which i de eloped. In ea ly
mig a ion esea ch, when conside ed a all, e u n was seen as he na u al and expec ed end
poin o a mig a ion ajec o y. This pe spec i e e lec ed dominan s a e-cen ed
unde s andings o mig a ion as a linea p ocess ha concluded wi h ein eg a ion in o he
socie y o o igin. One o he mos widely ci ed ea ly de ini ions comes om Geo ge Gmelch,
who desc ibed e u n as “ he mo emen o mig an s back o hei homelands o ese le”
(Gmelch 1980, 136). This concep ualiza ion posi ioned e u n as empo ally and spa ially
sepa a ed om mig a ion i sel , and amed la gely h ough he lens o indi idual choice. In
ea ly app oaches, e u n was p ima ily analysed ega ding pe sonal mo i a ions, aspi a ions,
and expe iences. This endency e lec ed he empi ical eali ies o many e u n lows in he
1960s and 1970s, which occu ed unde ela i ely non-coe ci e condi ion, be o e he s a e
became mo e ac i e in e u n go e nance. In he 1970s and 1980s, schola s began de eloping
ypologies o be e di e en ia e be ween e u n expe iences: by du a ion ( empo a y s.
pe manen ), by mo i a ion ( olun a y s. in olun a y), and by impac (success ul s. ailed). A
key ea ly con ibu ion came om F ancesco Ce ase (1974), whose ypology ocused on
mo i a ions behind e u n and linked hem o social posi ions and ela ions o he home con ex .
He dis inguished be ween e u ns o ailu e, conse a ism, e i emen , and inno a ion. His
ypology demons a ed ha e u n is no a monoli hic e en bu mus be di e en ia ed by in en
and socio-economic backg ound. Much o his ea ly li e a u e was mainly conce ned wi h he
causes and decision ac o s c ea ing e u n mig a ion.
Conside ing he g owing complexi y and poli iciza ion o e u n in he 1990s, i s
concep ualiza ion was unde de eloped (King 2000). Russell King highligh ed he need o a
mo e sys ema ic unde s anding no only o e u n’s o ms, bu also i s ou comes. His wo k
helped consolida e e u n as a dis inc ield and encou aged schola s o examine he e ec s o
e u n mig a ion on bo h indi iduals and he socie ies o which hey e u ned, al eady no ing
ha esea ch ound mixed, o en complica ed, e ec s despi e p e ailing op imism. This
op imism was embedded in a b oade esea ch con ex shaped by no ma i e de elopmen
amings ha cas e u n mig an s as “de elope s” (Åkesson & E iksson Baaz 2015).
Jean-Pie e Cassa ino (2004) esponded wi h a model o e u n p epa edness ha shi ed
a en ion om indi idual mo i a ions o s uc u al condi ions. His amewo k dis inguishes
be ween comple e, incomple e and in e up ed mig a ion cycles, o e ing a lexible model ha
accommoda es and compa es mo e and less olun a y e u ns. He g ounds his a gumen in he
no ion ha mig an s p epa e o e u n wi h a iew o u u e success and po en ial
ans o ma ion in he coun y o o igin/ e u n. The model acco dingly accoun s o mig an s’
a ying oppo uni ies o mobilize esou ces, choose he iming o e u n, and he s uc u al
condi ions in bo h coun ies o des ina ion and o igin/ e u n. As he w i es, “we s ill need o
know who e u ns when, and why; and why some e u nees appea as ac o s o change, in
speci ic social and ins i u ional ci cums ances a home, whe eas o he s do no ” (Cassa ino 2004,
253). This shi owa d p ocessual and ela ional unde s andings o e u n eme ged as schola s
6
began o ake mo e se iously he une en oppo uni ies mig an s ace and he impo ance o p io
expe iences and accumula ed capi al in shaping e u n ou comes.
Cassa ino’s app oach can also be unde s ood as a eac ion o he poli ical dynamics a ound
e u n a he ime, as he go e nance o mig a ion became inc easingly en angled wi h ques ions
o secu i y, legali y, and bo de con ol, pa icula ly om he 1990s onwa ds, wi h he no ion
o olun a iness in e u n coming unde in ensi ied sc u iny. As pa o his, AVRR p og ammes
ha had been c ea ed in he 1990s we e scaled up and ins i u ionalized ac oss he Global No h
(see also Sub-sec ion 2.4). The legal and policy amewo ks hus inc easingly elied on he
dis inc ion be ween “ o ced” and “ olun a y” e u n, while esea ch, wi h Cassa ino’s wo k as
a heo e ical co ne s one, s a ed engaging wi h he analy ical laws and poli ical bias o his
bina y. S a e-induced e u n, which eaches om highly en o ced depo a ions o s a e-
incen i ized AVRR (Koch 2014), exempli ies he con adic ions o he bina y aming.
Mig an s who a e p essu ed o lea e due o i egula legal s a uses o he h ea o de en ion
may o mally consen o e u n, bu unde condi ions ha a e a om eely chosen. Schola s
such as Ba ak Kali (2017) o Lau a Cle on and Sébas ian Chau in (2020) ha e shown how his
kind o ins i u ionalized p essu e can p oduce coe ced olun a iness, whe e mig an s
echnically ag ee o e u n bu do so wi hin s uc u ally cons ained decision spaces. These s a e-
induced e u ns hus call o he ques ion how mo e o less olun a y hey a e in compa ison o
non-s a e-induced e u ns, and which e ec his dicho omy has o he mig an s and he con ex
in o which hey e u n.
Resea ch agendas hus mo e and mo e u ned o e u n mig a ion wi h a lens on s a e-induced
e u n, disagg ega ing coe cion and in olun a iness. No ably, om a heo e ical pe spec i e on
e u n olun a iness, e en in “ egula and liquid mig a ion con ex s” (E dal & Oeppen 2022,
74), such as wi hin he Eu opean Union, he decision o e u n is a ely ee om any cons ain .
Howe e , in olun a iness c ea ed by legal, poli ical and adminis a i e o ces a e o en el , and
de ined, mo e as a coe cion han o he s such as amily obliga ions, o wo k con ac s ha
demand a mig an ’s e u n. Acco dingly, he p esen schola ly and socie al unde s andings o
e u n in/ olun a iness mainly ela e o poli ically c ea ed legal ca ego iza ions (E dal &
Oeppen 2022), as does also my ocus.
Secondly, my esea ch engages wi h a ension in mig a ion esea ch ha is ela ed o
ansna ionalism. Pa allel o he de elopmen s ou lined abo e, he social sciences unde wen a
ansna ional u n: a signi ican heo e ical and me hodological expansion shaped by ongoing
p ocesses o globalisa ion, and hei schola ly obse a ions and e lec ions. F om he 2000s
onwa d, he boundedness o na ion-s a e ca ego ies and e en ele ance was ques ioned. In his,
e u n was econcep ualised as one momen in a wide se o c oss-bo de ela ionships
(Wimme & Glick Schille 2002). Wo k on ansna ionalism emphasized how mig an s
main ain ies, iden i ies, and esponsibili ies ac oss mul iple locali ies. In his unde s anding,
e u n is o en p o isional o pa ial, unde aken empo a ily, o accompanied by in en ions o
e-mig a e, emphasizing he b oade spec um o e u n du a ion. S udies on he “my h o
e u n” (e.g. Sina i 2011; Bolognani 2015) indica e he omnip esence o e u n in mig an
imagina ies e en when ac ual e u n ne e occu s. O he wo ks ha e examined he luidi y o
7
e u n decision-making in he ace o shi ing oppo uni ies, isks and obliga ions (e.g. Black e
al. 2004; Bo neman 2004; Flahaux 2017; Ia ia 2011) as well as empo a y mig a ion
biog aphies and ansna ional li elihoods (e.g. Fais , Fause & Reisenaue 2013). These
pe spec i es eme ged as esea che s began o see mig an s no only as indi iduals mo ing
be ween places bu as ac o s embedded in sus ained ansna ional ields, challenging p io
assump ions o linea i y and ixi y.
Ye , such ansna ional emphases s and in ension wi h he linea , s a e-cen ic imagina ies ha
had eme ged in pa allel in mig a ion policy and, la e , esea ch on he p ominen ole o
ein eg a ion in s a e-induced e u n (see also Sub-sec ion 2.4.4). While ansna ional
app oaches emphasize luidi y, s a e-induced e u n concep s build on an en isaged closu e.
This disjunc u e is o cou se no me ely academic. I a he e lec s how e u n is expe ienced
and go e ned on a e y wide spec um which o en neglec s mig an aspi a ions in ou
inc easingly in e -connec ed wo ld and i s p omises o ansna ional li elihoods, allowing
access o hose only o some. My wo k on e u n as a ansna ional egime p ocess engages
p ecisely wi h his ension: by ea ing e u n as embedded in ansna ional ields o powe and
nego ia ion, I seek o cap u e bo h he s uc u al cons ain s imposed by s a es and he mul i-
laye ed ansna ional en anglemen s and s a egies o a ec ed mig an s when hey espond and
shape hei mig a ion expe iences wi hin his.
Thi dly, my wo k he e o e c i ically engages wi h he embeddedness o he e u n esea ch
ield in policy-o ien ed na a i es ha link e u n o de elopmen . This nexus has become
inc easingly p ominen since he la e 1980s o ea ly 1990s, when e u n mig a ion, as laid ou
ea lie , was cas as an oppo uni y o mig an s o con ibu e o he economic and social
ad ancemen o hei coun ies o o igin/ e u n. Al eady in he ea lie ypologies by Ce ase
(1974) o Gmelch (1980), e u n mig a ion was seen as po en ially p oducing esou ces, ideas
and ambi ions ha could impac he socie ies hey e u ned o, pa icula ly in Ce ase’s no ion
o he “ e u n o inno a ion”. Wi h ising policy in e es , hese a he desc ip i e obse a ions
we e inc easingly e amed h ough a no ma i e lens. Re u n began o be p omo ed no jus as
an ou come, bu as a desi able ins umen o de elopmen policy, especially in egions o
mig an o igin. This policy aming has since shaped no only go e nance p ac ices bu also
ce ain s ands o academic wo k ha aligned mo e closely wi h policy agendas, pa ly as e o s
o p oduce applicable knowledge. No ably, e en Cassa ino’s model o e u n p epa edness
ca ies he no ion o u u e o ien a ion o he e u ning mig an s as a po en ial gain o he
coun ies o o igin/ e u n, wi h s uc u al condi ions suppo ing o impeding his.
Summing up, hese b oad s ands o schola ship highligh how olun a iness exis s on a
con es ed spec um, shaped by misma ches be ween policy ca ego ies and li ed expe iences as
well as no ma i e conce ns wi h he ins umen alisa ion o mig an consen and indi idual
e u n mo i a ion. As e u n has become cen al o mig a ion go e nance, i is essen ial o
engage wi h hese p oblema ic ci cums ances. In he ollowing li e a u e discussion, I build on
hese insigh s o u he con ex ualize my esea ch and cla i y he gaps i add esses. I begin by
in oducing he mig a ion egime pe spec i e as an o e a ching concep ual amewo k (2.1).
Building on his, I u n o mig an agency and p esen heo e ical accoun s o Ma ga e A che
8
ha help dis inguish why mig an agency does o does no become e ec i e in he e u n
con ex acco ding o my obse a ions (2.2). I hen discuss how e u n in e sec s wi h
democ a iza ion and poli ical de elopmen as impo an social and poli ical p ocesses
nego ia ed a he same ime (2.3). I hen c i ically assess how AVRR as one o m o s a e-
induced e u n has become concep ually and poli ically en angled wi h de elopmen agendas
in coun ies o o igin/ e u n (2.4), including an examina ion o he concep o ein eg a ion as
a biased geopoli ical concep mainly anspo ing in e es s o mig an - e u ning des ina ion
egions. Las ly, I add ess he ela i e neglec o o igin s a es in academic analyses o he e u n
egime and iden i y key excep ions ha p o ide a ounda ion o my own app oach, o which I
coun my own app oach (2.5).
2.1 The Mig a ion Regime Pe spec i e and he Re u n Regime
As explained in he in oduc ion, he cen al conce n o my wo k is how mig an s seek and
manage o es ablish in luence o e poli ical ins i u ions ha shape, en o ce and go e n e u n.
Mo e speci ically, I examine how mig an s posi ion hemsel es in ela ion o ins i u ional
ac o s, pa icula ly s a e au ho i ies, ha see hemsel es as so e eign decision-make s in
mig a ion con ol. In he case s udy, his p ocess b oadly s a ed wi h inc eased Gambian
immig a ion o Ge many, whe e Gambian na ionals en e ed he asylum sys em bu o which
mos we e only g an ed sho - e m legal esidence. F om he pe spec i e o poli ical and
adminis a i e ac o s in Ge many, hese mig an s’ longe - e m p esence was conside ed
undesi able and – o a ious deg ees – unlaw ul. They in oked na ional and in e na ional legal
amewo ks ha hey assumed we e binding o he Gambian s a e (and mig a ed people) and
sough o induce e u n – by incen i izing AVRR and by depo a ion. Unde lying hese e o s
was a con ic ion ha mos a ge ed mig an s would no e u n wi hou inducemen o e ec i e
p essu e. Ge man au ho i ies assumed hey had he necessa y ools o e ec hese e u ns:
nego ia ion le e age, inancial means, adminis a i e con ol, and he powe o de ine and
ins i u ionalize wha cons i u es a easonable e u n p ocess.
To analyse his cons ella ion – he in e ac ions be ween mig an s and poli ical ins i u ions – as
one in e ela ed ield, I build on he mig a ion egime pe spec i e. I allows me o cap u e hei
in e play no as isola ed decisions o e en s, bu as embedded in b oade , e ol ing
con igu a ions o powe , policy, and nego ia ions ac oss bo de s. In he ollowing, I in oduce
he eme gence o he concep and explain why I ely on pa icula agency-based, powe -
sensi i e unde s andings o egimes, which gi e analy ic space o nego ia ing p ac ices and
agency o mo e and less powe ul ac o s. In my case, I could show how e u n is poli ically and
socially p oduced, how di e en ac o s con es i s e ms, and how mig an s’ ac ions ha e
in e sec ed and pa ly eshaped he ins i u ional ield in which hey a e go e ned. I hen assess
how he egime concep has been connec ed o he issue o e u n, and how hese exis ing
app oaches ela e o my wo k, which se s he scene o an al e na i e concep ualiza ion o a
e u n egime which I sugges in 6.1.
The concep o mig a ion egimes has es ablished as one o he mos popula ways o s udy and
desc ibe he ela ionships be ween mig a o y mobili ies and s a es’ con ol e o s and
mechanisms. As he concep has no de eloped in o a ha monized unde s anding o analy ical
9
applica ion, i demands o be u he heo e ically cla i ied when applied. The e o e, I will in
he ollowing poin ou why and how he egime pe spec i e is ins uc i e o my disse a ion
p ojec and in which di ec ions my indings can in o m heo e ical deba es ha ollow he
egime concep .
Mig a ion gained momen um as a ield o in e na ional poli ics in he con ex o ising global
mobili y om he la e 20 h cen u y onwa d. As a esul o globaliza ion, poli ics is inc easingly
cha ac e ized by mo e decen al in e -s a e, egional up o global poli ical mechanisms. In
esponse, mig a ion schola s needed concep ual ools ha cap u e he complex ela ionships
be ween c oss-bo de mo emen s and s a e con ol. The concep o egimes, de eloped in
in e na ional ela ions heo y du ing he la e 1970s and ea ly 1980s, o e ed one such ool.
S ephen K asne ’s in luen ial de ini ion desc ibed a egime as a ‘‘se o implici o explici
p inciples o no ms, ules and decision-making p ocedu es a ound which ac o s’ expec a ions
con e ge in a gi en a ea o in e na ional ela ions” (K asne 1982, 186). Al hough p omising
in i s abili y o ame mul i-ac o coo dina ion, his ea ly egime heo y la gely assumed a ional
ac o s ope a ing wi hin coope a i e in e na ional sys ems. I he e o e unde played he ole o
powe , con lic , and asymme y. These limi a ions we e c i iqued no ably by James F. Keeley
(1990), who called o a shi owa d iewing egimes h ough he lens o con es a ion and
esis ance.
F om he la e 1990s o ea ly 2000s onwa d, mig a ion schola s inc easingly adop ed and
adap ed he egime concep acco dingly. The concep was no only aken up by schola s
wo king in ins i u ionalis adi ions o in e na ional ela ions, bu also by esea che s inspi ed
by Foucauldian and go e nmen ali y pe spec i es, who used i as a powe -sensi i e analy ical
lens (c . Ho a h, Kenne h, Amelina & Pe e s 2017). This led o a b oad spec um o egime
app oaches in mig a ion s udies, wi h some ocusing on ins i u ional coo dina ion and legal
amewo ks, while o he s emphasize discu si e p ac ices, s a e a ionali ies, o he p oduc ion
o con ol. Despi e hei di e ences, hese app oaches sha e a conce n wi h unde s anding how
mig a ion is shaped by he in e play be ween s a es, sup ana ional o ganiza ions, and mig an s
hemsel es.
In o de o iden i y powe asymme ies and s uggles wi hin in e na ional egimes, Keeley
encou aged o “ ocus on con es a ion as an essen ial elemen o any heo y o egimes” (Keeley
1990, 84). D awing on Foucaul ’s wo k, he sugges ed a econcep ualiza ion o egimes no as
spaces o coope a ion, bu as o de s eme ging h ough “s uggle and esis ance” (Keeley 1990,
85). This shi is especially ele an o mig a ion s udies, whe e s a e con ol, bu eauc a ic
con lic , and mig an agency in e ac dynamically and o en in con adic o y ways. A powe -
sensi i e u n was needed o g asp he “complex, con adic o y, and con es ed na u e o cu en
mig a ion poli ics” (Ho a h, Amelina, and Pe e s 2017, 302).
In line wi h his, Giuseppe Scio ino’s accoun o mig a ion egimes places “gene a ions o u
wa s among bu eauc acies” (Scio ino 2004, 32) a he cen e o analysis. Building on his
in luen ial unde s anding, schola s o Eu opean mig a ion go e nance ha e elabo a ed how
powe ul s a e and sup ana ional ac o s es ablish mig a ion and bo de egimes designed o
de end mig an -exclusiona y in e es s agains pe cei ed p essu e om ising mig a ion lows
10
(Fo schungsg uppe “T ansi Mig a ion” 2007; Hess & Kaspa ek 2012). Applying he egime
concep h ough la gely e hnog aphic and discou se-analy ical me hods, hese app oaches ocus
on how con ol mechanisms a e p oduced, enac ed, and con es ed a he g ound le el. They
e eal how ins i u ions like he Eu opean Bo de and Coas Gua d Agency F on ex (Kaspa ek
2021) o he In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (IOM) (Geige & Pécoud 2020) a e no
neu al adminis a i e bu ac i e pa icipan s in shaping and en o cing egimes, o en in
in e ac ion wi h and in opposi ion o mig an s a egies.
Such powe -sensi i e app oaches o mig a ion egimes a e especially use ul o my own wo k.
The ac ions o he Ge man s a e e lec a dis inc i ely sel -assu ed unde s anding o i s igh
and capaci y o exe in luence wi hin a mig a ion egime ha hey unde s and in hei pa icula
in e es . Thei ac ions a e mainly di ec ed owa ds h ee audiences: hei own elec o a e, he
a ge ed mig an s, and The Gambia as coun y o o igin/ e u n. My wo k ocuses on he la e
wo, analysing how mig an s and he coun y o o igin/ e u n ac upon he e u n p essu e
in oked by he Ge man s a e. By employing he egime pe spec i e, I see he in e ac ions o he
in ol ed s akeholde s as a p ocess o egime o ma ion and ( e)nego ia ion, whe e compe ing
in e es s, hie a chies o powe , and con lic ing o ms o knowledge in e sec ac oss bo de s and
p ac ice le els.
While in his unde s anding, mig an s ecei e an ac i e ole in he in e ac i e o ma ion o
mig a ion egimes, which s ands agains he adi ion o analysing mig a ion egimes wi h a
a he s uc u e-cen ed mac o pe spec i e ha o e emphasises he powe o he mo e powe ul
s a e ac o s, I none heless do no lay sole ocus on mig an ac i i y. Wo ks on mig an agency
usually end o neglec he poli ical na u e o mig an agency and i s in e ac i i y wi h he
poli ical sphe e (Bakewell 2010; see also de Haas 2014 and Massey, A ango, Hugo, Kouaouci,
Pelleg ino & Taylo 1993). My wo k seeks middle g ound ins ead. I pe cei e mig an s’ ac ions
wi hin he egime as one impo an pa , while obse ing powe o ma ion a mo e mac o le els
in in e ac ion wi h hem.
Wi h his unde s anding o s udying an in e play on a ious le els o agency, I ollow he
app oach o Ch is oph Rass and F ank Wol in hei applicable usage o mig a ion egimes as
“model o desc ibe and o unde s and a complex and decen alized powe o ma ion” (Rass &
Wol 2018, 44) a he meso-le el which is c ea ed h ough he he e ogeneous connec ions
be ween he mic o-le el and he mac o-le el, wi h he la e including he no ms, alues and
s uc u es ha shape he o me . Thei unde s anding o e s a middle g ound be ween a solely
mig an -ac o e hnog aphic pe spec i e and a mig a ion egime as a s uc u al ‘ou come’ (Rass
& Wol 2018, 44). Albei he bounda ies o a egime always emain uzzy, his app oach helps
o de ec some p ocesses o he egime p oduc ion be ween ac o s on a ious le els.
The ole o knowledge is, in a Foucauldian pe spec i e on mig a ion egimes, ano he impo an
aspec o he s uggles a ound he shaping o (mig a ion) egimes, which a e unde s ood as
socially cons uc ed and e-cons uc ing. In o de o emain powe -sensi i e, I conside who
p oduces he knowledge and concep s inco po a ed in he dominan discou ses, and how hese
supp ess al e na i e knowledge o sideline con es ing discou ses. Academic knowledge
c ea ion is always also a powe componen in he agenda se ing wi hin a mig a ion egime
11
(Ho a h, Amelina & Pe e s 2017; Kaspa ek 2024; Rass & Wol 2018). Schola s a e o en
u ged o mo i a ed o p oduce knowledge ha is applicable in he s udied egime, o a leas
hey ha e o wo k wi h social ca ego ies and e minologies ha a e poli ically (co-)p oduced
(c . Amelina & Fais 2012). Acco ding o Rass and Wol , he powe biases o knowledge
c ea ion inhe en in mig a ion egime analysis is connec ed o he colonial legacy o he
knowledge-p oducing sys ems, which demands pos -colonial c i ique: “One essen ial pa o
pos -colonial c i ique is de o ed o he accep ance o (geo-)poli ical ca ego ies and
di e en ia ion as analy ical uni s” (Rass & Wol 2018, 43). Following his means o use
esea ch as e lexi e coun e ac s ha ques ion desc ip i e e minologies mani es ed in
mig a ion s udies and poli ical concep s a he same ime.
This knowledge/powe -sensi i e no ion becomes ele an , i s ly, when I conside he Gambian
s a e’s coope a ion in mig an e u n. As we shall see, om a pe spec i e o Gambian s a e and
socie y, mig an e u n is inhe en ly connec ed o ques ions o de elopmen and
democ a iza ion in hei own coun y – aspec s o which he e is limi ed o no space in he
legi imiza ion o s a e-en o ced mig an e u n among he mo e powe ul Eu opean and Ge man
poli ical egime ac o s. I will go mo e in o de ail abou he in e linkages o mig an e u n,
de elopmen and democ a iza ion in Sub-sec ion 2.3. Fo mig a ion egime heo y, his
in e linkage wi h egimes ac ing in pa allel – in his case, democ a ic de elopmen coope a ion
in he b oades sense – ha migh compe e wi h ega ds o ce ain asc ip ions owa d ac o s and
hei ole in he egime – in his case, e u nees, poses an in e es ing ques ion: How, whe e and
h ough which mechanisms does he mig a ion egime in e ac wi h such o he egimes?
Secondly, he knowledge/powe -sensi i e app oach plays a ole in my c i ical s ance owa ds
he dominance o he ein eg a ion concep in pos - e u n esea ch, which I will u he elabo a e
on in Sub-sec ion 2.4.
Las ly, I u n o he applica ion o he egime pe spec i e in he sub- ield o mig an e u n,
whe e i is also inc easingly applied bu in a ying no ions. Building on he powe -sensi i e
unde s andings o Foucauldian egimes, Nicholas De Geno a and Na halie Peu z ha e
disco e ed he eme gence o a ‘depo a ion egime’ (De Geno a & Peu z 2010). Thei
unde s anding o a depo a ion egime expands he mig a ion o bo de egime in a empo al
sense, mani es ing depo abili y echniques o mig an aliena ion, exploi a ion and emo al
a e mig an s’ a i al in hos s a es, a e ha ing managed o wo k hei way h ough he
exclusiona y bo de ing p ac ices o mig a ion egimes. De Geno a and Peu z’s
concep ualiza ion also goes beyond he Eu opean mig a ion egime in a spa ial sense, as hey
ind he depo a ion egime o be “global” (De Geno a & Peu z 2010, 3). Wi h his, hey
cha ac e ize he depo a ion egime as he sha ed commi men o s a es wo ldwide o emo e
unwan ed mig an s and join ly de elop acco ding echniques o do so.
In con as o hese uni e sal obse a ions in des ina ion con ex s, o he schola s ha e analysed
depo a ion egimes o single hos s a es, such as he Ne he lands (Cle on & Chau in 2020),
No way (Ka lsen 2016), o Swi ze land (Piñei o, Loche & Pasche 2022). In acco dance wi h
di e ing indings o hose s udies wi h a clea na ional ocus, A jen Lee kes and Ma ieke an
Hou e ind ha a global unde s anding o a depo a ion egime is misleading. They iden i ied
12
hemsel es ou di e en ypes o ‘pos -a i al en o cemen egimes’ in Eu ope alone (Lee kes
& an Hou e 2020).
3
Wi h my wo ks, I ollow hese spa ially mo e nuanced analyses below he global and look a
mo e case-speci ic c ea ion dynamics. My concep ualiza ion inco po a es spa ial di e si y by
emphasizing he span o he e u n egime beyond he des ina ion con ex . In o de o cap u e
he egime in which depo a ion as one o m o s a e- educed e u n is enac ed be ween
Ge many and The Gambia, we ha e o conside he in e ac i e p oduc ion o he egime
be ween mo e and less powe ul s a e ac o s in he des ina ion coun y and he coun y o
o igin/ e u n. Equally impo an is he impac o no only po en ially e u ning mig an s a he
places o des ina ion bu also al eady- e u ned mig an s in he coun y o e u n. Such a
ansna ional egime c ea ion has been neglec ed in depo a ion o o he mig a ion egime
concep ualiza ions and analyses, and my wo k aims o o e come his gap. The ollowing sub-
sec ion shall gi e mo e heo e ical ounda ion o my indings.
4
2.2 Mig an Agency in he Re u n Regime
As indica ed epea edly, a powe -sensi i e app oach o mig a ion egimes equi es a pa icula
conside a ion o agency, which has allen sho in s uc u e- ocused analyses o mig a ion
egimes in he pas (c . Benz & Schwenken 2005), especially ega ding he ole o mig an s as
ac o s (c . Po , Rass & Wol 2018). This lack o acknowledging agency cons i u es a gene al
challenge in heo izing mig a ion egimes (Rass & Wol 2018). I ollow Rass and Wol ’s
sugges ion o an ‘agency-based app oach’ o o e come his. They ega d he egime as a
nego ia ion a ena in ol ing mo e and less powe ul ac o s, including mig an s. These
nego ia ions e-c ea e and shape he s uc u es ha make up he mig a ion egime. Rass and
Wol dis inguish ac o s’ p ac ices on h ee le els: P ima y p ac ices co e di ec mobili y
mainly on he indi idual le el o mig an s. Seconda y p ac ices con ol mig a ion, mainly
including he la ge spec um o ac ions by ins i u ionalized poli ical and in as uc u al ac o s.
Finally, e ia y p ac ices indi ec ly impac he i s and second le el, hey o example include
poli ical changes in in ol ed s a es, bu also knowledge p oduc ion on mig a ion. By pu ing
ac o s’ p ac ices on hese h ee le els in one ela ional con ex , we can de ec powe ela ions
and asymme ies be ween hem, eaching om mig an s o s a e ac o s om he e u ning and
3
Lee kes and an Hou e (2020) ind (1) hin egimes – cha ac e ized by weak en o cemen in e es s and limi ed
en o cemen capaci ies; (2) hick egimes – ma ked by s ong en o cemen in e es s and obus en o cemen
capaci ies; (3) a ge ed egimes – whe e s ong en o cemen capaci ies a e applied selec i ely, o en exemp ing
ce ain mig an ca ego ies; and (4) hampe ed egimes – which ha e s ong en o cemen in e es s bu ace
cons ain s due o limi ed en o cemen capaci ies. Ge many mainly exhibi s cha ac e is ics o a a ge ed egime. I
has ela i ely s ong en o cemen capaci ies ha a e applied selec i ely, o en exemp ing ce ain mig an
ca ego ies, o example wi h many ejec ed asylum seeke s emaining in a s a us o ole a ion because o legal o
p ac ical obs acles (see also oo no e 10). In con as , he Uni ed Kingdom exempli ies a hick en o cemen egime,
ma ked by high depo a ion a es, a s ong poli ical commi men o e u n, and e ec i e in as uc u e, whe eas
I aly, shaped by bo h poli ical ambi alence and logis ical cons ain s, ep esen s a hin egime.
4
I ha e no included such a mo e comp ehensi e embedding in he published pape s, as his a he connec s he
indings o he a ious a icles. I will pick up he heo e ical conside a ions p esen ed he e in Sub-sec ion 6.1,
whe e I u he link hem o my empi ical indings.
13
e u nee- ecei ing s a es, as well as b oade de elopmen s in he en i onmen in which
mig a ion egimes e ol e (c . Po , Rass & Wol 2018, 50).
To s a ou wi h, mig an s ha e s uc u a ion powe h ough hei agency and co-shape he
e u n egime by he way hey ac . Consciously o unconsciously, hey make use o he ooms
o manoeu e hey ha e wi hin a gi en egime (Lippha d & Schwa z 2018, 190). This ac ion
le e age is no en i ely au onomous, bu eme ge and de elop in ela ion o he his o ically
embedded poli ical, legal and social op ions which ce ain mig an s ha e unde pa icula
condi ions. They can con o m o con on hem, mani es o ans o m hem. Thus, he
le e ages do no ollow he no ms, ules o alues o all ac o s, as hese a e con es ed.
This means ha he e is bo h dependency and con ingency in how mig an s c ea e and use hei
agency. Ma ina Benz and Helen Schwenken desc ibe his le e age as an ac i e ‘wil ulness’ in
decision-making ('Eigensinnigkei ’, Benz & Schwenken 2005). They si ua e mig a ion- ela ed
decisions in esponse o he de ined s uc u al pa hways, which lies on he p ima y le el o
p ac ices iden i ied by Rass and Wol , and which can in luence p ac ices on he second le el
o mig a ion con ol. In he case o he Ge man-Gambian e u n egime, o example, Ge man
s a e ac o s had o keep adap ing hei assump ions and s a egies con inuously while obse ing
o e ime ha no many Gambians wi h a denied asylum claim would op o a e u n h ough
he p omo ed ‘Assis ed Volun a y Re u n and Rein eg a ion’ p og ammes.
While he concep ual e o s by Anna Lippha d and Inga Schwa z (2018) as well as Benz and
Schwenken (2005) help o be e unde s and mig an agency, hey do howe e no o e u he
di e en ia ions be ween agency ha is inhe en in mig an exis ence h ough hei me e being
and li ing unde he gi en means – and by using hei ooms o manoeu e po en ially al eady
challenge exis ing ules – and agency c ea ed h ough ac ions ha mig an s do in o de o widen
hei ac ion le e ages h ough a change o ules. Going beyond he a he unin ended in luences
o such p ima y p ac ices, I wan ed o obse e i and which mo e di ec le e ages o ac ion
mig an s would c ea e in o de o claim and gain in luence, h ough poli ical posi ioning ha
would aim a changing he s uc u e wi hin which hey socially exis as ‘(po en ial) e u nees’.
In o de o unde s and be e why and how mig an s ha e o de elop which kind o poli ical
agency wi hin he egime, we need o look mo e closely in which di e en ways hei agency
can be linked o he egime. Fo his, he heo e ical wo k o c i ical ealis Ma ga e A che on
s uc u a ion is highly ins uc i e (c . B ock, Ca igan & Scamble 2016). A che ’s app oach o
he ela ionship o s uc u e and agency gi es a ich heo e ical accoun o he inne mechanisms
o his ela ionship, which “o e a mo e ui ul heo e ical a enue o o e come he s uc u e–
agency impasse in mig a ion esea ch” (Bakewell 2010, 1702) han many o he a emp s o
b idge his impasse.
A che p esumes a dualis ic exis ence o agen s and social s uc u es, in acco dance wi h he
p e iously desc ibed unde s anding o egimes as ela ional s uc u es. A che is mainly
conce ned wi h how s uc u es – which, acco ding o he , exis p io o indi iduals ha ac
wi hin hem – change h ough agency ha indi iduals de elop in hei s uc u al en i onmen .
The ac ions o agen s ha e (in ended o unin ended) consequences o he na u e o he
20
economies. Thei e-engagemen in he domes ic labou ma ke in ol es u ilizing hese asse s
o c ea e job oppo uni ies and os e en ep eneu ship (Kleis , 2015).
Bu e u n mig an s can also os e de elopmen s beyond he economic sec o . Thei
con ibu ions a e hen desc ibed as social and poli ical emi ances in he li e a u e. B oadly,
poli ical emi ances a e pa o social emi ances, mo e p ecisely ideas, no ms, p ac ices, and
iden i ies ha mig an s ans e back o hei home coun ies and po en ially in luence poli ical
and social s uc u es (Le i & Lamba-Nie es 2011). This also applies o e u ning mig an s.
Resea ch has, o example, elabo a ed on poli ical emi ances ans e ed h ough mig an
o ganisa ions (e.g. Pipe 2009), he o ing powe o diaspo a communi ies (e.g. Wa e bu y
2006) o so-called “g ass oo s ansna ionalism” a ec ing poli ics a he na ional le el
(Øs e gaa d-Nielsen 2003). Fo e u ning mig an s, Lisa Chau e and Ma ion Me cie (2014)
show signi ican ly inc eased o e pa icipa ion a es and elec o al compe i i eness in elec ions
in Mali in a eas wi h highe p esence o e u ned mig an s om Non-A ican coun ies. Ca ia
Ba is a and Ped o Vicen e simila ly ind ha go e nance in des ina ion coun ies ma e s. In a
beha iou al expe imen in Cabo Ve de, hey show ha in e na ional emig a ion posi i ely
a ec s he popula ion’s demand o imp o ed poli ical accoun abili y, wi h s onge e ec s o
mig an s o coun ies wi h be e go e nance, and especially o e u ned mig an s (Ba is a &
Vicen e 2011). An onio Spilimbe go, using dynamic panel eg essions on a global longi udinal
da ase da ing back o he 1950s, ound ha indi iduals who ecei ed e ia y educa ion ab oad
p omo e democ acy in hei home coun ies, “bu only i he o eign educa ion is acqui ed in
democ a ic coun ies” (Spilimbe go 2009, 528).
The wo k o Ch is l Kessle and S e an Ro he (Kessle & Ro he 2016) on poli ical emi ances
h ough e u n mig a ion o he case o he Philippines e eals some condi ionali ies o he
posi i e e ec s. In line wi h Spilimbe go (2009), hey ind ha he in luence o poli ical
emi ances a ies depending on he mig an s' des ina ion coun y and he du a ion o hei s ay.
Re u nees om coun ies wi h well-es ablished democ a ic sys ems a e mo e likely o engage
in poli ical ac i i ies back home, such as o ing, communi y o ganizing, o pa icipa ing in local
go e nance. They also asse ha poli ical emi ances do no au oma ically lead o
democ a iza ion. Fac o s such as he local poli ical en i onmen , exis ing powe s uc u es, and
he willingness o e u n mig an s o challenge hese s uc u es play a c ucial ole in shaping
ou comes. In some cases, e u nees may ace esis ance when a emp ing o in oduce new
poli ical ideas o p ac ices (Kessle & Ro he 2016). This esona es wi h Debna h’s inding ha
beyond he ques ion wha asse s and ambi ions e u ning mig an s b ing back on an indi idual
le el, i is he s uc u al condi ions in he o igin coun y ha ha e o o e oppo uni ies o hei
posi i e impac (Debna h 2016).
In conclusion, while he ela ionship be ween e u n mig a ion, poli ical de elopmen , and
democ a iza ion is o en amed wi hin op imis ic na a i es, i is essen ial o c i ically examine
he complexi ies ha unde pin hese dynamics. The condi ionali ies ound in he empi ical
wo ks on poli ical emi ances indica e ha we canno p esume a posi i e e ec o e u n
mig a ion on poli ical de elopmen . Wha ma e s a e con ex ual ac o s o he des ina ion
coun y as well as in he coun y in o which mig an s e u n, bu also he condi ions unde which
21
mig an s e u n (Cassa ino 2004). My analyses e eal ha emi ances h ough e u n mig a ion
need o be unde s ood in a mo e complex in e play: i is no only he e u ning mig an s
hemsel es ha p oduce poli ical emi ances a ound he opic o e u n, bu also he nego ia ion
o e u n p essu e by ac i e mig an s can c ea e poli ical emi ances, as elabo a ed in pape 5.3.
Fu he mo e, I ound mixed esul s o he poli ical ac i a ion o e u ned mig an s who ha e
o na iga e he de as a ing pos - e u n condi ions o s a e-induced e u n, as u he discussed
in pape s 5.1 and 5.2.
This demands o a c i ical and di e en ia ed look a ole o e u n condi ions c ea ed h ough
he des ina ion s a e’s e u n p essu es, building on misleading poli ical assump ions ha
posi i e de elopmen e ec s can be c ea ed h ough sma policy design o any mig an ha
des ina ion coun ies wan o see lea ing. This demands a c i ical examina ion o knowledge
c ea ion abou ein eg a ion. The in insic link be ween ein eg a ion and de elopmen is
pa icula ly s ongly en o ced in AVRR p og ammes, which I will u he elabo a e on in he
ollowing sub-sec ion.
2.4 S a e-Induced Re u n: Be ween De elopmen and Ex e naliza ion o Bo de Con ol
The in e play be ween esea ch pa adigms and he poli ics o e u n mig a ion complica e he
ela ionship be ween e u n and de elopmen . Acco ding o Hein de Haas (2010), we can
obse e a ‘pa adigm pendulum’ in mig a ion and de elopmen s udies, in which shi s in
schola ly in e p e a ions o he mig a ion-de elopmen -nexus ha e been in e wined wi h
policy na a i es and public pe cep ions o mig a ion dynamics. De Haas a gues ha an
academic emphasis on he po en ial bene i s o e u n mig a ion has led o gene alized
assump ions abou e u nees con ibu ing posi i ely o hei home socie ies (de Haas 2010).
When esea che s ind ela ionships be ween e u n and de elopmen , hey do no necessa ily
ocus on he signi icance o hei indi idual e u n condi ions. They migh no d aw clea
dis inc ions be ween a ansna ional diaspo a, empo a ily e u ning and longe - e m e u ned
mig an s (see, o example, Tu ne 2008). O hey migh no ocus on he ole o skill le el (see,
o example, Hammond 2015). Fu he mo e, many o he s udies ha iden i y poli ical
emi ances ocus on egula mig an s, wi h conno a ions on skill le el and e u n decision-
making ( o impo an excep ions, see Ammassa i 2004 and Lecade 2018).
Finding gene aliza ions and egula i ies ega ding he de elopmen impac o e u n mig a ion
is hus a challenge ha esea che s ace due o he boundedness o hei knowledge c ea ion in
poli ical imes and spaces. This complexi y lea es a g ea scope o in e p e a ion o policy
make s. My wo k sc u inizes some o hese gene aliza ions, how hey a e poli ically en isioned
e sus i and how hey un old in eali y. To gi e hese o my indings some schola ly con ex ,
I will i s ske ch a b ie his o y o how AVRR was es ablished and inco po a ed in de elopmen
coope a ion (2.4.1), and hen a gue in line wi h c i ical schola s ha he ambi alences his
c ea es esona e wi h a biased schola ly engagemen in s udying assis ed e u ns wi h a ocus
on ein eg a ion.
22
2.4.1 AVRR: A Mig a ion Managemen Tool in De elopmen Coope a ion
Fi s p og ammes o suppo e u n mig a ion o de elopmen in he 1970s ocused on mig an s
wi h ele an skills o esou ces and an in e es in e u ning in o de o comba nega i e impac s
o b ain d ain. A he ime, inc eases in he in e na ional mig a ion o skilled wo ke s had
b ough b ain d ain o he o e on as a se e e challenge o he economies and socie ies in
de eloping coun ies. In pa allel, diaspo as we e inc easingly ecognized o hei
de elopmen al po en ials, con ibu ing o a ‘b ain egain’ h ough bo h a he sho - e m o
mo e long- e m e u n (de Haas 2010).
Howe e , wi h he ise o bo h immig a ion om de eloping coun ies o Eu ope and i s
p oblema isa ion, he poli ical ocus in he e u n-de elopmen nexus has been shi ing
(Cassa ino 2019). I is inc easingly ansla ed in o a language wi h which policymake s y o
ind answe s owa ds how o deal wi h i egula ised mig an s in Eu ope. Al eady in Richa d
Black and Khalid Kose ’s ounda ional s udy on he e u n-de elopmen nexus in pos -con lic
si ua ions, hey emphasize ha e u ning is, in con as o poli ical hopes o a ‘na u al’ du able
solu ion o displacemen , a highly p oblema ic issue (Black & Kose 1999).
One o he occu ing complica ions is he blu iness o olun a iness be ween people who le
as e ugees and migh ha e been wai ing o s abiliza ion in hei o igin coun y in o de o go
home, ejec ed asylum seeke s and i egula mig an s. These g oups a e co e ed by he same
AVRR p og ammes. In line wi h his, Tine Da ids and Ma ieke an Hou e (2014) econs uc
how, in pos -con lic con ex s in 2007/2008, he e is a signi ican misma ch be ween he
mig an s ha policy make s iden i y as po en ial pos - e u n change agen s and he ac ual a ge
g oup o hei e u n policies. While alloca ed skill and capi al as well as an in insic e u n
mo i a ion a e ecognized as key ac o s in gene a ing de elopmen po en ial, mos e u n and
ein eg a ion measu es a ge ejec ed asylum seeke s – who ypically lack hese p econdi ions.
Assis ed Volun a y Re u n (AVR) and Rein eg a ion (AVRR) p og ammes as he cen al policy
ins umen s ha en o ce he e u n-de elopmen linkage a e ini ia ed and unded by des ina ion
coun ies and acili a ed by he IOM.
6
AVR is he “adminis a i e, logis ical o inancial
suppo , including ein eg a ion assis ance o mig an s unable o unwilling o emain in he hos
coun y o coun y o ansi and who decide o e u n o hei coun y o o igin” (IOM 2019,
12). Concep ually, AVRR suppo hus shall p epa e and equip mig an s o a success ul pos -
e u n ein eg a ion, ep esen ing a p econdi ion o a chance o hei de elopmen al
con ibu ions (Cassa ino 2004). Howe e , while AVR p og ammes we e i s in oduced in he
la e 1970s o ea ly 1980s, hei ini ia ion was no linked o he e u n-de elopmen policy
s a egies de eloped in he 1970s. AVRR was, ins ead, supposed o bypass he expensi e and
mo e complica ed p ocess o depo a ion o ejec ed asylum seeke s, and allow mig an s a mo e
digni ied e u n han h ough depo a ion. Thi dly, AVRR mean o be less dependen on
coope a ion o o igin coun ies, o example in he o mal iden i ica ion o p esumed na ionals
(Noll 1999; Schneide & K eienb ink 2010) and addi ionally combine i wi h p omising
6
Gene ally, he IOM implemen s AVRR p og ammes as con ac o s o he unding hos s a es. De elopmen
coope a ion in coun ies o o igin o e supplemen a y se ices o which e u ned mig an s a e e e ed once back.
23
a gumen s o mig an s and o igin coun ies: AVRR p omised, mo e han AVR, o be a ‘ iple-
win’ o e u ning s a es, o igin coun ies and e u ning mig an s alike (Sina i 2015).
Wi h u he policy shi s o he EU owa ds mo e es ic i e immig a ion con ols in esponse
o ising asylum applica ions and mig a ion lows du ing he 1980s and 1990s, AVRR
p og ammes we e signi ican ly expanded (Lie ae , B oekae & De luyn 2017b). In he 2000s,
AVRR p og ammes inc easingly s a ed emphasizing a de elopmen al angle, linking e u n
wi h sus ainable ein eg a ion in mig an s' home coun ies (Kose 2001). Acco dingly, a ious
Eu opean coun ies conside hei AVRR p og ammes as pa o hei app oach in mig a ion
and de elopmen , and alloca e de elopmen unds o his (F ankenhaeuse , Noack, Bacchi,
Keijze , Kla e & Knoll 2013).
Fo example, Ge many, whe e AVRR has i s been in oduced bu o a long ime no
in eg a ed in de elopmen coope a ion, s a ed ollowing i s e u n and ein eg a ion s a egy
along a ‘cohe en go e nmen app oach’ in ol ing he Ge man In e io Minis y (BMI) and he
Minis y o De elopmen Coope a ion (BMZ) in 2017. Wi h his, he BMZ s a egically
“expanded he opic ‘ e u n’ owa ds sus ainable ein eg a ion in he o igin coun y” (BMZ
2019, 9). F om he pe spec i e o he IOM, he way Ge many links e u n assis ance wi h
de elopmen al s a egies is a p og essi e s ep o make assis ed e u n mo e e ec i e, and design
mig a ion policy in a mig an -cen ed way (IOM 2019). This esona es wi h concep s o Ge man
de elopmen coope a ion. The Ge man de elopmen agency GIZ s a es ha “ins ead o simply
pushing coun ies o o igin o eadmi na ionals and ocusing on he numbe o e u nees,
de elopmen coope a ion esea ch and p ac ice indica e ha coun ies o o igin and des ina ion
mus coope a e closely in o de o acili a e e u n and sus ainable ein eg a ion, and o enhance
e u nees’ po en ial o con ibu e o he de elopmen o hei coun ies o o igin” (Hone a h &
Haase 2016, emphasis by au ho ).
Wi h his, he GIZ inco po a es he na a i e o a ‘ iple win’ h ough e u n mig a ion (Sina i
2015) and u he s eng hens he no ion o con ainmen de elopmen (Landau 2019). The GIZ
unc ions as an impo an implemen e o Ge many’s e u n p og ammes beyond he IOM
(Ge lo 2018). Thei engagemen in he ield is pa icula ly use ul as he GIZ can build on i s
humani a ian legi imacy, acco ding us among i s pa ne s in de eloping coun ies, and i s
es ablished poli ical ne wo ks and managemen in as uc u es. I s in e es -bound eo ien a ion
he e o e s eng hens Eu opean bo de ex e naliza ion qui e e ec i ely (Ge lo 2018). The
ins umen alisa ion o de elopmen aid hus ex e nalizes poli ical challenges om wi hin he
EU o hi d coun ies. This was also obse ed on a mul ila e al scale by, o example, Na ascha
Zaun and Oli ia Nan e moz (Zaun & Nan e moz 2023) who show his in he es ablishmen o
he EU Eme gency T us Fund o A ica (EUTF), in which nume ous e u n and ein eg a ion
measu es ha e also been es ablished (see pape s 5.1 and 5.2).
Re u ning o he IOM, esea che s ha e also assessed he p oblema ic mul i ace ed ole o he
IOM as a key s akeholde in es ablishing AVRR since i s beginnings. In he 2000s, i had
inc easingly engaged in esea ch and p ojec s owa ds es ablishing and ein o cing he
mig a ion-de elopmen nexus (Newman-G igg 2020). Thei e o s o embed ein eg a ion in o
local and communi y de elopmen aligns wi h he „dialogue shi in de elopmen away om
24
p esc ip i e op-down app oaches owa ds communi y-based de elopmen “ (Newman-G igg
2020, 100). The IOM usually implemen s AVRR, and i s local o ices se e as impo an
connec ion poin s a e he e u n. Th ough i s wo k in e u n and ein eg a ion, he IOM “can
be unde s ood as a ‘de elopmen al bo de wo k’ ac o , whose p ac ices a e unde pinned by a
since e bu p ocedu al humani a ianism, a echnical ocus on bes p ac ices and implemen a ion,
and an in e en ion app oach d awn om he de elopmen indus y” (F owd 2018). Philippe
F owd’s analysis unde lines how ex e nalisa ion p ocesses apply no only wo ding bu also
implemen a ion echniques om he de elopmen coope a ion indus y. Th ough a success ul
o sus ainable e u n suppo ed by de elopmen -len concep s and/o unds, mig an s a e
expec ed no only o e ain om emig a ing, bu ac ually be enabled o con ibu e o local
de elopmen . This leads me o a c i ical assessmen o he concep o ein eg a ion.
2.4.2 Deba es o e he Re u n-De elopmen Nexus and ‘Rein eg a ion’ in AVRR
Al hough AVRR has no been designed as a de elopmen coope a ion ool, i s unde s andings
o mig an e u n d aw om concep ual amewo ks ha mig a ion and de elopmen s udies
ha e p oduced, as desc ibed in he p e ious sub-sec ion. These amewo ks we e shaped by
b oade heo e ical pa adigms, which g adually shi ed he mig a ion-de elopmen nexus om
conce n wi h b ain d ain o an emphasis on b ain egain. Howe e , clea , causal ela ionships
be ween e u n and de elopmen ha e emained empi ically elusi e. Thei e ec s a e case-
speci ic, mul i ace ed, and some imes coun e in ui i e.
Despi e his, policy app oaches end o highligh he de elopmen al po en ials o e u n, o en
ex apola ing op imis ic ou comes om a a he small sha e o p i ileged e u nees. These
gene aliza ions help legi imize poli ically mo i a ed e u n e o s, pa icula ly hose aimed a
ex e nalizing bo de con ol. As a esul , expe knowledge ha may hold ue only o speci ic
e u nee p o iles and con ex s is applied o b oade mig an popula ions wi hou ega d o hei
s uc u al disad an ages (Da ids & an Hou e 2014). Conc e ely, policy incen i es o e u n
mainly a ge ejec ed asylum seeke s, mos o which ha e aced mul iple social disad an ages
since be o e hei mig a ion and while in Ge many, ins ead o a ac ing mig an s which would
po en ially yield be e b ain egain esul s, o example based on skills. This sides eps he
socio-economic ba ie s ha shape bo h hei p e-mig a ion and e u n condi ions. The esul is
a misalignmen be ween policy in en ions and mig an s’ li ed eali ies. Poli ical p ac ice
he e o e may ul il only pa o wha hey claim o deli e : hey may be able o success ully
e u n mig an s physically bu do no accoun o hei ein eg a ion p ocesses.
In p ac ice, he e o e, AVRR o en esembles depo a ion mo e han de elopmen -o ien ed
e u n, despi e i s b anding as ‘ olun a y’. Bo h AVRR and depo a ion aim o educe he
numbe o ‘unwan ed’ mig an s and a ge indi iduals ha a e subjec o depo abili y.
Depo abili y en ails s uc u al disad an ages, such as ba ie s o quali ica ion, esou ce
accumula ion, and psychological secu i y, ha cons ain mig an s’ au onomy well be o e hey
ag ee o e u n.
As schola s ha e a gued, AVRR decisions a e o en made unde du ess, wi hin a con ex o
limi ed op ions (Cle on & Chau in 2020; Cle on & Schwei ze 2021; C ane & Lawson 2020;
Kali 2017; Lee kes, an Os & Boe sema 2017; Lie ae , B oekae & De luyn 2017b). Schola s
25
such as Ba ak Kali (2017) and F ances Webbe (2011) emphasize ha AVRR o en e lec s
he absence o iable al e na i es a he han a ee choice (see also Cassa ino 2020; E dal &
Oeppen 2018). Acco dingly, a ious schola s a gue o concep ualizing AVRR and depo a ion
as poin s on he same con inuum, including in e minology. Two impo an sugges ions ha e
been p oposed: ‘s a e-induced e u n’ (Koch 2014; Maâ 2021) as an o e a ching e m
unde lines he simul aneous ole o s a e in e es s and s eamlined p ac ices o in e na ional
o ganiza ions such as he IOM’s, while ‘so depo a ion’ (Kali 2017; Lee kes, an Os &
Boe sema 2017) emphasizes AVRR’s coe ci e unde pinnings and eplaces i s olun a y label.
While hese c i iques sha pen ou unde s andings o AVRR’s concep ual ambigui y, hey
p ima ily ocus on e u n decisions and he pe iod leading up o depa u e. Howe e , i is he
pos - e u n phase, o en ou o sigh o policy ac o s in he e u n-inducing coun ies, ha se es
as a cen al s age o legi imize AVRR. This is wha he e m ‘ ein eg a ion’ in he p og amme’s
i le signals. Unlike depo a ion, AVRR claims o suppo he well-being o e u nees and hei
po en ial con ibu ion o he de elopmen in hei coun y o o igin/ e u n. Ye , he pos - e u n
expe ience is une enly s udied ac oss con ex s and o en glossed o e in policy amewo ks.
Thus, he c i ical wo k being an impo an con ibu ion, his cons i u es an impo an concep ual
gap o which my wo k di ec ly speaks.
No ably, a g owing body o s udies ha e examined li e a e AVRR and depo a ion. These
include wo k on AVRR by Da ids and an Hou e (2014), Leande Kandilige and Ge aldine
Adiku (2020), Nauja Kleis (2020), Ine Lie ae , E ik B oekae and Ilse De luyn (Lie ae 2021;
Lie ae , B oekae & De luyn 2017a), Sand a Sacche i (2016) o Masja an Mee e en,
God ied Engbe sen, E ik Snel and Ma ije Fabe (2014). Rega ding depo a ion, Shah am
Khos a i (2018a; 2018b) as well as Liza Schus e and Nassim Majidi (2013; 2015) ha e gi en
p ominen schola ly accoun s, as ha e Agnieszka Radziwinowiczówna (2021; 2022), Susanne
Schul z (2022) o E in Rodkey (2016), o name bu a ew. Thei indings ha e in o med he
analyses in pape s 5.2 and 5.5.
Two poin s abou his s and o li e a u e a e wo h highligh ing on his mo e gene al le el o
discussion. Fi s , while hese s udies highligh he impo ance o e u n olun a iness and he
limi ed impac o ein eg a ion assis ance, hey do no sys ema ically compa e AVRR and
depo a ion. Some dis inguish be ween he wo bu do no ca e ou hei simila i ies o
di e ences (e.g. Da ids & an Hou e, 2014; Lie ae & Kuschminde , 2021; Ruben, Da ids &
an Hou e 2009). O he s ei he p esuppose hei di e ence by sampling only one o he wo,
(see, o example, Lie ae , De luyn & B oekae 2014) o ea hem wi h an indi e ence by
including bo h in one sample (see, o example, Åkesson 2011). Second, hese s udies do no
ocus on ein eg a ion as an analy ical concep . Ins ead, hey employ a ious al e na i e
amewo ks o s udy pos - e u n condi ions. My analysis in pape 5.3 speaks o hese
sho comings along empi ical ma e ial on pos - e u n ajec o ies.
The li e a u e on ein eg a ion, on he o he hand, has expanded as a ela i ely new s and o
discussion, bu became he dominan amewo k in pos - e u n esea ch o e he pas decade
(Kuschminde 2017a; Ma ino & Lie ae 2022). This ocus on ein eg a ion g ew pa ly in
esponse o policy demands o mo e sys ema ic pos - e u n esea ch and o make i analy ically
26
mo e aluable and applicable (Black e al. 2004; Kose & Kuschminde 2015; Paasche 2014).
Due o his closeness o policy, i is impo an o e lec which consequences his has o all
ac o s in he e u n egime. The ein eg a ion concep emains a con es ed one, because o i s
p oximi y o policy goals and i s concep ual ambigui ies (Ma ino & Lie ae 2022). Some
schola s ha e sys ema ized i , de eloping pa ame e s o measu e ein eg a ion ou comes; o he s
ha e c i ically assessed i s no ma i e and poli ical implica ions. I will explica e his by gi ing
some b ie insigh s in o he ques ions, challenges and solu ions ha he de elopmen o he
concep b ings along, in o de o subs an ia e my c i ical s ance.
One cen al ension lies in he concep ’s connec ion o ‘ e u n sus ainabili y’ (Lie ae &
Kuschminde 2021), which in ol es elabo a ing wha a ‘success ul e u n’ is and how hese
wo ela e (Kuschminde 2017b). One deba ed concep ual s and o ques ions conside s he ole
o e-emig a ion – whe he e u ned mig an s should (no ) aspi e o o be capable o e-
emig a ing o whe he hey wan o o can sus ain ansna ional li elihoods (Ca ling & E dal
2014; Kuschminde 2017a; Lie ae & Kuschminde 2021). The cen ali y o hese ques ions
mi o s why he de ini ion o ein eg a ion i sel is so con es ed. I s ands in di ec ela ion o
he de elopmen -o ien ed ques ion whe he no e-emig a ing is a success in igh ing “ oo
causes o mig a ion” o a he leads o in olun a y immobili y.
Typologies add essing ‘success ul e u n’ and ‘sus ainable ein eg a ion’ usually conside h ee
dimensions: (1) mig an s’ indi idual cha ac e is ics including social and biog aphical ac o s,
(2) hei condi ions in hos coun ies including he easons o e u ning, and (3) he con ex s
in o which hey e u n. Mos highligh challenges wi h AVRR and emphasize ha he success
o e u n is mo e closely ied o olun a iness han o he assis ance o e ed. Cen al wo ks ha
engage wi h ein eg a ion and e u n sus ainabili y a e AVR(R) sys ema ically include hose
o Black e al. (2004), Kose and Kuschminde (2015) as well as A ne S and, Synnø e K is ine
Neps ad Bendixsen, Hilde Lidén, E lend Paasche, and Lo ise Aalen (2016). Ye , hey canno
en i ely wi hd aw om he ul ima e goal o a sus ainable e u n ha enables mig an s, in he
bes case, o decide o mig a e h ough egula means – which in mos cases lies a ou side he
scope o ein eg a ion p ocesses.
Building on deba es a ound success ul e u n, Kuschminde (2017b) de eloped a ein eg a ion
amewo k based on empi ical da a om emale e u nees o E hiopia. He wo k expands he
concep o include highly p i ileged o leas -p i ileged e u nees and hei condi ions, including
depo ees. O e all, she ames ein eg a ion as a ‘s a egic’ p ocess enac ed be ween mig an s
and he socie ies in o which hey e u n, hus as a ‘bidi ec ional esponsibili y’ (Kuschminde
2017a). This s a egy depends on e u ned mig an s’ ela ionship o – and he s uc u al
openness o – key sec o s (go e nmen , ci il socie y, p i a e sec o ) in he coun y o
o igin/ e u n. In he pe spec i e, e en hough he p e- e u n condi ions make a cen al
di e ence o he pos - e u n expe iences, No he n policy does no ca y a esponsibili y in he
ein eg a ion p ocess.
In pa allel, he Think Tank Samuel Hall and IOM ad anced an ‘in eg a ed app oach o
ein eg a ion’ (Samuel Hall & IOM 2017) as a ool o s a is ically measu e and quan i a i ely
moni o ein eg a ion empi ically on a la ge and compa a i e scale. Thei amewo k, which
27
can be unde s ood as a ounda ional ool in ein eg a ion managemen , in oduces mul i-le el
indica o s spanning indi idual, communal, and s uc u al domains. Al hough ecognizing he
ole o p e- e u n condi ions as con ex ually impo an ac o s, hey do no sys ema ically
include o measu e hem in hei comp ehensi e indica o sys em. Thei indings sugges ha
challenges o en lie a he meso-le el o he communi y a he han indi idual o na ional le el,
implying ha ein eg a ion assis ance equi es in e en ions in public se ice domains, such as
educa ion, heal h, psychosocial assis ance, access o employmen and housing, no only o he
e u ning mig an s bu o he communi ies o e u n (Samuel Hall & IOM 2017).
As exempli ied a ound hese p ominen amewo ks, ein eg a ion esea ch amewo ks end o
ocus on whe he indi idual mig an s can e-es ablish hemsel es socially and economically
and iden i y a eas o policy in e en ion whe e hey see he g ea es obs acles wi hin he
iden i ied amewo k. They can hus assess whe he assis ance can o se he disad an ages o
semi- olun a y e u n, c i ically examine he posi i e claims o AVRR and make sugges ions
how o be e ul il hem. They canno , howe e , measu e he b oade poli ical economy o
e u n managemen . This concep ual di ec ion aligns wi h a b oade u n in de elopmen
hinking, whe e neolibe al pa adigms eplaced ea lie dependency-o ien ed models, cas ing
mig an s no as ic ims o unde de elopmen bu as agen s o change i jus equipped wi h he
igh ools (de Haas 2010; Fais 2008; Skeldon 2008).
This is whe e Zana Va hi, Russell King and Ba ak Kali (2022) see a cen al p oblem in he
ein eg a ion concep . They a gue ha , jus as e u n p ac ices, he s udy o ein eg a ion akes
place wi hin geopoli ical hie a chies ha skew i s aming owa d he in e es s o des ina ion
s a es. Fo hem, e u n sus ainabili y is “a concep es i ying o he unequal geopoli ics o
e u n” (Va hi, King & Kali 2022, 6). While acknowledging ha he ein eg a ion concep has
success ully inco po a ed indings om esea ch on ansna ionalism, social ne wo ks and
psychosocial well-being o he ad an ages o a seemingly ca ing humani a ian analy ical lens,
“ he geopoli ical aspec s o ein eg a ion a e somewha o e looked in e u n mig a ion
schola ship” (Va hi, King & Kali 2022, 6).
Rossella Ma ino and Ine Lie ae (2022) u he ace how ‘sus ainable ein eg a ion’ became
ins i u ionalized h ough cycles o “no malisa ion, agmen a ion, assimila ion and e-
no malisa ion” (Ma ino & Lie ae 2022, 178), o en led by he IOM. The IOM ac s no jus as
an implemen e bu as a knowledge b oke , “coope a ing di ec ly wi h consul an s and
academics o e-employing he la e ’s independen e-de ini ions and iews” (Ma ino &
Lie ae 2022, 178). This shapes academic and policy unde s andings o ein eg a ion in ways
ha suppo mig a ion managemen .
This leads o he inal insigh o his sub-sec ion: ein eg a ion is inc easingly amed as a
echnical p oblem o be sol ed h ough managemen , a he han a poli ical p ocess shaped by
asymme ical powe . When ein eg a ion ails, he cause is o en ames as manage ial
weakness – no he deepe poli ical o economic cons ain s ha s uc u e e u n. In doing so,
ein eg a ion discou se depoli icizes he de elopmen - e u n nexus and obscu es he gap
be ween policy p omises and mig an s’ pos - e u n eali ies.
28
To sum up, he analy ical ise o ein eg a ion e lec s bo h shi ing agendas and b oade policy
ends wi hin he mig a ion-de elopmen nexus. Despi e he claim o c ea ing a iple-win
scena io in mig an e u n (Sina i 2015), unde s andings o wha ‘success ul’ e u n and
ein eg a ion mean is con es ed be ween hos s a es, o igin s a es and e u ning mig an s (Black
& Gen 2006; Kuschminde 2017c), and ends o a bias owa ds in e es s o e u ning s a es
(e.g. Black & Kose 1999; Collye 2012; Lie ae , De luyn & B oekae 2014; Sina i 2015).
While o en amed as a neu al ool o suppo humane e u n, he concep o ein eg a ion is
pe aded by powe asymme ies on a ious le els which i obscu es. The emphasis on
measu able, compa able indica o s and p og amma ic managemen depoli icizes e u n. I shi s
a en ion away om s uc u al ba ie s and geopoli ical inequali ies along he whole mig a ion
cycle ha in luences e u n and pos - e u n. I ins ead emphasizes managemen ool
e ec i eness and mig an compliance.
My wo k add esses he aised c i icism in wo ways. As a conc e e consequence, I delibe a ely
a oid elying on he ein eg a ion concep , e en when analysing pos - e u n expe iences a he
indi idual le el, as I do p ominen ly in pape 5.2. Ins ead, I examine mig an agency wi hin he
same pos - e u n se ing as ein eg a ion could be obse ed. On a mo e abs ac le el, my egime
pe spec i e enables insigh s in o he asymme ic geopoli ical powe ela ions desc ibed by
Va hi, King and Kali (2022), pa icula ly by e ealing how hese asymme ies a e econ i med
o con es ed by mig an s and ac o s in he coun y o o igin/ e u n. This b ings me o he nex
body o esea ch o which my wo k speaks and esponds o, which is he ole o he o igin
coun y in he e u n egime.
2.5 The O igin Coun y in he Re u n Regime
While he li e a u e acknowledges ha he poli ical con ex a he ecei ing end o e u n plays
an impo an ole, only ew wo ks concen a e a his dimension in mo e de ail. I ha e al eady
ouched upon li e a u e ha ela es o po en ial in e es s o o igin/ e u n coun ies’ go e nmen s
in Sub-sec ion 2.3 ega ding de elopmen hopes. Howe e , as I ha e laid ou , s a e-induced
e u n ep esen s a speci ic o m o e u n o which he de elopmen -linkage mus be
ques ioned when conside ed om he pe spec i e o o igin/ e u n s a es. Tha said,
go e nmen s o des ina ion and o igin/ e u n coun ies can ind de elopmen he o ic in his
con ex as common g ounds. Giulia Sina i igh ly poin ed ou ha he unde s andings o e u n
o Senegalese s a e ac o s build on de elopmen hopes and hus align wi h e u n ideals
nou ished by AVRR concep ualiza ions, e en hough hey a e likely o emain un ul illed, and
he e o e do no align wi h pe cep ions o he e u ning indi iduals (Sina i 2015). Simila ly,
Pécoud desc ibes how o igin/ e u n coun y go e nmen s mi iga e nega i e public pe cep ion
by delega ing he esponsibili y o manage e u n and ein eg a ion o in e na ional
o ganiza ions such as he IOM. This ans e o esponsibili y o non-s a e ac o s depoli icizes
he e u n ques ion and upcoming p ac ical challenges, while aligning wi h des ina ion s a es‘
in e es s and he e o e allowing o igin/ e u n coun y go e nmen s o main ain legi imacy bo h
domes ically and in e na ionally (Geige & Pécoud 2010). Also, h ough coope a ion in
mig a ion poli ics, Eu opean des ina ion coun ies in eg a e hei con ainmen p io i ies in
poli ical s a egies and managemen in Wes A ican coun ies o o igin/ e u n (see, o example
29
Bisong 2020 o Mali and Nige , and Roos, T aune & Adam 2024 o Ghana and Senegal).
Rossella Ma ino, Jo is Schapendonk and Ine Lie ae (2023) desc ibe o he case o The
Gambia how e en local ci il socie y o ganiza ions a e inco po a ed in e u n and ein eg a ion
managemen by des ina ion s a es‘ e u n egimes.
These s udies a e a eco d o des ina ion s a e ac o s success ully aligning ac o s in coun ies o
o igin/ e u n – mainly go e nmen al bu pa ly e en also ci il socie y – in o hei e u n
managemen . While hey o cou se conside he poli ical con ex in he coun y o o igin/ e u n
in hei analysis, hey mos ly do no ocus on how o igin/ e u n s a e ac o s assess and na iga e
he e u n demands o des ina ion s a e ac o s, despi e e u n en o cemen being a guably he
mos con es ed ield in mig a ion coope a ion. While s a egies o esponsibili y a oidance o
manage ial coope a ion migh make up an impo an pa o o igin/ e u n coun ies’ poli ical
s a egies, we know li le abou how hey nego ia e hei posi ions and deal wi h con es a ions
among di e en o igin/ e u n s akeholde s.
When i comes o depo a ions, e en less schola ly a en ion is paid o he poli ical eac ions a
he ecei ing end. While he e exis long-s anding gene alizing obse a ions ha o igin/ e u n
coun ies a e, somehow na u ally, a he eluc an o accep depo ees, and ha he e o e
depo ing coun ies he e o e se condi ionali ies be ween eadmission coope a ion and
inancial aid o hese coun ies (Noll 1999), he e exis s sca ce di e en ia ing knowledge abou
how coun ies o o igin/ e u n deal wi h such depo a ion demands. S a is ics on ac ual
depo a ion numbe s highligh ha despi e he long-s anding Eu opean e o s o inc ease e u n
a es, hese emain a he low despi e a g owing in o malisa ion o eadmission ag eemen s
(Cassa ino 2007; S u z & T aune 2022). Conside ing he geopoli ical imbalance and he
in o mal spaces ha hese pla o ms c ea e be ween he in ol ed s a es, he ela i e ‘ ailu e’ o
expand depo a ion numbe s also is a consequence o how go e nmen s in coun ies o
o igin/ e u n handle he e u n ques ion on a diploma ic as well as adminis a i e le el. Thus
we need o lea n mo e abou hem.
As one impo an excep ion, F anzisca Zanke has compa ed how Wes A ican s a es handle
depo a ion demands o Eu opean coun ies. He indings show ha he e can exis di e en
o ms o coope a ion, eaching om eluc an compliance o a ious o ms o incompliances.
She hus concludes ha “coun ies a e esis ing [en o ced] e u n, albei in sub le ways gi en
hei asymme ic ba gaining posi ion” (Zanke 2023, 1). This indica es ha in he case o
depo a ions, o igin/ e u n coun y go e nmen s migh de elop di e en coope a ion s a egies
and diploma ic posi ions. One o he coun ies she assessed was The Gambia, based on da a I
collec ed as pa o he esea ch eam and which ep esen ed he mos p oac i e esis ance case.
As pa o his body o wo k, I con ibu ed o a policy b ie based on ou compa a i e indings
(c . Zanke , Al ogge, A hin-Sam & Jegen 2019).
When des ina ion coun ies e u n mig an s h ough AVRR o depo a ion, coun ies o
o igin/ e u n always ha e o show some deg ee o coope a ion – eaching om iden i ica ion
o ci izens be o e depo a ion, issuing landing pe mi s o cha e depo a ion ligh s, ecep ion
in as uc u es a he ai po s o he es ablishmen o a ein eg a ion in as uc u e among
domes ic o in e na ional ac o s. These con ain some mo e passi e and some mo e ac i e
36
he ime o he ansa lan ic sla e ade, he Senegambia egion was a majo sla e ade hub,
b inging bo h A ican and Eu opean se le s, sla e ade s and sla es o he a ea. In e nal,
egional and in e na ional mig a ion con inued un il he beginning o he 20 h cen u y based on
sla e ade as well as e hnic and eligious con lic s. Du ing colonial imes, human wo k o ce
was mo ed be ween di e en colonies, wi h The Gambia ecei ing a me s as seasonal c oss-
bo de mig an wo ke s ha enabled he colonial cash c op p oduc ion. (Sallah 2012, Teye 2022)
Thus, The Gambia has long unc ioned as a hub o immig a ion, ansi and emig a ion wi hin
i s wide Wes A ican con ex and con inues o do so despi e s a e bo de s. (Saine, Ceesay &
Sall 2013, x i). In ac , i had been a ne immig a ion coun y o a long ime, wi h many
egional mig an s, especially om Senegal, li ing in The Gambia (De illa d, Bacchi & Noack
2015), making up 17% o i s popula ion in 2010 (Kebbeh 2013)
9
. Bu also “Gambians
hemsel es ha e ex ended lineages in a web o connec ions sp ead o e a la ge pa o Wes
A ica” (Saine, Ceesay & Sall 2013, x i). Thei egional in e linkages a e also embedded in
e hnic s uc u es ha con inue o shape social, economic and mig a o y p ac ices. E hnic g oups
a e no con ined by na ional bo de s bu a e sp ead ac oss he Senegambia egion and beyond,
main aining ansna ional kinship, eligious and linguis ic ies. Fo ins ance, he Mandinka and
Fula communi ies ha e s ong c oss-bo de ne wo ks wi h ela i es in Senegal, Mali, Guinea,
and Sie a Leone, acili a ing ci cula mig a ion, ma iage ies, and in o mal ade.
Un il he 1970s, he majo i y o Gambian emig a ion was di ec ed owa d neighbou ing
Senegal, wi h complemen ed by educa ional mig a ion o o he Commonweal h coun ies in he
egion wi h es ablished uni e si ies, such as Sie a Leone. In addi ion, some Gambians sough
economic oppo uni ies elsewhe e in Sub-Saha an A ica, including in esou ce- ich a eas such
as he mining egions o Angola (Hul in e al. 2017). These mo emen s we e shaped by long-
s anding egional ies, as well as by colonial-e a connec ions and educa ional pa hways ha
acili a ed accesses o ce ain Commonweal h des ina ions. La e on, egional mobili y was
u he ins i u ionalized h ough he Economic Communi y o Wes A ican S a es (ECOWAS),
which, beginning in he 1980s, p og essi ely implemen ed p o ocols g an ing ci izens o
membe s a es he igh o isa- ee en y, esidence, and es ablishmen ac oss he egion
(Adepoju 2003).
While egional mig a ion emained dominan well o he pos -independence decades, he la e
20 h cen u y also wi nessed he g adual expansion o Gambian mobili y beyond Wes A ica.
Building on exis ing c oss-bo de ne wo ks jus as o he pos -colonial Wes A ican s a es, new
in e con inen al ne wo ks bag o eme ge in The Gambia h ough he de elopmen o a coas al
ou ism sec o , which led o an inc easing p esence o Eu opeans in he coun y as ea ly as he
1960s (Bellagamba, Ceesay & Vi u ini 2021). O e he decades, he p esence o Eu opean
ou is s s eng hened ies ac oss con inen s on indi idual le els and he pull o Wes e n
coun ies, encou aging Eu o-A ican businesses, iendships, and amilies. In e -con inen al
mig a ion hen gained ac ion in he 1980s.
9
Acco ding o Wo ld Bank es ima es, in 2010, only 64,905 (acco ding o UN DESA: 77,440) Gambians li ed
ab oad, while 290,104 immig an s li ed in The Gambia (De illa d, Bacchi & Noack 2015).
37
Th oughou he 2000s, when poli ical ep ession unde Jammeh in ensi ied, also oppo uni ies
o social and economic ad ancemen became inc easingly ied o suppo o Jammeh’s
egime. In esponse, mig a ion eme ged as a key a enue o young people seeking sel -
ealiza ion and socio-economic empowe men , challenging he au ho i y o poli ical eli es,
elde s, and amily heads (Bellagamba, Ceesay & Vi u ini 2021). As his happened while
immig a ion policies in Eu ope and he USA g ew mo e es ic i e, mo e and mo e Gambian
mig an s op ed o i egula en y in o he EU, i s ia boa o he Cana y Islands in he ea ly
2000s, la e ia land ou es ac oss he Saha a and h ough he Medi e anean Sea. In The
Gambia, his phenomenon became known by he local e m ‘backway mig a ion’, indica ing
aspi ing mig an s’ dependency on “illegal (o he wise e e ed o as i egula o clandes ine)
ac i i ies and on human smuggle s, since he o icial (o legal) ways o each Eu ope a e limi ed
and di icul o gain access o” (Con ad Suso 2019, 111).
In he 2010s, Gambian emig a ion numbe s accele a ed signi ican ly. Be ween 2015 and 2017,
he small Gambian popula ion anked among he op 10-a i ing na ionali ies a he bo de s o
Spain and I aly (IOM 2018). In o al, mo e han 45,000 Gambians we e egis e ed a he EU
bo de s by F on ex as a i ing by i egula means be ween 2010 and 2018 (F on ex 2021). This
amoun s o o e 2% o he coun y’s popula ion. By 2020, an es ima ed 139,210 Gambians
we e li ing ab oad (Uni ed Na ions Popula ion Di ision Depa men o Economic and Social
A ai s [UN DESA] 2020), ep esen ing app oxima ely 6% o he na ional popula ion.
3.1.1 Wes e n Des ina ions
A e independence, he o me colonial powe G ea B i ain as well as he USA, as well as
Spain and some o he Scandina ian coun ies, especially Sweden, had become popula
des ina ions o Gambians. Thus, mos Gambians lea ing he coun y chose in e con inen al
des ina ions a he han emaining in he egion. The a ac i eness o in e -con inen al
mig a ion has inc eased ac oss Wes A ican coun ies wi h highe accessibili y o ansna ional
imagina ies in a globalized and pos colonial se ing (Kleis & Tho sen 2017; Vigh 2009). These
imagina ies a e associa ed wi h success and mode ni y, con as ing sha ply wi h na ional
con ex s cha ac e ized by a el absence o possibili ies, which is p edominan in Sub-Saha an
A ica, and pa icula ly also in The Gambia unde Jammeh’s dic a o ship.
,,
5 000
10 000
15 000
20 000
25 000
30 000
35 000
40 000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Uni ed S a es o Ame ica I aly Spain Ge many Uni ed Kingdom
Figu e 1: Gambian mig a ion s ocks in selec ed Wes e n coun ies 1990-2020.
Sou ce: UN DESA (2020)
38
As Figu e 1 p esen s, by 2020, ou o he i e op hos coun ies o Gambian mig an s we e
in Eu ope. The e we e an es ima ed 23,086 Gambians li ing in I aly and 17,200 in Ge many,
bo h ep esen ing he as es -g owing Gambian communi ies in he 2010s. In compa ison, in i s
o me colonizing s a e G ea B i ain, UN DESA es ima ed only a ound 10,015 Gambians in
2020 (al hough o he es ima es go up o 36,000 Gambia-bo n mig an s, based on di e en
s a is ical coun ing p ocedu es in he UK (Mig a ion and Sus ainable De elopmen in The
Gambia P ojec 2020). In Spain, he communi y had been g owing since he 2000s, and hen
a he s agna ed in size du ing he 2010s. The o he no able Gambian mig a ion is o he US,
wi h a ound 34,000 Gambians esiding he e in 2020. A s eadie low o e he yea s indica es
mo e egula immig a ion such as hough amily euni ica ion, s uden mobili y and o he isa.
3.1.2 Reasons o lea e
Fo mos Gambians lea ing he coun y, hei economic si ua ion and he connec ed s i e o
upwa d social mobili y o onesel and he amily a e pa o hei mo i a ion o mig a e. Fo
young Gambians, pa icula ly young men, economic ad ancemen , including he well-
es ablished op ion o seeking chances elsewhe e, is pa o a i e o passage in o adul hood
(Con ad Suso 2020; Gaibazzi 2015). Oppo uni ies o do so in The Gambia a e ega ded as oo
limi ed o do so by many, especially among he younge , which e lec s hei low labou o ce
pa icipa ion a e (GBOS 2023). Mig a ion is a “powe ul ope o imagining onesel as being
socially on he mo e … and a way o imagining a possible escape om a ozen u u e”
(Gaibazzi 2014, 173). O en, among hose who wan o go, he e is a belie o p edes ina ion o
mig a ion, ou shining some o he se e e isks a ached o ‘backway’ mig a ion (Cham 2024).
The no malcy in lea ing o social ad ancemen is also encapsula ed in he despe a ion and
sense o s uckedness among hose who do no see an oppo uni y o a el, de eloping he
“ne es synd ome” (Con ad Suso 2022).
This no malcy o physical mobili y o upwa d socio-economic mobili y also accoun s o
Gambians who mig a e o s udy ab oad. Al hough he sha e o Gambians who ollow e ia y
educa ion is e y limi ed, chances o hem o spend ime a a o eign uni e si y and hen also
po en ially emain ab oad o be e job oppo uni ies is high, as op ions o e ia y-le el
educa ion in he small coun y a e a he new. The only uni e si y in he coun y, he Uni e si y
o The Gambia (UTG), was es ablished only in 1999 and s ill o e s a ela i ely limi ed ange
o deg ee p og ammes, pa icula ly a he pos g adua e le el. While UTG plays a c ucial ole I
expanding access o highe educa ion na ionally, i s ins i u ional capaci y and academic
in as uc u e emain unde de elopmen , which can pose challenges o in e na ional
ecogni ion and o s uden s seeking ad anced o specialized quali ica ions (Bellagamba,
Ceesay & Vi u ini 2021). While o me ly, also some Commonweal h coun ies in Wes A ica
we e popula des ina ions o s udies, nowadays mos educa ional mobili y om The Gambia
akes place o he Uni ed Kingdom and he USA. In con as , backway mig a ion ends o
include mo e low-educa ed indi iduals. Fo example, in 2005, a s udy ound he illi e acy sha es
o Senegalese and Gambian mig an s in Spain well beyond 70 pe cen (see also Gaibazzi 2015;
Kaplan Ma cusán 2005). O he s udies also indica e a a he high sha e o lowe educa ion
le els han seconda y le el among Gambians a elling owa ds o a i ing in Eu ope (Al ogge
2019).
39
3.1.3 Gambian Mig an s’ Legal S a us in Eu ope
Many Gambian mig an s in Eu ope hold empo a y esidence pe mi s o no legal esidence
pe mi , especially in I aly and Ge many, whe e also he communi ies g ew pa icula ly quickly
in he 2010s. Table 2 shows he limi ed amoun o egula esidence pe mi s among Gambian
na ionals egis e ed in he EU. I indica es he la ge disc epancy o egula ized e sus esidence
pe mi s wi h only limi ed o empo al egula iza ion
10
among he Gambian popula ion in 2018
in he h ee coun ies wi h he la ges Gambian popula ion in con inen al Eu ope. As can be
seen, he e a e some sligh a ia ions, o example Ge many g an ing some mo e isas based
on amily easons, while Spain g an ing mo e isas based on employmen easons and I aly
gi ing mo e Gambians e ugee p o ec ion han he o he wo. Howe e , in all h ee coun ies,
he as majo i y o egis e ed Gambians ca ied p eca ious legal s a uses, including subsidia y
p o ec ion, pending asylum decisions, and ejec ed asylum s a uses. As an indica ion, in 2017,
12,400 Gambians iled an asylum claim in he Eu opean Union (see Table 3). A he same ime,
o e all 6,540 Gambians in he EU had been o de ed o lea e due o lack in esidence pe mi ,
wi h he highes sha es in Ge many and Spain (see Table 4).
Valid esidence pe mi s o 12 mon hs o longe on 31 Decembe 201811
Repo ing coun y
Regis e ed
Gambian
popula ion
1 Janua y 2019
which ha e he ollowing esidence i les:
Family
easons
Educa ion
easons
Employmen
easons
Re ugee
s a us
I aly
22,075
667
33
676
1,183
Spain
19,257
6,592
8
1,244
14
Ge many
14,552
2,412
34
25
418
Table 2: Valid esidence pe mi s o 12 mon hs o longe on 31 Decembe 2018
Sou ce: EUROSTAT ables “Regis e ed popula ion by ci izenship” [mig _pop1c z] and “Valid esidence pe mi s”
[mig _ es alid]
10
The Duldung (“ ole a ion”) is a empo a y suspension o depo a ion g an ed unde Ge man immig a ion law (§
60a Au en hG) o indi iduals who a e legally obliged o lea e he coun y bu canno be depo ed o p ac ical o
legal easons — o example, due o missing a el documen s, medical condi ions, o ongoing educa ion o
aining. I is no a esidence pe mi , and while i p e en s immedia e emo al, i con e s only minimal igh s and
c ea es a highly p eca ious legal s a us. Indi iduals wi h a ole a ion s a us emain legally obliga ed o lea e
Ge many and may ace depo a ion once he suspending ci cums ances no longe apply. Despi e his, many
indi iduals emain in ole a ion s a us o ex ended pe iods, c ea ing a condi ion o legal unce ain y and limi ed
access o in eg a ion pa hways (Al ogge & Aue 2020; Cle on & Schwei ze 2021).
11
These s a is ics a e o be unde s ood as indica i e a he han p ecise ep esen a ions o mig an popula ions, as
inconsis encies in epo ing s anda ds be ween na ional and Eu opean egis ies pe sis – including o Gambian
na ionals in Ge many. Mo eo e , coun ies di e in how hey classi y ce ain esidence ca ego ies, pa icula ly
hose linked o asylum p ocedu es. The esidence ca ego ies p esen ed he e he e o e e lec a selec ion o s a uses
ha a e ela i ely compa able ac oss coun ies, a he han an exhaus i e lis .
40
Fi s - ime Gambian asylum applican s by EU coun y (o e all op sha es)
Repo ing coun y
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Eu opean Union (incl. UK)
11,030
11,925
15,510
12,400
4,355
3,270
2,105
I aly
8,490
7,970
8,845
8,705
1,660
140
125
Ge many
1,910
2,995
5,655
2,620
1,380
880
645
Spain
30
55
70
265
125
175
245
Table 3: Fi s - ime Gambian asylum applican s by EU Coun y (o e all op sha es)
Sou ce: EUROSTAT able „Asylum applican s by ype, ci izenship, age and sex - annual agg ega ed da a“
[mig _asyappc za]
Gambian na ionals in he EU o de ed o lea e based on lacking esidence pe mi
Repo ing coun y
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Eu opean Union (incl. UK)
1,525
1,720
2,355
6,345
5,770
3,690
2,740
I aly
270
400
495
490
540
860
615
Ge many
230
255
260
2,740
1,750
925
750
Spain
330
405
990
2,335
2,570
740
555
Table 4: Gambian na ionals in he EU o de ed o lea e based on lacking esidence pe mi
Sou ce: EUROSTAT able “Thi d coun y na ionals o de ed o lea e – annual da a ( ounded)” [mig _eio d]
In Ge many, o 15,725 Gambians egis e ed a he na ional cen al egis e o o eign na ionals
(“Auslände zen al egis e ”) on 31 Decembe 2018, mo e han wo hi ds (10,915) we e legally
egis e ed as ‘seeking p o ec ion’ (“Schu zsuchende”) (S a is isches Bundesam [Des a is]
2019). This alue had inc eased by 284% be ween 2014 and 2016, which was he second
highes inc ease among o eign na ionals seeking p o ec ion in Ge many a e Sy ia (Des a is
2017). In 2016, 89 pe cen o hese asylum decisions we e s ill pending, which d opped o 60
pe cen un il 2018. Du ing ha ime, he numbe o Gambians in Ge many wi h a ejec ed
asylum s a us inc eased om 860 in 2016 o 3,510 in 2018. This numbe kep inc easing as
asylum p ocessing sped up, a ound he same ime as he Gambian dic a o ship ended and he
new go e nmen es ablished. By 2020, he e we e 6,105 Gambians in Ge many wi h a ejec ed
asylum claim. Mos o hem, 5,720, held he ole a ion s a us, o he s we e obliged o lea e he
coun y immedia ely (Des a is 2023).
3.2 Re u n o The Gambia
The s a is ics p esen ed in he p e ious sub-sec ion indica e ha acco ding o Ge man law, a
majo i y o Gambians esiding he e in he mid-2010s we e supposed o lea e he coun y. In
he ollowing, I p esen how Ge many ope a ionalizes his policy o ien a ion, including
s a is ical backg ound as well as how e u n as a poli ical opic and adminis a i e p ocess
eme ged be ween he wo coun ies. Subsequen ly, I explain how e u n is pe cei ed in
Gambian socie y and how his pe cep ion weighs di e en ypes o e u n di e en ly. I also
explain how hese selec i e pe cep ions ela e o he e u n-de elopmen -nexus. Fo his, I d aw
41
on empi ical insigh s I gained du ing my esea ch, bu which I ha e no p e iously published
in his analy ical aming.
3.2.1 S a e-Induced Re u ns om Ge many o The Gambia
The inc eased amoun o ejec ed asylum cases coincided wi h he go e nmen al change and
he Gambian go e nmen es ablishing and managing a ‘democ acy in ansi ion’. Fo Ge man
au ho i ies, he de ac o aboli ion o Jammeh’s au ho i a ian egime legi imized he ejec ion o
p o ec ion s a us. The numbe o depo a ions om Ge many back o The Gambia s a ed o
inc ease a e he go e nmen al change, and he Ge man adminis a ion also s a ed
depo a ions o la ge g oups o indi iduals ia cha e ed ai planes (see Figu e 2 and Figu e 3).
The inc ease o depo a ions o The Gambia, especially hose execu ed h ough cha e ligh s
was p eceded by in ense nego ia ions be ween he EU and he Gambian go e nmen o how
o ced e u n o The Gambia could be implemen ed and aised. These nego ia ions became
inc easingly poli ically con es ed in The Gambia, which is he depa u e poin o a icles 5.3
and 5.4.
In addi ion, Gambian asylum seeke s a e pa o he a ge g oup o Ge many’s ‘Assis ed
Volun a y Re u n’ p og ammes REAG-GARP and he addi ional “S a hil ePlus” componen .
In his con ex , Ge man au ho i ies ha e de eloped c oss-depa men al e o s o inc ease he
e u n a es among Gambians, combining mig a ion go e nance wi h de elopmen al logic
(Al ogge & Zanke 2019; Ge lo 2018). Beyond gene al ou each, policy make s began p o-
ac i ely a ge ing Gambian asylum seeke s h ough ailo ed ini ia i es. These measu es include
‘ e u n p epa a ion p og ammes’ (“Rückkeh o be ei ende Maßnahmen”), which o e p e-
e u n oca ional o business aining designed o acili a e economic ein eg a ion a e e u n.
While hese a e no limi ed Gambians, a ious policy p ocesses e eal ha he Gambian
communi y was add essed wi h pa icula emphasis. This selec i e app oach o e u n
en o cemen aligns wi h wha Lee kes and an Hou e (2020) desc ibe as a a ge ed en o cemen
egime, cha ac e ized by s ong en o cemen capaci y combined wi h selec i e poli ical will. In
such egimes, e u n e o s inc easingly ocus on g oups whose depo abili y inc eases, as was
he case o Gambians ollowing he go e nmen al change. Wi h poli ical obs acles seemingly
3
8
310
4
13
0
5
10
15
20
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Figu e 3: Depo a ions Ge many – The Gambia
Sou ce: Deu sche Bundes ag 2016-2023b
Figu e 2: Depo a ion cha e s Ge many – The Gambia
Sou ce: Deu sche Bundes ag 2018-2023b
42
educed, hey became a mo e ‘ e u nable’ g oup and we e hus made an ope a ional p io i y
despi e hei ela i ely small numbe s.
12
Fo example, in 2017, one dis ic in Sou h Wes e n Ge many wi h a signi ican Gambian
asylum seeke popula ion launched a special “ u u e wo kshop” speci ically a ge ing Gambian
pa icipan s. The p og amme aimed o in o m hem abou he op ion o olun a y e u n while
p o iding oca ional skills aining in a eas such as me al and wood p ocessing o he ho el
indus y. The ini ia i e eme ged om local ac o ’s ecogni ion o a c i ical gap in sensi iza ion
o pos - e u n oppo uni ies – a gap hey sough o add ess, despi e ein eg a ion lying beyond
hei o mal, domes ic manda e.
Tha same yea , a ‘Gambia ask o ce’ was es ablished a he ede al s a e le el in Baden-
Wü embe g. I b ough oge he a b oad a ay o poli ical and adminis a i e ac o s, including
ep esen a i es om he Ge man In e io Minis y, he Ge man De elopmen Minis y, he
IOM, de elopmen agencies, ede al s a e agencies in ol ed in e u n adminis a ion, and
domes ic aining ins i u ions. The ask o ce aimed o align e u n- ela ed e o s wi h
de elopmen policy, unde he o e a ching goal o acili a ing mo e e u ns o The Gambia.
One o i s p ojec s en isioned a e u nee aining pa hway ha would begin in Ge many and
con inue a a Gambian oca ional ins i u e suppo ed by Ge man de elopmen coope a ion. The
aining ocused on ields conside ed ele an in he de elopmen con ex o The Gambia, such
as sola ins alla ion, welding, and ag icul u al machine y. Al hough he p ojec was ul ima ely
no implemen ed in he way ini ially designed – pa ly because o he lack in in e es ed
pa icipan s in Ge many – i illus a es how e u n and de elopmen we e inc easingly
concep ualized in an in eg a ed manne by policy and adminis a ion. I was hoped ha
syne gies could be c ea ed unde he p econdi ion ha he a ge ed Gambians would ha e o
lea e Ge many by all means.
Wi h hese dynamics, Gambian asylum seeke s in Ge many el an inc eased p essu e o e u n
olun a ily so as no o isk depo a ion. I e lec on he c ea ion and consequences o hese
p essu es in a policy b ie (Al ogge & Aue 2020) and in a icle 5.3. Howe e , no ably, AVRR
o The Gambia emained ela i ely low in numbe s, e en in compa ison o depo a ions.
O e all, he e we e 183 AVRR e u ns be ween 2017 and 2020 om Ge many o The Gambia.
Table 6 indica es ha AVRR was equen ed sligh ly mo e a e he change in go e nmen in
The Gambia and wi h ising p essu e o e u n, bu on a a he low le el. Un o una ely, no
adequa e in e na ional s a is ics a e a ailable on assis ed e u ns. Howe e , AVRR pa icipa ion
a es om Ge many gi e some indica ion, as Ge many ealizes mos AVRR e u ns in EU
compa ison (see Table 5).
12
The ollowing accoun is based on empi ical obse a ions and in o mal exchanges wi h policymake s and
p ac i ione s du ing my ieldwo k in Ge many. These in e ac ions we e no eco ded o o mally ci ed, and he
desc ip ion emains anonymized acco dingly.
43
REAG-GARP pa icipa ion
Ge many – The Gambia
2015
5
2016
12
2017
44
2018
54
2019
52
2020
33
2021
43
2022
29
Hos coun ies o assis ed e u ns,
2013 – 2023 accumula ed
Ge many
202,937
G eece
52,129
Belgium
32,261
Aus ia
28,817
Ne he lands
25,611
Res o EU coun ies + Swi ze land
50,063
Table 5: Hos coun ies o assis ed e u ns, 2013 – 2023
accumula ed
Sou ce: IOM 2024
Table 6: REAG-GARP pa icipa ion
Ge many – The Gambia
Sou ce: IOM bila e al communica ion
3.2.2 Pe cep ions o Re u n in The Gambia and he Coun y’s De elopmen Agenda
As my PhD p ojec ocuses on he impac s o s a e-induced e u n on he socie y in he coun y
o o igin/ e u n, i is impo an o si ua e hese e u ns in he b oade landscape o e u n
dynamics p esen in he coun y. Unde s anding how s a e-induced e u n ela es o o he o ms
o e u n is essen ial, as public pe cep ions o e u n shape how poli ical ac o s ame he issue
and jus i y hei posi ions o he popula ion.
As s a ed be o e, in The Gambia, he opic o mig a ion is na owly ied o a ious de elopmen -
ela ed issues, and i s in e linkages a e likewise amed and con es ed in poli ical and ci il
socie y deba es. When Ba ow and his ansi ion go e nmen came in o o ice, bo h
de elopmen and mig an e u n we e es ablished as impo an issues in na ional poli ics, which
means ha hei ela ionships we e also o be ede ined. Rega ding de elopmen , he Ba ow
go e nmen ook o e an impo e ished coun y wi h emp y s a e easu ies. Ba ow and his
ellow coali ion pa ne s p omised o lead he coun y ou o some o he mise ies ha he o me
dic a o ship had guided i in o. The su p ising win o he ansi ion go e nmen was possible
because o a popula ion ha da ed o seek change. Ba ow’s coali ion had p omised o ini ia e
his change, and expec a ions we e high in he popula ion o poli ical and economic
ad ancemen , e en hough no ye close de ined. The s eps ha he go e nmen de eloped
we e p esen ed in he Na ional De elopmen Plan (NDP). In a icle 5.1, I show in mo e de ail
how he NDP ames he ole o de elopmen in ela ion o mig a ion.
In he ollowing, I will go mo e in o de ail abou how mig an e u n has de eloped and is
unde s ood in Gambian socie y, wi h a ocus on con empo a ily ele an ypes o e u n. I will
also poin ou some o hei linkages o de elopmen conside a ions and de elopmen
coope a ion in he coun y. Wi h his, I suppo my a gumen ha he pa allel in ensi ica ion o
he wo agendas o e u n and de elopmen and hei ensued in e wining is linked o a di e se
mix o in e es s, including he Gambian go e nmen ’s de elopmen -o ien ed aming, bu also
44
how he EU unde s ands his de elopmen -mig a ion nexus and Eu opean coun ies’ in e es s
in e u ning asylum seeke s. To a lowe deg ee, in e es s o mig an s hemsel es a e also
ep esen ed in he dynamics.
In e con inen al e u n o The Gambia s a ed a e he inc eased in e con inen al mig a ions,
mainly o he UK and he US, in he 1970s. Du ing he 1980’s, “ he social igu e o he
‘semes e ’, who spends a pa o he yea in Eu ope and comes back du ing he holidays, o en
accompanied by his wi e and child en, became popula in he coas al locali ies” (Bellagamba,
Ceesay & Vi u ini 2021, 7). This c ea ed an ideal pic u e o e u n embedded in ansna ional
li elihoods leading o social and economic ad ancemen . Semes e s con inued o e u n o he
coun y and nou ish his ideal and unde s anding o success ul mig a ion and e u n since ha
ime.
Wi h inc easing i egula mig a ion, also non- olun a y e u ns s a ed. In ac , Eu opean
coun ies also depo ed Gambians du ing Jammeh’s ime in powe , pa ly e en in simila
amoun s han pos -Jammeh, as Cham and Adam show. “Media epo ing on hese e u ns,
howe e , was non-exis en ” (Cham & Adam 2023a, 643). The e was o e all li le media
co e age on mig a ion and (non)coope a ion on e u ns, while Jammeh publically explained
ha he would no coope a e wi h he EU on depo a ions, d awing on a gumen s o neo-colonial
esis ance and A ican iden i y (Cham and Adam 2023b). Thus, e en hough depo a ions ook
place, hey s ayed in isible and we e amed as an ou come o colonial dominance.
When he pos -Jammeh go e nmen ook o ice, The Gambia expe ienced an unp eceden ed
ise in e u n mig a ion, pa icula ly om No he n A ican coun ies. This sudden su ge, a
exceeding p e ious le els, was d i en by a ange o o e lapping bu dis inc dynamics,
including he a e ma h o he Libyan ci il wa and he implemen a ion o in e na ional
humani a ian mig an e u n p og ammes. These dynamics, a he independen o Gambian
domes ic poli ics, we e accompanied by he new go e nmen ’s hopes ha highly-skilled
mig an s would be e u ning o suppo he coun y’s economic and poli ical eco e y. Soon
a e , he g owing p essu e om he EU o accep ejec ed asylum seeke s u he in ensi ied
he complexi y o e u n. The con e gence o hese di e en ypes o e u n shaped how EU-
d i en e u ns we e poli icized in public discou se and he media. The ollowing p o ides a
b ie o e iew o hese di e en ypes o e u n and he con ex s in which hey eme ged.
Re u n om No he n A ican ansi coun ies
In Feb ua y 2017, he numbe o mig an s e u ning o The Gambia s a ed inc easing
d as ically wi h ‘humani a ian’ e u ns om No he n A ican coun ies, especially Libyan
coun ies. As a eac ion owa ds he secu i y c isis in No h A ica in he con ex o he Libyan
ci il wa , he EU se up a as -paced escue p ojec , he ‘EU-IOM Join Ini ia i e o Mig an
P o ec ion and Rein eg a ion’. Th ough his, he IOM anspo ed housands o mig an s back
o hei coun ies o o igin in ‘ epa ia ion ligh s’.
This ype o e u n o mig an s om he backway, o which many had no eached hei p obable
des ina ion, c ea ed by a he highes e u n numbe s o The Gambia a he ime, and ac ually
p obably wi hin his o y o he coun y. Be ween Janua y 2017 and Janua y 2020, he IOM had
45
e u ned 5,000 mig an s (IOM 2020), wi h a ound hal o hem being e u ned in 2017 alone
(Al ogge & Zanke 2019). The egional p og amme had been launched in Decembe 2016 jus
be o e he go e nmen al change in The Gambia and hus, he ollowing high-paced e u n
coincided wi h he go e nmen al change.
No only did e u n numbe s escala e apidly, bu hei managemen wi hin The Gambia also
became a poli ically sensi i e issue, as explo ed in pape 5.1. While e u ning mig an s we e in
p inciple eligible o ein eg a ion suppo om he IOM, gaps in implemen a ion le some
excluded, p omp ing hem o o ganize collec i ely and demand ecogni ion om he new
go e nmen . Ini ially, hey complained ha he new go e nmen did no welcome hem back in
a way ha hey had expec ed, leading hem o conclude ha he ’new’ Gambia would ail hem
again. Thei us a ion led some o hem o oice h ea s o iolence in o de o des oy he
newly es ablished peace in he coun y, i hei needs would emain un ecognized. This c ea ed
a si ua ion in which i seemed ha e u ning oo many oo quickly could endange he coun y’s
jus ini ia ed democ a ic ansi ion, as laid ou in a icle 5.1. Howe e , he e u nees’ demands
we e e en ually ecognized o a ce ain deg ee. Some o hem se up ci il socie y g oups o
ep esen hemsel es and claim hei demands, wi h he go e nmen and also in e na ional
poli ical ac o s such as he Ge man embassy and he IOM coope a ing wi h hem in a ious
ways. As one consequence, he IOM also adap ed hei p ojec in o de o be able o include all
‘ ansi e u nees’ in he ein eg a ion componen (Al ogge & Zanke 2019). Thus, ‘ ansi
e u nees’ became eligible o suppo ha is compa able o ha o mig an s ha e u n h ough
AVRR p og ammes om Eu opean coun ies.
Re u n om he diaspo a
Fo he Ba ow go e nmen , ano he ype o e u n was ele an when i came o o ice: he
po en ial e u n o highly-skilled mig an s om ‘ he diaspo a’. The diaspo a had played a key
ole in ous ing Jammeh, demons a ing bo h hei poli ical in luence and hei possible
willingness o con ibu e o he coun y’s u u e. As u he ou lined in a icle 5.1, bo h he
na ional go e nmen and in e na ional ac o s placed high hopes on he skilled and esou ce ul
mig an s aking he all o he dic a o as an oppo uni y, o e en call, o e u n. In June 2017,
a ew mon hs a e he new go e nmen ook o ice, he hen-Vice P esiden Fa ouma a
Tambajang decla ed: “We ha e o ebuild a na ion a e 22 yea s. This b ings collec i e
esponsibili ies. We canno a o d o ha e so many o us ab oad” (Zanke & Al ogge 2017, p.
13). Howe e , hese ini ial hopes o de elopmen -e ec i e e u n did no ansla e in o la ge -
scale e u n mo emen s, and no did he idea o skilled e u n signi ican ly shape he public
pe cep ion o e u n. Al hough eliable numbe s a e sca ce, he b oade discou se in The
Gambia and among long-se led mig an s who had es ablished hemsel es in Eu ope and he
USA la gely dismissed such policy hopes as ou o ouch wi h eali y, as I could egula ly
econ i m in in e iews and coun less in o mal con e sa ions. Many a gued ha mig an s who
had success ully es ablished hemsel es ab oad would no olun a ily e u n solely because o
he poli ical ansi ion. Acco ding o hei own pe cep ion, he e was li le u gency o e u n,
and i any e u n was conside ed a all, i was con ingen on subs an ial imp o emen s in
domes ic condi ions. These included no only a mo e a ou able business clima e bu also
52
Secondly, I could examine mig an s’ pe cep ions o empo ali ies and he impac o ‘ ime
poli ics’ du ing ha p ocess, paying heed o he shaping o ‘ ein eg a ion’ expe iences along
he bu eauc a ic imes o depo a ion and AVRR. Schola s wo king on pos - e u n ind ha “i
can ake wo yea s o mo e o es ablish sel -su iciency ollowing e u n” (Hammond 2014,
505), which is no ecognized in ein eg a ion assis ance implemen a ion, which is usually
deli e ed and moni o ed in sho e e ms. I hus de ec ed he impac o bu eauc a ic imes on
e u n expe iences as well as hei ela ions o mig an empo ali ies. I u he e lec on he ole
o ime and empo ali y o my in o man s’ expe iences, longi udinal da a collec ion and
knowledge p oduc ion in pape 5.5.
4.3 Choice o Me hods, In o man Sampling, and Rec ui men
Quali a i e and e hnog aphic esea ch a e key in esea ching he p oduc ion o he e u n
mig a ion egime, especially ega ding he need o ocus on ansna ional dimensions and he
messy ansla ion o concep s and p ac ices, he une en powe dynamics and e ol ing
con es a ions (Hess, Kaspa ek & Schwe l 2018). They help us no only unde s and he
complexi ies and li ed expe iences o mig an s and hei expe iences wi h he egime, bu also
enable he esea che o econs uc h ough in e p e i e me hods how p o essionals a di e en
geog aphical and ins i u ional si es ac as co-c ea o s in mig a ion managemen . This co-
c ea ion does no necessa ily mani es in w i en ex such as laws, policies o p og amme
desc ip ions, nei he a e hey ound in s a is ical ma e ial on mig a ion lows, i a all numbe s
a e a ailable. The e o e, I chose mainly quali a i e me hods o my case s udy.
My publica ions ely on a se o di e en ypes o empi ical da a. These se s include in e iews,
media ex s and policy documen s as well as some pa icipan obse a ion. Addi ionally, I
e ie ed seconda y s a is ical da a o con ex ualize and highligh he ele ance o he esea ch
subjec . Quali a i e in e iews s and a he hea o my s udies while o he sou ces we e mainly
used o alida e and con ex ualize in o ma ion and pe spec i es om in e iews. Because o
his, I gi e mo e de ails on my empi ical in e iew ma e ial.
I aimed a ge ing a comp ehensi e pe spec i e on e u n mig a ion in he sense ha I was keen
on explo ing which and how di e en s akeholde s impac he e u n egime. The e o e, I chose
o include ac o s in poli ics and policy implemen a ion, ci il socie y and mig an s hemsel es.
1. Poli ical and policy decision-make s and implemen a ion ac o s in Ge many and The
Gambia. These included s a e-le el ins i u ions (go e nmen , adminis a ion/ minis ies
and s a e agencies) and hei ins i u ional implemen a ion pa ne s, mos ly non-s a e
domes ic o ganiza ions and in e na ional o ganiza ions.
2. Ci il socie y ac o s and ac i is s in Ge many and The Gambia. These included
o ganized and uno ganized g oups and indi iduals ha aimed a in luencing Gambian
mig a ion and e u n and i s poli ics.
3. Mig an ac o s. These included mainly indi iduals expe iencing s a e-induced e u n
om Ge many o The Gambia, bu also mig an s in Ge many as a ge g oup o s a e-
induced e u n, and mig an s who ha e e u ned o The Gambia om o he places such
as No he n A ican coun ies, o h ough o he means han s a e-induced e u n.
53
Some ep esen a i es ell in o mo e han one o hese ca ego ies, especially ega ding ci il
socie y and mig an s, in which case I coun ed he in e iews acco ding o he ocus o he
in e iew.
Rec ui men and sampling o in e iew pa ne s ollowed di e en logics ega ding he
espec i e s akeholde g oup. Rega ding poli ical as well as ci il socie y ep esen a i es, I
ollowed a heo e ical sampling s a egy o s a ou wi h, eaching ou o ins i u ions and
indi iduals ha we e di ec ly in ol ed in e u n poli ics and managemen based on desk
esea ch and a i s ield ip and da a collec ion in The Gambia. The epo “The poli ics o
mig a ion go e nance in he Gambia” (Zanke & Al ogge 2017), which my co-au ho
F anzisca Zanke and I published as a esul o his ip, se ed as an empi ical ounda ion o
his sampling. As he i s academic publica ion on he opic, i gained wide isibili y among
ele an ac o s in bo h Ge many and The Gambia, and hus se ed as a doo opene o u he
ec ui men . Building on he us and ecogni ion gene a ed du ing ha phase, I expanded he
sample as new ins i u ions and ac o s became ele an . Building on he ecognized expe ise,
my posi ionali y as a whi e Ge man academic acili a ed access o high-le el obse a ional
se ings. On se e al occasions, I wi nessed Ge man s akeholde s speaking wi h su p ising
openness abou hei iews on Gambian mig a ion and poli ical nego ia ions in my p esence –
an access a guably enabled by a pe cei ed neu ali y (whe e e ha may ha e come om).
Among mig an in o man s, my main a en ion lay on in e locu o s e u ning om Ge many
(and no elsewhe e in No h A ica o Eu ope) o The Gambia a e he change in go e nmen
in 2017 h ough he pa icipa ion in AVRR o by depo a ion. Beyond his selec ion c i e ion, I
aimed a co e ing a maximum di e si ied spec um o expe iences in a ious dimensions,
especially ega ding he ‘exposu e’ o e u n and ein eg a ion suppo . The e o e, I chose a
ec ui men s a egy among a maximum ange o ac o s in bo h Ge many and The Gambia ha
migh be able o connec me o in e iew pa ne s. These included p esen mig an s, ci il socie y
in Ge many in close con ac wi h Gambian asylum seeke s and ci il socie y in The Gambia, as
well as s a e and non-s a e ins i u ions ha a e in ol ed in e u n and ein eg a ion counselling
and acili a ion o asylum seeke s. The sample was going o be a he homogeneous wi h
ega d o socio-demog aphic and biog aphic cha ac e is ics o he mig an s due o he make-up
o Gambian mig an s acing e u n p essu e in Ge many. This will become mo e isible in he
sample desc ip ion u he below.
Rec ui men o mig an in o man s posed a pa icula challenge due o he low numbe o
AVRR cases and he high deg ee o social isola ion and shame expe ienced by depo ed
indi iduals. A e ini ial unsuccess ul a emp s o iden i y AVRR cases in Ge many p io o
e u n, I shi ed my s a egy o con ac ing indi iduals du ing a ield s ay in The Gambia, hus
a e hei e u n. This adjus men came wi h bo h ad an ages and limi a ions. Engaging
Gambian asylum seeke s on he opics o e u n is di icul om he ou se , as e u n is a aboo
subjec , and many a oid discussing hei plans wi h ou side s. Had hey spoken wi h me be o e
hei e u n, hey migh ha e been e en mo e likely o pe cei e me as pa o he ein eg a ion
in as uc u e han hey we e a e e u ning. In The Gambia, I could s ill be pe cei ed in his
way, hough mo e as a compassiona e Ge man coun e pa (see also a icle 5.5). A key
54
disad an age o pos - e u n ec ui men , howe e , was ha my pa icipan s had o econs uc
hei p e- e u n decisions, expec a ions and p epa a ions e ospec i ely. Such e ospec i e
na a i es a e o en shaped by wha happened a e wa d, which can obscu e he o iginal
easoning o emo ional landscape ha in o med ea lie decisions (c . Mixed Mig a ion Cen e
and Uni e si y o Edinbu gh 2022; Neale 2016; T ąbka, Pus ułka & Bell 2024). This limi a ion
was pa icula ly p onounced in he analysis o a icle 5.2, whe e I examined pa icipan s’
subjec i e pe cep ions, including abou he in/ olun a iness o hei e u n, a dimension ha
he e o e equi ed especially ca e ul in e p e a ion. O e he ex ended pe iod o da a collec ion,
I was e en ually able o ec ui wo cases in which mig an s we e s ill planning hei AVRR
e u n, in e iewing hem be o e and a e hei e u ns. These cases we e pa icula ly aluable
in helping me e lec on he po en ial biases in o he in e iews.
A e all, 14 cases o he indi iduals I conside ed in pape 5.2 had been ec ui ed h ough
ne wo ks in Ge many: six cases h ough ci il socie y (ne wo k o asylum seeke suppo ,
including h ee cases o depo a ion and AVRR each), i e AVRR cases h ough Ge man s a e
adminis a i e ac o s (such as ein eg a ion ad iso s), h ee u he AVRR cases h ough o he
Ge man ins i u ional ac o s in ol ed in AVRR p o ision, one case (depo a ion) h ough his
mig an iend, and one case (AVRR) h ough ano he esea che ’s e e al. Th ough
ne wo king in The Gambia, I ec ui ed u he six cases ha we e included in he s udy: i e o
hem h ough ins i u ions ha a e p o essionally in ol ed in ein eg a ion assis ance ( h ee
AVRR and wo depo a ion cases), and one h ough a Gambian esea che ’s e e al
(depo a ion). I did no include some u he mig an in e iew pa ne s ec ui ed in bo h
Ge many and The Gambia in he sys ema ic analysis, because o example hey did no ha e
immedia e e u n ambi ions, hei e u n ambi ions did no ma e ialize a e all, o in he case
o e u ned mig an s, hey did o he wise no i in o my sample.
4.4 Da a and Me hods
In he ollowing, I p esen he da a I collec ed in Ge many and The Gambia, which a e lis ed in
mo e de ail in he a achmen . The pape s ela e o di e en deg ees on hese ma e ials, which
is desc ibed mo e in de ail in each pape ’s me hodological sec ion.
4.4.1 In e iew Da a
In e iews ep esen he empi ical backbone o my hesis. O e all, I conduc ed a ound 115
in e iews, eaching om semi-s uc u ed in e iews o e e hnog aphic in e iews o
backg ound in e iews. 39 o hese in e iews we e ollow-up in e iews wi h he same
in o man s, adhe ing o my in e es in change p ocesses. These included in o man s om all
h ee s akeholde g oups: mig an s, poli ical s akeholde s and ci il socie y ac o s. Some o he
in e iews I held wi h mo e han one pe son, eaching om wo o i e indi iduals. Conside ing
his as well as he ollow-up in e iews, a ound 90 indi iduals ook pa in in e iews wi h me.
In Ge many, I conduc ed o e all 28 in e iews and ca ied ou pa icipan obse a ions a ou
e en s h oughou he yea s o 2017 o 2024. Mos o he in e iewed indi iduals we e based in
Ge many, wi h he excep ion o a ew elephone in e iews wi h e u ned/ e u ned and e-
emig a ed indi iduals ha could no be eached in The Gambia. O e all, a ound en in e iews
55
we e held wi h Gambian mig an s based in Ge many, ocusing on hei pe spec i es on e u n.
Two o hose ac ually e u ned o The Gambia and we e added o he se o compa a i e da a
analysis. A ound nine in e iews in Ge many we e held wi h ep esen a i es o ins i u ions ha
we e in ol ed in e u n poli ics, adminis a ion and managemen . A ound en o he in e iews
we e conduc ed among ci il socie y ep esen a i es, including mig an ac i is s, mig an
o ganisa ions and o ganisa ions suppo ing Gambian asylum seeke s in Ge many. In addi ion
o he in e iews, I kep con ac ia social media wi h some o he e u ned mig an s I
accompanied o e a longi udinal ime (see a icle 5.5) while being in Ge many.
Da a collec ion in The Gambia ook place h oughou six ield s ays o an o e all ime o almos
six mon hs, wi h a majo h ee-mon h ield esea ch in 2019, and sho e ield ips in 2017 ( wo
weeks), 2018 (one week), 2020 ( wo weeks), 2021 ( h ee weeks), and 2023 ( h ee weeks).
Du ing my s ays in The Gambia, I ca ied ou o e all 87 in e iews. These include a ound 24
in e iews among ep esen a i es o ins i u ions ha we e ela ed o he poli ics, adminis a ion
o managemen o mig a ion, e u n and ein eg a ion in one way o ano he , such as
ep esen a i es o Gambian s a e ins i u ions (go e nmen , adminis a ion, managemen ), and
hose o Ge man s a e and EU- ela ed ins i u ions based in The Gambia. Twel e in e iews
we e held among ci il socie y ep esen a i es in The Gambia, including ci il socie y
o ganisa ions, jou nalis s as well as ac i is s, wi h his di e en ia ion being somewha luen .
A ound 51 in e iews in The Gambia we e held wi h mig an s. Mos o hese we e
con e sa ions wi h one indi idual, wi h a ew excep ions o ocus g oup discussions wi h wo
o 15 indi iduals ha we e somehow engaged oge he be o e as ci il socie y ac o s and join ly
p esen ed hei pe spec i es o me. The mig an in e iews in The Gambia u he include 29
second- and hi d- ime ollow-up in e iews which I conduc ed wi h 22 e u ned mig an s o
he longi udinal s udy o s a e-induced e u n om Ge many (see a icle 5.2). In addi ion o he
lis ed in e iews, I held uncoun able side con e sa ions abou mig a ion and e u n as well as
poli ical de elopmen s in he coun y wi h Gambian ci izens. They had, o example, mig a ed
and e u ned hemsel es, had amily membe s o iends li ing ab oad, o o he wise had
some hing o say abou he issues a s ake. They likewise in o med my pe spec i es, despi e no
sys ema ic analysis. Table 7 sums up all conduc ed in e iews ha in o med my analyses.
Numbe o in e iews along s akeholde g oups in Ge many and The Gambia
S akeholde g oup
In e iews
.. o which in Ge many
.. o which in he Gambia
Poli ics and managemen
33
9
24
ci il socie y
22
10
12
mig an s
61
10
51
o e all
115
28
88
Table 7: Numbe o in e iews along s akeholde g oups in Ge many and The Gambia
56
The conduc ed in e iews ollowed semi-s uc u ed ques ion guides o he speci ic a ge
g oups. The mig an in e iew ques ion guides (see Appendix B) we e de eloped along
heo e ical conside a ions and echniques p oposed by Jan K use (2014), aiming o a
econs uc i e-he meneu ic analysis.
The ques ion guides o in e iews wi h p o essionals ollowed a na owe app oach and we e
adap ed o he espec i e ins i u ion’s unc ion as well as he pu pose o he in e iew a he
ime. I unde s and p o essionals wo king in ins i u ions as expe s ha ca y speci ic expe
knowledge due o he unc ion hey ul il wi hin he ins i u ion hey wo k o and he in e es s
ha hese ins i u ions hold. As indi iduals, hey con ain a socially and p o essionally asc ibed
ole ha ep esen s he ins i u ion, usually based on speci ic o mal quali ica ion (Meuse &
Nagel 1991). Thei knowledge is shaped by hei p o essional expe iences bu also by hei
pe sonal posi ion in a pa icula cul u al con ex , along which hey make meaning beyond an
ins i u ion’s o mal posi ions. Fo example, Gambian p ac i ione s in he ield o AVRR
p o ision in The Gambia con ex ualize hei p o essional knowledge di e en ly han
p ac i ione s in Ge many, who in e ela e hei expe ise mo e wi h hei cul u al knowledge o
mig a ion and e u n embedded in Ge many. In addi ion o ins i u ional knowledge, a ious
expe s also e eal p ac ice knowledge o b oade egime unc ions, o example how he
e e encing o mig an s be ween di e en se ice-p o ide s wo ks. Thei in e iews hus
con ained in o ma ion on and opinions abou he p ac ices and ac o s o mig a ion managemen
as pe cei ed by he espec i e indi idual, changes in policy and mig a ion dynamics, as well as
hei meaning-making a ound hese issues.
Mos o he cha ac e is ics o ‘expe in e iews’ also b oadly accoun o in e iews held
among ci il socie y ep esen a i es. As indi iduals who engage in ci il socie y o ganisa ions
o wi h he goal o ep esen a ce ain social unc ion as indi idual, hey can be conside ed as
‘expe s’ in he de elopmen o he conce ned ield o ac ion. Depending on he in o man ’s
ole, he ques ion guides ocused on he e ol emen o ce ain ac i ism, hei demands and
ac i i ies o he ins i u ion o indi idual, as well as hei in e ac ions wi h and opinions abou
o he ac o s wi hin he mig a ion egime.
The ques ion guides de eloped o in e iews wi h mig an s we e b oade and mo e ex ensi e.
They included biog aphical dimensions, a ious aspec s on hei p e-mig a o y li e, mig a ion
decision, hei li e in Ge many and expe iences wi h ins i u ions, hei engagemen wi h he
ques ion o e u n and – in cases o AVRR – e u n p epa a ion, hei physical e u n expe ience
and las ly hei pos - e u n li e. Addi ionally, hey co e ed ques ions on opinions abou poli ical
ins i u ions and po en ial poli ical engagemen p io , du ing and a e mig a ing.
I adap ed he in e iews wi h mig an s in hei deg ee o openness and closeness depending on
how he indi idual eac ed o my ques ioning. In some cases, he in e iewee o ien ed himsel
closely along he guiding ques ions, in o he cases I had o apply mo e open s imuli in o de o
c ea e a com o able and us -enhancing a mosphe e. The in o ma ion I was seeking in
na a ions was some imes gi en in con e sa ions ha las ed se e al hou s and included ea ing
o spending ime oge he , which ei he happened a e o ins ead o a mo e o mal, ime-
cons ained in e iew. Du ing hese sequences, some in e locu o s sha ed addi ional insigh s
57
ha hey had no e ealed in he mo e o mal pa o migh likely no ha e e ealed i I had
con on ed hem wi h a limi ed ime slo . These expe iences highligh he s eng hs o
e hnog aphic in e iewing when engaging wi h mig an s.
In o de o cap u e ajec o ies o e ime, di e en me hods may be used besides in e iews,
such as mapping o con inuous e hnog aphic obse a ion. Howe e , in my case, epea ed in-
dep h in e iews p o e as bes o ealize, o a ious easons on some o which I e lec in a icle
5.5. Fo he second and hi d ollow-up in e iews, ques ion guides we e adap ed o he speci ic
case and he in o ma ion I had ecei ed du ing he i s in e iew. The mig an in e iews I used
o he pos - e u n ajec o y analysis (a icle 5.2) we e analysed wi h suppo o MaxQDA
along a ime-sensi i e deduc i e code sys em cap u ing di e en aspec s de i ed om
ein eg a ion esea ch as well as addi ional social and poli ical dimensions. I u he analysed
hem along a sys ema ized amewo k which I u he desc ibe in he a icle.
4.4.2 Pa icipan Obse a ion
Pa icipan obse a ions in Ge many ook place a mee ings and wo kshops wi hin he ield o
e u n poli ics and managemen . They we e mainly supposed o gi e oppo uni y o in o mal
con e sa ion, ne wo king and backg ound e hnog aphic imp essions. The e o e, I did no ake
a sys ema ic app oach in en e ing he ield o obse a ions, bu ook oppo uni ies o pa icipa e
when hey a ose, mainly h ough in i a ion by he ini ia o s. Table 8 summa izes he amoun o
sys ema ic obse a ions I conduc ed.
Numbe o obse a ions along s akeholde g oups in Ge many and The Gambia
S akeholde g oup
Obse a ions
.. o which in Ge many
.. o which in he Gambia
Poli ics, adminis a ion
5
4
1
ci il socie y, mig an s
2
-
2
Table 8: Numbe o obse a ions along s akeholde g oups in Ge many and The Gambia
The obse a ions among poli ical and managemen s akeholde s in bo h coun ies we e
conduc ed a s a egic planning mee ings and wo kshops o e u n and ein eg a ion
p o essionals, while he ones among ci il socie y we e conduc ed among mee ings o e u ned
mig an g oups. Among e u ned mig an indi iduals, I made e hnog aphic obse a ions when
in e iewing hem, o example a hei homes o when hey showed me hei businesses, which
a e no lis ed in he able because hey a e di icul o quan i y.
4.4.3 Documen s and Social Media
The in e iew ma e ial was u he complemen ed wi h documen analysis. The sou ces include
ex s published by poli ical ins i u ions and in e na ional o ganiza ions, in public media,
pa icula ly newspape s, and social media, pa icula ly Facebook. The selec ion o ex was bo h
b oad and highly selec i e. I collec ed mos a icles published in Ge man newspape s on
Gambian mig an s, and poli ical ac o s posi ioning hemsel es owa ds Gambian mig a ion and
depic ions o backway mig a ion and e u n issues in majo Gambian newspape s and online
58
ou le s. I also included some ma e ial ha ac i is s pos ed on Facebook as one o hei mos
impo an communica ion channels.
While he empi ical basis o my disse a ion a e in e iews, documen and media analysis
ul illed he pu pose o da a iangula ion whe e his was deemed necessa y o p o e
pa icula ly in e es ing o he speci ic ques ion I was ollowing. Fo example, i was necessa y
o alida e ce ain in o ma ion o econs uc he imeline o key e en s, o example he
imeline o he mo a o ium in compa ison o depo a ions, o he poli ical dynamics hese
igge ed in social media. I o e ed pa icula ly in e es ing insigh s when I could c i ically
con as ce ain na a i es and in e p e a ions o p ac ices and e en s om in e iews, o
example ega ding mig an s’ pe cep ions o access o ce ain ein eg a ion se ices, o ace
con e gences and di e gences o ac i is s’ (sel -) ep esen a ion in in e iews e sus he media.
In o he wo ds, media ex and policy documen s e ealed di e en pe spec i es on he same
issue. Newspape a icles ga e upda es abou ce ain de elopmen s ha we e impo an o my
case, bu mo e impo an ly also e ealed which ac o s communica e how and wha o he
add essed public. Tex ma e ial p oduced by ins i u ions – including s a e ins i u ions bu also
ci il socie y o ganiza ions – in which hey display issues o e u n and ein eg a ion
managemen (such as pamphle s o pos e s by he IOM) o poli ical s a egies a ound e u n and
de elopmen (such as he Gambian go e nmen ’s Na ional De elopmen Plan (Republic o The
Gambia, 2018) e eal hei unde s anding o he depic ed issues and also e eal which kind o
in o ma ion hey see necessa y o communica e ia ex and o whom. Tex documen s we e
analysed selec i ely and acco ding o he needs o my analyses.
In sum, my esea ch employed a longi udinal, mul i-si ed case s udy app oach g ounded in
quali a i e and in e p e i e me hodologies o explo e he eme gence and unc ioning o he
e u n egime be ween Ge many and The Gambia. The ex ended case s udy design allowed o
i e a i e adap a ion o a dynamically e ol ing esea ch ield and cap u ed bo h s uc u al
p ocesses and he li ed expe iences o di e se ac o s embedded wi hin i . D awing on
in e iews, obse a ions and media analyses ac oss h ee di e en s akeholde g oups –
mig an s, poli ical-adminis a i e and ci il socie y ac o s – o e ed he di e en ye in e sec ing
oles in shaping he e u n egime. The empo ally sensi i e app oach p o ed c ucial o acing
changes in mig a ion go e nance and ac i ism as well as he ajec o ies and shi ing
pe cep ions o e u n mig an s. My posi ion as a whi e Ge man esea che demanded o a
ho ough e lec ion o he powe -imbalances be ween mysel and my mig an s udy
pa icipan s. I also a o ded pa icula access o ins i u ional s akeholde s which u he
in o med he e hnog aphic insigh s o he s udy. Ul ima ely, he esea ch design e lec s he
complexi ies and con es a ions o he e u n egime i sel , and he need o quali a i e esea ch
o emain a en i e o empo ali ies as well as posi ionali ies and he co-p oduc ion o
knowledge.
59
5 SUMMARY OF PUBLICATIONS
In he ollowing sec ion, I p esen in g ea e dep h he i e academic pape s h ough which I
con ibu e o he schola ly deba es ou lined in Sec ion 2. I explain how hese con ibu ions ela e
o he esea ch ques ions and me hodological app oach de eloped abo e and highligh hei
concep ual dis inc ions and o e laps. These i e pape s consis o ou pee - e iewed jou nal
a icles (pape s 5.1 o 5.4) and one book chap e in an edi ed olume on me hodologies in
depo a ion s udies (pape 5.5). The wo ea lies pape s (pape s 5.1 and 5.4) a e co-au ho ed
wi h F anzisca Zanke , wi h whom I conduc ed join esea ch on The Gambia p io o o mally
beginning my PhD p ojec , as desc ibed in Sub-sec ion 4.3. While pa o he empi ical ma e ial
was collec ed collabo a i ely, bo h pape s ely on addi ional da a I ga he ed du ing my PhD
ieldwo k (2018, 2019) and on concep ual e lec ions de eloped in discussion wi h F anzisca.
O e all, he i e pape s examine he agencies o ou di e en mig an g oups a di e en imes
and in di e en oles. Pape 5.1 compa es he poli ical in luence o ansi e u n and diaspo a
e u n a an ea ly s age o The Gambia’s poli ical ansi ion; pape 5.2 analyses pos - e u n
expe iences o mig an s a e s a e-induced e u n om Ge many; and pape 5.4 ocuses on he
poli ical ele ance o ansna ional an i-depo a ion ac i ism in ol ing asylum seeke s in
Ge many. Pape 5.3 shi s he pe spec i e o he s a e and in e na ional le els o e u n poli ics,
while pape 5.5 e lec s on me hodological and e hical aspec s o knowledge p oduc ion on
pos - e u n expe iences. An o e iew o he i e pape s is p esen ed in Table 9 a he end o
his sec ion. Wha ollows a e ex ended summa ies o hese ex s.
5.1 The Poli ical In luence o Re u n: F om Diaspo a o Libyan T ansi Re u nees
In his s udy, my co-au ho F anzisca Zanke and I examine he poli ical in luence o mig an
e u n o The Gambia soon a e he go e nmen al change om Jammeh’s dic a o ship o
Ba ow’s ansi ional go e nmen . Ou cen al objec i e was o analyse he possibili ies o
poli ical in luence o wo di e en g oups o e u nees ha became poli ically ac i e a ha
ime: highly skilled diaspo a e u nees and low-skilled e u nees om Libyan ansi zones. We
a gue ha p e ious esea ch insu icien ly cap u es po en ial a enues o poli ical in luence o
e u nees because i ocuses ei he on he depo a ion policies o hos coun ies o he de elopmen
impac o highly skilled diaspo a e u nees. In ou con ibu ion, we show ha di e en kinds o
e u nees, ega dless o hei social s a us o a quali ica ion ha would p esiden hem o
poli ical in ol emen , can asse poli ical claims and hus exe poli ical in luence.
To achie e ou objec i es, we conduc ed a quali a i e analysis o 36 semi-s uc u ed in e iews
wi h a ious ac o s in he Gambian mig a ion con ex , including policymake s, poli icians, ci il
socie y ac i is s, diaspo a leade s, and academic expe s. We also analysed ex ma e ial p oduced
by hese ac o s, especially a ound he poli ical sel -pe cep ion o he diaspo a s akeholde s
conside ed in he pape . The da a analysed o his a icle is based on wo ield ips. In May/June
2017, F anzisca Zanke and I collec ed da a o a pilo s udy (Zanke & Al ogge 2017) which we
analysed o he a icle, pa icula ly in ela ion o he ole o ansi e u nees. This was
complemen ed by ieldwo k I conduc ed in Feb ua y 2018, du ing which I ga he ed addi ional
ma e ial on he diaspo a in ol emen . This aspec had become isible only a e ou join ip.
60
Among he in e iews om May/June 2017 was a ocus g oup discussion wi h 15 young men
who had e u ned om Libya unde he IOM’s ‘Volun a y Humani a ian Re u n om Libya’
p og amme. The de elopmen o ideas ollowed an i e a i e p ocess be ween he wo au ho s.
The p omising pe spec i e o he compa a i e app oach we chose in he a icle came o ligh
h ough he ieldwo k and in e iews I conduc ed in 2018. The p eceding da a analysis and
d a ing o he ex was done in a collabo a i e manne be ween my co-au ho and me.
Ou esul s show ha bo h highly skilled diaspo a e u nees and low-skilled e u nees om
Libya managed o exe poli ical in luence in he new poli ical con ex o Gambia, a aining o
he di e ing in e es s be ween he wo mig an g oups. We engage wi h he di e ing modes o
access o he poli ical sphe e ha he wo mig an g oups ca ed ou . Highly skilled diaspo a
e u nees we e explici ly in i ed by he go e nmen o con ibu e o he poli ical and economic
ans o ma ion o he coun y. They ecei ed a di ec poli ical in luence, which was also
mani es ed in hei in ol emen in de eloping he Na ional De elopmen Plan, he
es ablishmen o a Think Tank which was supposed o ge quali ied mig an s in ol ed in
na ional policy-making, and he c ea ion o a dedica ed Diaspo a Di ec o a e (GDD). In
con as , low-skilled e u nees om Libya we e p ima ily pe cei ed as ecipien s o s a e
suppo , such as ein eg a ion p og ammes. F us a ed by he lack o access o hese p og ammes
and a lack o poli ical ep esen a ion, he e u nees o ganized hemsel es in o he sel -
ep esen a ion g oups ‘You h Agains I egula Mig a ion’ (YAIM) and ‘Gambian Re u nees
om he Backway’. Th ough collec i e mobiliza ion and, in some cases, h ea s o iolence, hey
exe ed indi ec poli ical in luence. This was e iden in he e oac i e adap a ion o IOM
p og ammes, he es ablishmen o e u nee-speci ic ac i i ies unde he You h Empowe men
P ojec (YEP), and he ecogni ion o hei ole in he Na ional De elopmen Plan.
As a consequence o ou indings, we sugges ha he dis inc ion be ween ‘high-skilled’/ egula
mig an and ‘low-skilled’/i egula mig an , which is o en cen al in he ques ion which
mig an s con ibu e o he poli ical de elopmen in hei coun ies o o igin, does no p ope ly
ep esen mig an s’ he e ogeneous poli ical agencies. Howe e , i has poli ical implica ions, as
i leads o di e en expec a ions owa ds hese g oups by poli ical s akeholde s and policy
measu es applied o hem. We he e o e ad oca e o a mo e di e en ia ed iew o e u nees, a
g ea e conside a ion o hei he e ogeneous pe spec i es and a enues o poli ical agency in
mig a ion and de elopmen policy. We also a gue ha he e en ual ep esen a ion o he
poli ical claims o he e u nees om ansi coun ies was ins umen al o he ansi ion
go e nmen o a ain o i s he o ic o democ a ic ansi ion and e en con ibu ed o keeping
social s abili y du ing he ola ile imes in which meanings a ound democ a iza ion and ci izen
esponsi eness had jus s a ed o be nego ia ed.
5.2 Income P ospec T ajec o ies a e S a e-Induced Re u n om Ge many o The
Gambia: AVRR as ‘Slow Depo a ion’
The a icle compa es he income p ospec s o e u ned mig an s a e depo a ion and a e
pa icipa ing in AVRR. The s udy is based on 48 in e iews conduc ed wi h 20 mig an s who
e u ned om Ge many o The Gambia be ween 2018 and 2019. O hese, wel e mig an s
pa icipa ed in an AVRR p og amme and eigh we e depo ed. O e all, I show ha while bo h
61
ypes o e u n gene a e di e en empo al dynamics, hey bo h end o lead o simila ly
challenging economic ajec o ies ha become di icul o dis inguish o e ime. While AVRR
o en en ails a disillusionmen p ocess abou he inadequacy o pos - e u n hopes, depo a ion,
agains he backd op o inhumane depo a ion p ac ice and subsequen despai , can likewise
lead o eo ien a ion and he pa icipa ion in ein eg a ion p og ammes. Conside ing he o e all
low chances o es ablishing posi i e income p ospec s a e any s a e-induced e u n, AVRR
esembles a ‘slow depo a ion’. In o de o show hese ajec o ies, I applied a longi udinal
quali a i e e hnog aphic in e iew design.
In he li e a u e e iew, I i s ca e ou he di e ences be ween depo a ion and AVRR
concep s, c ys allizing hei majo di e en ia ion poin s o a highe le el o agency wi h ega ds
o decision-making and p epa a ion in AVRR on he one hand, and g an ed ein eg a ion
assis ance on he o he . AVRR, by de ini ion, includes assis ance se ices unded and o ganized
by he coun y o o igin and i s implemen ing pa ne s, s e ching om p e- o pos - e u n ime
spaces. Fo depo ing s a es, o e ing his assis ance o AVRR pa icipan s while denying i o
depo ed indi iduals is conside ed key o he e u n incen i isa ion o wo k.
I hen go on o show ha he dis inc ion along hese wo ca ego ies becomes o en blu ed in
p ac ice, which had al eady led c i ical schola s o cha ac e ize AVRR as ‘so depo a ion’ in
he spa io- empo al con ex o he des ina ion coun y be o e e u ning. Th ough ‘so powe ’,
depo ing s a es en o ce hei in e es s in e u ning depo able indi iduals by con incing
mig an s o pa icipa e in AVRR. Howe e , I a gue ha pos - e u n s udies ha e so a no
de eloped me hodologies ha allow o ollow h ough wi h his cha ac e iza ion in he ull
spa io- empo al dimension o e u n egimes, including he space and ime a e e u n, based
on he epis emological pa h dependencies in pos - e u n s udies desc ibed in 2.4.
In he analy ical sec ion o he a icle, I compa a i ely examine he income p ospec s o
mig an s based on ou g oups o agency expe iences: depo a ion wi hou ein eg a ion
assis ance, depo a ion wi h ein eg a ion assis ance, AVRR wi h basic ein eg a ion assis ance,
and AVRR wi h ex ended ein eg a ion assis ance. I ind ha he spec um be ween a he
sa is ying and de e io a ing income p ospec s is ound among all ou g oups. The spec um
among depo a ion eaches om some depo ed mig an s ha we e among he mos con en in
he sample ega ding hei income p ospec s, while o he s aced con inuous downwa d
dynamics. A he same ime, nume ous AVRR pa icipan s also ound hemsel es in si ua ions
o p o ac ed challenging o de as a ed income p ospec s. Depo a ion is, he e o e, no a
ca ego ically la ge obs acle o posi i e income p ospec de elopmen a e e u n han AVRR.
I also po ay he di e ing empo al dynamics o expec a ions and agency ha accompany
AVRR and depo a ion. Du ing and closely a e e u n, he di e ences be ween he wo a e
dis inc i ely s ong. The shock, ange , and con usion a e depo a ion e oke emo ional dis ess
and impulsi e denial owa ds he new si ua ion. Meanwhile, wi h AVRR, mig an s ha e a
con en men -based o ien a ion o e unneling income p ospec s a he place o e u n. They
connec a elie abou being back o he agency in hei e u n decision-making. Acco dingly,
hey a i e wi h highe sel -es eem and expec a ions abou hei abili ies o con inue hei
jou neys in ha posi i e ein. A e he ha sh disempowe ing expe ience o depo a ion,
68
6 KEY INSIGHTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO SCHOLARLY DEBATES
In my disse a ion, I asked how mig an s de elop and na iga e hei socio-poli ical agency in
he ansna ional mig a ion egime in he ace o he h ea o s a e-induced e u n. To answe
his o e a ching ques ion, I examined (1) which o ms o mig an agency owa ds egime ac o s
eme ge among mig an s, AVRR e u nees and depo ees, (2) how hey posi ion hemsel es
owa ds in ol ed poli ical ac o s, concep s and p ac ices, and (3) how hei posi ionings
in luence de elopmen s in he o igin coun y. Wi h hese h ee ques ions, I del e in o he spa io-
empo al un olding o he egime along he mig a ion cycle o he (po en ially) e u ning
mig an s. I u he add ess a ious o ms o agency among mig an s wi h di e ing social
condi ions and a di e en poin s o hei mig a o y endea ou . Las ly, I s udied b oade e ec s
o mig an agency o he coun y o o igin/ e u n. My disse a ion answe s hese ques ions and
makes b oade con ibu ions o he li e a u e in h ee majo ields, which I p esen in he
ollowing.
Fi s , I link mig an agency o he o ma ion o a ansna ional e u n egime (6.1). He e, I ela e
o my indings on mig an agency which I discussed in h ee o my disse a ion a icles,
highligh ing how mig an s a di e en s ages o hei mig a o y expe ience ha e de eloped
agency in di e en kinds o ways owa ds poli ical e u n egime ac o s, and how hei di e en
social posi ions enabled hem o do so (o no ). Pape 5.1 con as s he poli ical in luence o he
egula ized diaspo a e sus ansi e u nees in he ea ly phase o he go e nmen al ansi ion.
Pape 5.2 dwells on how he expe iences o mig an s a e s a e-induced e u n challenge policy
assump ions as well as he concep o ein eg a ion, unmasking AVRR as ‘slow depo a ion’.
Pape 5.3 discusses he poli ical impac o p esen mig an s wi h unsecu e esidence s a us on
he e u n poli ics o hei coun y o o igin/ e u n.
Second, I ela e my wo k o deba es abou poli ical de elopmen and democ a iza ion (6.2). In
his ega d, pape 5.4 examines how he go e nmen o an o igin/ e u n coun y is pushed o
be e adhe e o he in e es s o mig an s ab oad in e u n poli ics in an unequal in e na ional
se ing, whe e mo e powe ul, mo e de eloped des ina ion s a es p io i ize hei depo a ion
in e es s agains less powe ul coun ies o o igin/ e u n in ola ile de elopmen dynamics. Bu
he in luence o mig an agency goes beyond he ield o e u n poli ics pe se and also
con ibu es o he shaping o s a e-socie y ela ions in a dynamic con ex o democ a iza ion,
which I ouch upon in pape s 5.2 and 5.3.
Las ly, in Sub-sec ion 6.3, I explain how my empo al me hodology helps coun e esea ch
biases in ein eg a ion s udies and con ibu es o a mo e c i ical, powe -sensi i e unde s anding
o e u n expe iences. While hese e lec ions a e mainly oo ed in he me hodological
discussions o pape 5.5, hey build closely on he empi ical insigh s om pape 5.2 and he
obse a ion o ‘slow depo a ion’. In his sub-sec ion, I also sugges mo e comp ehensi e u u e
esea ch on ‘ ime poli ics’ in he e u n egime.
69
6.1 The Re u n Regime and Mig an Agency
In my esea ch, I obse ed he o ma ion o a e u n egime ha is analy ically dis inguishable
om bo h he b oade mig a ion egime and mo e na owly de ined depo a ion egimes. This
concep ual di e en ia ion has impo an implica ions o u u e esea ch on e u n. By
analy ically dis inguishing e u n egimes om b oade mig a ions o na owe depo a ion
egimes, I o e a new concep ual lens o unde s anding e u n as a poli ically and socially
con es ed p ocess embedded in a ansna ional ield. This econcep ualiza ion enables mo e
in es iga ion o how e u n is nego ia ed, shaped and enac ed in coun ies o o igin/ e u n and
ac o s based he e, which I will u he explain in he ollowing.
To s a ou wi h, I applied he egime pe spec i e as a me hodological ool o iden i y ac o s
and p ocesses o s uc u a ion h ough ac ion. The ac ha he in ol ed ac o s a e loca ed in
di e en coun ies cha ac e ized his egime as ansna ional. While mig a ion egimes end o
be de ined beyond a me e na ional scale (Rass & Wol 2018), he p oduc ion o mig a ion
egimes is o en ocused on he mo e powe ul ins i u ional ac o s o he des ina ion con ex ,
some imes also conside ing hei collabo a ion pa ne s in hi d coun ies, and some imes hei
in e ac ion wi h mig an ac o s, bu mos ly hose esiding in he des ina ion con ex . In analyses
o he depo a ion egime, his ocus on des ina ion con ex s is p esen as well. Wi h his, he
impo an ques ion emains how o include he ansna ional enac men o he mig a ion egime,
which is pa icula ly necessa y when i comes o e u n.
I p opose ha , alongside exis ing analyses ocused on mig a ion and depo a ion egimes –
ypically om a des ina ion-coun y pe spec i e – we need o de elop he concep o ‘ e u n
egimes’ wi h a lens ha o eg ounds he pos - e u n con ex , emphasizing i s ins i u ional,
social and discu si e embeddedness in he coun y o o igin/ e u n. Re u n egimes o e a mo e
holis ic iew on e u n bo h as a p ocess and a poli ical issue, accoun ing o hei social
embeddedness, allowing us o de ec he ways in which s a e-induced e u n is si ua ed wi hin
b oade social and poli ical s uc u es and deba es in he e u n con ex . While analyses o
depo a ion egimes also examine he p oduc ion o AVRR, hey end o concen a e on he
mechanisms leading up o e u n, o wha igge s depo a ion in a global depo a ion egime
(Lindbe g & Khos a i 2021). Thus, hey emain cen ed on he spa ial and ins i u ional logics
o des ina ion coun ies and ac o s. In con as , e u n is mainly enac ed in he spa io- empo al
con ex o he coun y o o igin/ e u n, shaped by poli ical nego ia ions and coope a ion,
mig an expe iences and hei p esence in hei communi ies. We he e o e need mo e esea ch
ha o eg ounds he pos - e u n con ex wi hin egime pe spec i es.
Such an app oach can en ich bo h mo e na owly o ien ed analyses o e u n implemen a ion
as well as b oade inqui ies in o he social embeddedness o e u n, which I will b ie ly explain.
Wi h ega ds o he o me , s a e-induced e u n gene a es ins i u ional dynamics in he coun y
o o igin/ e u n, leading o changes in wha Rass and Wol iden i y as seconda y p ac ices
(Rass & Wol 2018). In he des ina ion coun y, mig a ion and depo a ion egimes migh
in ol e o e lapping ins i u ional ac o s and in as uc u es. Fo example, he same ins i u ion
migh be asked wi h bo h in eg a ion assis ance and ein eg a ion counselling. Howe e , in he
o igin/ e u n con ex , he e u n egime in ol es a di e en a ay o poli ical and adminis a i e
70
ac o s ha a e no necessa ily conside ed in depo a ion egime app oaches bu whose
ins i u ional logics in luence he egime. Fo example, while in many con ex s o o igin/ e u n,
he IOM is unded by des ina ion coun ies o p o ide ein eg a ion assis ance, and addi ional
se ice p o ide s may become in ol ed in deli e ing ein eg a ion assis ance, seizing on he
economic and poli ical oppo uni y p esen ed by his expanding ield. In his compe i i e
en i onmen , domes ic and in e na ional o ganiza ions may ie o unds and esponsibili ies,
and po en ially ope a e in he absence o meaning ul in ol emen by s a e ins i u ions ha
would o he wise be esponsible o b oade social se ice p o ision. Mo eo e , de elopmen
coope a ion may become pa o he e u n egime, an in e sec ion ha has ecei ed limi ed
a en ion in exis ing depo a ion egime li e a u e.
Conside ing b oade social embeddedness, he e u n egime is shaped no only by p ima y
p ac ices ( he ac ual e u ns) and seconda y p ac ices ( he ins i u ional se up), bu also by
e ia y p ac ices (Rass & Wol 2018). These e e o how ac o s claim “in luence on o maybe
e en shape discou se on mig a ion ma e s, indi ec ly impac [ing] mig a ion by al e ing i s
meaning, challenging ca ego iza ions, o a emp ing o mobilize o he s h ough public
exp ession” (Rass & Wol 2018, 47). Hence, poli ical ensions and concep ual con es a ions
and blu s ha occu because o he wo di e en places be ween which e u n is c ea ed and
enac ed a e in play. I is impo an o engage wi h how depo a ion is se wi hin a con ingen
spec um o e u n also in he o igin/ e u n con ex , anging om depo a ion o e AVRR o
e u ns o skilled, inancially success ul o ansna ionally mobile mig an s o en labelled he
‘diaspo a’. The way how hese ca ego ies and hei dema ca ions a e poli ically and socially
cons uc ed – unlikely he same a bo h ends – in luences mig a ion and poli ics a ound s a e-
induced e u n.
One conc e e illus a ion o hese discu si e e ia y p ac ices is he di e en ia ion be ween
AVRR and depo a ion. While his di e en ia ion is highly impo an in des ina ion coun y
con ex , i nea ly disappea s o ac o s in he con ex o o igin/ e u n. Acco ding o s a e ac o s
and e en among ci il socie y ac o s in he des ina ion con ex , AVRR holds p omises o
pe sonal digni y, access o ein eg a ion assis ance, and wi h his mo e chances o a p ospe ous
u u e han s aying a he des ina ion unde he o e ed p eca ious i egula ising condi ions. In
he con ex o o igin/ e u n, AVRR does no quali y as a mo e p ospe ous u u e han s aying
a he des ina ion o being depo ed. In he o igin/ e u n con ex , depo a ion as he consequence
o a mig an ’s ul ima e e o o s ay in Eu ope is comp ehendible, while op ing o AVRR is
no . Acco dingly, depo ed indi iduals a e seen o need ein eg a ion suppo as well o be
somewha accep able, which s ands in di ec con adic ion o he concep o depo a ion he way
depo ing s a es en ision i .
Te ia y p ac ices also impac he e u n egime as s a e ac o s in coun y o o igin/ e u n mus
o en link e u n- ela ed esponsibili ies wi h o he poli ical ields and go e nance- ela ed
esponsibili ies o domes ic go e nance, and o en mo e cen al ones. These include a eas such
as de elopmen coope a ion o social wo k, and equally he public legi ima ion o go e ning
decisions. Many o igin coun ies a e embedded in de elopmen coope a ion amewo ks and
nego ia e hei p io i ies wi h dono s a es. The dono s a es inc easingly a emp o inco po a e
71
hei own in e es s ega ding mig a ion and e u n in he de elopmen agendas o pa ne
coun ies. As a esul , he e u n egime may ein o ce con ainmen -based unde s andings o
de elopmen , which end o o e ide mo e emancipa o y pe spec i es associa ed wi h he
mig a ion-de elopmen nexus. These con ainmen logics con lic wi h he iews and in e es s
o socie ies in de eloping coun ies, whe e mig a ion is widely seen as a de elopmen
oppo uni y and whe e legal mig a ion pa hways a e seen as he g ea e chance. Go e nmen s
in coun ies o o igin/ e u n may s uggle o inco po a e such socie al pe spec i es in o hei
de elopmen agendas h ough nego ia ions wi h dono s. This disconnec can make hei
app oaches appea less ci izen-o ien ed and mo e aligned wi h ex e nal policy p essu es.
Building on hese obse a ions on how a e u n egime es ablishes, my disse a ion con ibu es
a mo e di e en ia ed pe spec i e o how mig an agency mani es s wi hin i . In mig a ion
egime and depo a ion egime analyses, he e a e engaged e o s o acknowledge and
concep ualize mig an agency in shaping he espec i e egime. Resea che s ind scopes like
‘Handlungsspiel äume’ (Lippha d & Schwa z 2018) o mig an s in which hey can un old
agency acco ding o hei ‘Eigensinnigkei ’ (Benz & Schwenken 2005) ha migh unde mine
mig a ion con ol. They also ind di e en o ms o mig an poli ical ac i ism shaping he
egime. Mig an s he e o en engage wi h he ac o s and in as uc u es in hei immedia e
en i onmen s, in hei p esen co-exis ence. App oaching my case, I had he e o e expec ed ha
co po a e agency would o m among mig an indi iduals a e hei e u n, while assis ed o
le alone by ins i u ions. I wan ed o “Follow he people!” (Lippha d & Schwa z 2018) in o de
o explo e along mig an ’s expe iences on hei ajec o ies how hey in e ac wi h he egime.
In o med by heo ies abou poli ical emi ances ha highligh he o ma ion o pa icula
poli ical opinions, I expec ed hei mig a ion expe iences o c ea e speci ic poli ical a i udes.
A e hey had managed o each a Wes e n, weal hy na ion wi h es ablished democ a ic
ins i u ions – which was in bo h ega ds di e en om hei place o o igin and which hey had
ound compelling in one way o ano he – bu we e ejec ed by ha e y same s a e, I expec ed
ha ha would impac poli ical sel -consciousness a leas o some. Howe e , hese
assump ions p o ed a he alse, which eaches us some hings abou mig an agency in he
e u n egime and how o s udy i .
Fundamen ally, i is impo an o pay mo e analy ical a en ion owa ds which mig an s, whe e
and when de elop which o m o agency in he e u n egime, o in o he wo ds: how mig an s
de elop agency beyond hei ecei ing ole bu as co-shape s o he egime. Tu ning o he mos
di ec ly in ol ed mig an s – hose who e u n h ough he egime in as uc u e – hey a e
s uggling wi h hei ‘ ein eg a ion’ in he sense o su i ing and adhe ing o he a ious social
expec a ions owa ds p o ision in hei social en i onmen while a he same ime con on ed
wi h eelings o doub o shame. Thei agency canno be conside ed as sub e sion o he e u n
egime: i hey accep ein eg a ion assis ance, hey end o emain p ima y agen s, as hey y
o make use o hese oppo uni y in as uc u es as good as hey can. Ye , i hey do no ecei e
assis ance, hey all ou o he egime. They do no s and in an ac i e in e change wi h egime
ac o s and do no s and unde he ules and egula ions o he e u n egime anymo e, because
hey dissol e in o he socie al s uc u es o he coun y o o igin/ e u n. They a e also la gely
excluded om being esea ched in ein eg a ion esea ch (see u he below).
72
The ques ion hen is, wha kind o agency can and do hey none heless enac unde hese
condi ions? Ac i ely wi hd awing om ein eg a ion oppo uni ies, o example because o
scep icism owa ds ce ain se ice-p o iding ac o s, can be in e p e ed as a poli ical ac in i sel .
I co-es ablishes he bounda ies o he e u n egime. Secondly, some schola s ind a high
emig a ion po en ial among o ce ully e u ned mig an s (Schus e & Majidi 2015), which
would be a bold ac in opposi ion o he e u n egime when mig an s app oach he same
des ina ion. Bu his emig a ion does no necessa ily se in. In my sample, o example, he
as majo i y did no emig a e and he majo i y did no e en closely conside i (ye ). Thus,
while he op ion o emig a ing exis s, many migh also s ay. Fo hem, de eloping agency –
especially co po a e agency – appea s mo e cons ained han o mig an s who a e s ill a he
des ina ion, whe e hei me e p esence and endu ance o en cons i u e a o m o esis ance o
he laws and no ms en o ced by powe ul ac o s in he e u n egime.
This means ha mig an s who a e legally supposed o lea e bu do no do so ha e agency in he
e u n egime. My wo k enables o conside mo e closely how his kind o agency di e s om
mo e co po a e agency among s aying mig an s, and wha he e ec s o bo h kinds o agency
can a ec he coun y o o igin/ e u n di e en ly. As we ha e seen, mig an s who hemsel es
s and unde e u n p essu e agains hei will in des ina ion con ex s can u n owa ds hei
o igin coun y’s socie y – go e nmen , media, ci il socie y – in o de o add ess hei in e es s
and os e and shape opinion and ac i ism o ma ion o a public in e es . This means ha in
he e u n egime, mig an s can de elop ansna ional co po a e agency ha seeks o in luence
he agency o he o igin/ e u n coun y’s go e nmen wi hin he e u n egime. This o igin-
o ien ed ac i ism is a new di ec ion o mig an s’ ac i ism (see also Lecade 2018). I expands,
on he one hand, diaspo a’s ansna ional poli ical ac i ism which so a does no add ess he
issue o e u n poli ics as pa o diaspo a poli ics. On he o he hand, i expands he spec um
o ac i ism o i egula mig an s and asylum seeke s in i s spa ial dimension, as such ac i ism
is usually add essed owa ds egional, na ional o local poli ical ac o s in he des ina ion
con ex , o owa ds a global audience. They ind esonance among he go e nmen based on
he e u n egime’s en anglemen wi h de elopmen poli ics, which I will add ess nex .
6.2 Poli ical De elopmen and Democ a iza ion
The second key con ibu ion o his disse a ion lies in showing how mig an agency wi hin he
e u n egime in e sec s wi h poli ical de elopmen and democ a iza ion p ocesses in he
coun y o o igin/ e u n. As I ha e laid ou in Sub-sec ions 2.3 and 2.4, he way ha he
ela ionships be ween e u n and de elopmen a e unde s ood di e s be ween ins i u ional
ac o s in academia and poli ics, as well as be ween di e en imes. A he same ime,
unde s andings a e dependen on dynamics in in e na ional coope a ion. O e all, i is always
necessa y o ask which kind o e u n we conside , and which kind o de elopmen we conside
when we speak abou he e u n-de elopmen nexus in he speci ic ime and space in which i
is nego ia ed, bo h in schola ly wo ks as well as in poli ics.
Fi s , I show how mig an s can ac i ely claim a oice in democ a iza ion du ing pe iods o
poli ical ansi ion in hei coun y o o igin/ e u n. In he case a hand, mig an s akeholde s
became pa o he econs i u ion o democ a ic ins i u ions and discou se. Mig a ion was no
73
pe iphe al o hese de elopmen s bu became one o he a enas in which democ a iza ion was
nego ia ed. My indings sugges ha he ole o mig a ion and e u n wi hin de elopmen
s a egies and democ a iza ion a e enego ia ed a imes when de eloping, mig an -sending
coun y econs i u es hei democ a ic p inciples. In he age o mig a ion (Cas les, Haas &
Mille 2014), when a de eloping coun y’s socie y ( e-)cons i u es i s democ a ic mechanisms
as a p ocess o na ional poli ical de elopmen , i is likely ha his will also include he opic o
mig a ion wi hin his (Vigneswa an & Qui k 2015). The ela ionship be ween s a e powe and
mobili y is nego ia ed be ween he s a e and i s (po en ially mobile) popula ions. Mig an s may
o ganize, p o es , o nego ia e wi h s a e au ho i ies o secu e hei igh s and in e es s h ough
es ablishing democ a ic means, o example by challenging ( o me ) au ho i a ian p ac ices,
limi ed eedom o exp ession o pa icipa ion, and pushing o mo e anspa en and accoun able
go e nance. The s uggle o e mobili y igh s is hus enac ed on a pla o m o b oade
democ a ic claim-making, such as demands o social secu i y, jus ice, and he ecogni ion o
di e en mig an g oups wi hin he poli ical sys em, as we ha e seen in he case on hand.
Second, I show how mig an ac o s ame hei poli ical claims in ways ha esona e wi h
dominan de elopmen imagina ies, and how hese amings di e depending on hei social
posi ioning and poli ical le e age. As I ha e shown in pape s 5.1 and 5.3, di e en g oups o
mig an s migh claim a oice o mo e plu alism – eaching om he es ablished ‘diaspo a’
wi h a highe social s a us o mig an g oups ha ha e no ye success ully es ablished ab oad.
Howe e , hey migh need o use di e en kinds o s a egies o make hei claims. My indings
highligh he di e en s a egies mig an s akeholde g oups use in o de o achie e impac .
‘Diaspo a’ mig an s migh mo e easily be ecognized as aluable coope a ion pa ne s by s a e
ac o s in a ious ields o policy design (see pape 5.1), no -ye -es ablished mig an s ha e o
legi imize he domes ic impo ance o hei claims, which in his case was done by unde lining
he impo ance o ci il socie y and ci izen esponsi eness in he ansi ion phase (see pape s 5.1
and 5.3). The need o such di e en discu si e legi imiza ion s a egies can be acked back o
he ways in which each mig an g oups’ claims can be aligned wi h he de elopmen
imagina ies o mo e powe ul ex e nal ac o s and hei p io i ies in de elopmen coope a ion.
The key ques ion, hen, is how mig an ac o s can ame hei claims so ha hey align wi h he
dominan de elopmen s a egies and wi hou o e ly con adic ing he in e es s o s ong ac o s
in he nego ia ion amewo k. On one end o he spec um, app oaches in which mig an s pu
e o s in o maximizing he de elopmen impac o p e ious egula mig a ion (o mig an s ha
ha e so a managed o secu e hei igh o s ay ab oad) – o example by imp o ing
ansna ional emi ance managemen o deli e ing p o essional expe ise in policy ields – a e
ela i ely easy o a go e nmen o in eg a e wi hou con es ing mig a ion-de elopmen
unde s andings o in e na ional pa ne s.
On he o he end o he spec um, claims o mo e legal pa hways o igh s o s ay ab oad canno
be easily in eg a ed. Such claims lie beyond he scope o domes ic poli ics. Mig a ion
go e nance is o e all highly dependen on o he s a es’ a i udes and acco ding laws and
egula ions owa ds mig a ion. As he less powe ul s a es, many de eloping na ions’
go e nmen s do no ha e he poli ical le e age o p oduce mo e accessible legal mig a ion
74
pa hways in o de o hei ci izens’ posi i e de elopmen hopes o be ul illed in acco dance
wi h des ina ion s a es’ laws and no ms. Mo eo e , such claims do no align wi h he
unde s andings o he mig a ion-de elopmen -nexus ha a e employed in cu en de elopmen
coope a ion app oaches. Mig a ion- ela ed de elopmen coope a ion has s ongly aligned wi h
he bo de ing and secu i iza ion poli ics o he des ina ion s a es, which a e de elopmen
pa ne s and unde s a he same ime (Tonah, Se ana & A hu 2017; F owd 2018; Moyo
2020). This dynamic mi o s des ina ion s a e’s con inued unde s anding o mig a ion as an
exp ession o local unde -de elopmen (Schapendonk & Smi h 2018), which hey seek o
add ess h ough con ainmen de elopmen app oaches (Landau 2019). Thus, ins ead o
p og amma ically s eng hening legal emig a ion s a egies as an exp ession o and sou ce o
mo e de elopmen , con empo a y mig a ion- ela ed de elopmen coope a ion in Wes A ica
concen a es on immobilizing in e en ions. Such in e en ions include, o ins ance,
imp o ing employabili y and aising employmen op ions o po en ial mig an s in he domes ic
labou ma ke , o he ein eg a ion o e u ning mig an s.
Howe e , wha does lie in he scope o o igin s a es is how o coope a e in e u n poli ics wi h
des ina ion coun ies. S a e-induced e u n unde sco es hei popula ion’s imagina ies abou
mig a ion as op ion o pu sue a be e li e. As my wo k has shown, his is whe e o igin s a es
can po en ially use hei poli ical le e age in a ou o ha mig an g oup’s claims and he
popula ion’s in e es s mo e b oadly. When o igin coun ies oppose o coope a e in des ina ion
s a es’ e o s o e u n ejec ed asylum seeke s, his can, o some deg ee, also challenge
des ina ion s a es’ in e p e a ions o he mig a ion/ e u n-de elopmen nexus. Mo e conc e ely,
mig an s’ claims ha could be b ough in line wi h exis ing de elopmen app oaches ca y
highe chances o success – such as c ea ing ein eg a ion assis ance eligibili y. A e all, he
‘p o ec i e exclusion’ which he Gambian go e nmen enac ed owa ds ejec ed asylum seeke s
was also explained wi h adhe ence o democ a ic s anda ds and domes ic unde de elopmen :
he o igin coun y go e nmen ’s claim o i s esponsibili y o allow demons a ions as pa o
eedom o speech, he need o p o ec he ola ile poli ical s abili y o he new democ a ic
go e nmen , and he a gumen ha hei social secu i y and economic sec o was oo
unde de eloped o ein eg a e depo ed indi iduals. Ye , he Gambian go e nmen ’s a emp o
asse domes ic so e eign y – by aligning wi h ci izens’ iews o mig a ion as de elopmen
chance – came a he cos o ex e nal no ms and expec a ions. Ul ima ely, his e o did no
con ince he in e na ional pa ne s o be es ablished as a sha ed p og amma ic goal.
These discu si e s a egies by mig an ac o s se he s age o how s a es o o igin/ e u n espond
o ex e nal p essu es and de ine hei own oles wi hin he e u n-de elopmen amewo k.
Conside ing his, I a gue hi dly ha domes ic s a e-socie y nego ia ions a ound e u n can
in luence in e na ional poli ical posi ioning o a deg ee ha o igin/ e u n s a es need o ede ine
hei so e eign y and de elopmen al agency in a pos colonial con ex . The discussion o he
case o The Gambia has augh us ha domes ic s a e-socie y nego ia ion dynamics can igge
in e -s a e poli ical nego ia ions ha a e inhe en ly linked o concep s o (democ a ic) s a ehood.
Paying mo e schola ly a en ion o o igin s a es’ s a egies and domes ic s a e-socie y
nego ia ions abou how o encoun e des ina ion s a es’ demands o e u n coope a ion can
enable us o de ec s a egies o how socie ies and go e nmen s in o igin s a es deal wi h he
75
unequal powe balances wi hin he in e na ional sys em in which mig a ion akes place. A ange
o s a e agency be ween coope a ion and esis ance (Zanke 2023) a e an exp ession o a
b oade nego ia ion abou ‘de elopmen ’. This p esupposes a b oade unde s anding o poli ical
de elopmen as some hing beyond a se o domes ic indica o s, bu as he consequence o a
mul i ude o e e -con inuing nego ia ions p ocesses and p ac ices wi hin and be ween socie ies
in he global communi y in which in e es s o ac o s and ac o g oups on di e en socie al
le els, including s a e ep esen a i es jus as much as mig an indi iduals ake pa .
6.3 Tempo al Me hodologies o Coun e Resea ch Biases in Rein eg a ion Resea ch
Resea ch on he pos - e u n s age a e s a e-induced e u n has de eloped along bi u ca ed
lines: ein eg a ion s udies ha conside AVRR mainly, o en policy-d i en and quan i a i ely
o ien ed, and e hnog aphic pos -depo a ion s udies, oo ed in c i ical mig a ion and bo de
s udies. These dis inc epis emologies ha e c ea ed concep ual blind spo s ha my longi udinal
quali a i e compa a i e app oach seeks o b idge. The poli ically mos ecognized and
academically mos s eamlined esea ch on pos - e u n is ein eg a ion esea ch. This esea ch
angle ollows an epis emological pa h dependency ha p io i izes AVRR e u ns. Wi h ising
poli ical emphasis on AVRR, schola s ha e called o “sys ema ic knowledge” (Paasche 2014)
and clea e de ini ions o “mo e he AVRR agenda o wa d” (Kuschminde 2017b) – a policy-
d i en in e es , e en i allowing c i ique, o en om an angle o applicabili y. Hence, empi ical
s udies none heless end o ocus on con ex s whe e policy al eady aligns ein eg a ion wi h
AVRR, unde s anding ein eg a ion as a pa hway a e AVRR. Hence, i la gely o e looks
depo a ion- ela ed pos - e u n dynamics and how hese could in o m knowledge abou AVRR,
ein eg a ion and in iguing e ec s o policy assump ions and p ac ices. These biases ha e
o med in he cu en ‘pa adigm pendulum’ swing (de Haas 2010) ha links ein eg a ion o
de elopmen coope a ion. AVRR p omises de elopmen po en ials – mo e so han i migh be
i pos -depo a ion expe iences would in o m ein eg a ion esea ch s onge .
Depo a ion s udies, meanwhile, ha e de eloped along o he epis emological and
me hodological lines. Mos depo a ion esea ch engages wi h he p e-depo a ion ime-spaces,
he legal and poli ical amewo ks go e ning depo abili y, and he sociopoli ical mechanisms
o en o cemen , o en in ela ion o s a e con ol and bo de secu i y (Cou in 2015; De Geno a
& Peu z 2010; Radziwinowiczówna 2024). Pos -depo a ion pe spec i es cons i u e a small
sub ield he ein, limi ed by, among o he hings, challenges o acking depo ees pos - e u n,
including logis ical obs acles and conce ns o e esea ch e hics in ola ile en i onmen s.
Addi ionally, hese s udies, jus as he whole pos -depo a ion esea ch ield, is cha ac e ized
by e hnog aphic app oaches, p io i izing emic concep s (D o bohm 2015; D o bohm &
Hasselbe g 2015; Radziwinowiczówna 2024).
Du ing my esea ch, I acco dingly encoun e ed scep icism abou my app oach om depo a ion
schola s iewed he compa ison o depo a ion o AVRR as e hically o e bu dening because o
po en ial ela i izing implica ions o he inhumane depo a ion p ac ices ha compa a i e
indings could e eal. Such ese a ions highligh he embedded pa h dependencies be ween
depo a ion and ein eg a ion esea ch, ein o cing he knowledge abyss be ween de elopmen -
76
linked ein eg a ion s udies ha seek o gene alize and pa ly also in o m policymaking and
e hnog aphically o ien ed pos -depo a ion esea ch.
Following de Haas (2010), we ha e o accep ha esea ch on pos - e u n is pa o he e y
e u n egime i in es iga es. The pa allel embeddedness o concep ualiza ions and e minologies
in policy and academic deba es he e o e does no mean ha schola s should wi hd aw om
nego ia ions abou meaning-making bu o p oac i ely and c i ically engage wi h he analy ic
e ms hey use and co-p oduce. Pos - e u n esea ch has o e lexi ely engage wi h ein eg a ion
s udies and he amings i c ea es. My esea ch has con ibu ed o his h ough a mul i-si ed,
longi udinal quali a i e me hodology. A mul i-si ed and longi udinal quali a i e app oach can
adhe e o he di e si y o e u n egime ac o s and he in e linkages o hei agencies in ime
and space wi h a s eng hened ocus on he pos - e u n spa io- empo al con ex .
This means, i s , o unde s and he agency o mig an s beyond hei ecei ing ole bu as co-
shape s o he egime which happens in p ocesses ha can only be cap u ed wi hin ex ended
ime pe iods. We ha e o lea n mo e abou why mig an s de elop p ima y and co po a e
agencies a which empo al poin s a he indi idual le el as well as a he le el o egime
o ma ion. So a , quan i a i e s udies on ein eg a ion expe iences – which a e high in demand
because hey seemingly allow gene alizable insigh s in o pos - e u n si ua ions – ocus on he
consequences o (s a e-induced) e u n o he indi idual, o po en ially also he communi ies
in o which hey e u n, bu no on b oade consequences o e u ns and e u n poli ics on he
de elopmen in coun ies o o igin/ e u n. They end o unde s and he ein eg a ion
in as uc u e as se ice deli e e a he han pa o he nego ia ions wi hin a e u n egime. On
he o he hand, e hnog aphic s udies – usually also ocusing on emic pe spec i es o indi iduals
a he han analysing hei connec ions o he poli ically shaped con ex s – do no su icien ly
engage wi h poli ically co-cons uc ed e minology and concep ualiza ion. I pos - e u n is
s udied as a measu able p ocess on he indi idual le el ins ead o as pa o a e u n egime, his
sidelines he geopoli ical igu a ions in which ein eg a ion expe iences on he indi idual le el
a e linked o in e es - es ed ac o s, knowledge and p ac ices.
None heless, da a collec ed among mig an indi iduals akes a cen al ole in e u n egime
analysis also. He e, quali a i e and longi udinal app oaches bea p omising echniques o
collec meaning ul da a on e u n dynamics including an ex ended pos - e u n pe iod (see also
pape 5.5). One empi ical example o wha such an app oach e eals is he inding o ‘slow
depo a ion’ de eloped in pape 5.2. Th ough a compa a i e longi udinal analysis o mig an s’
pos - e u n income ajec o ies a e depo a ion and AVRR om Ge many, I show how AVRR,
hough amed as olun a y and de elopmen -o ien ed, can o e ime esemble depo a ion in
e ms o disillusionmen , social exclusion, and e oding agency. This con e gence only becomes
isible h ough ex ended empo al engagemen wi h e u ned mig an s. Me hodologically
ollowing e u n expe iences o e longe pe iods o ime hus enhances e u n egime esea ch.
Mos cu en s udies ely on sho e - e m and/o one-o da a collec ion. While hese s ill
cap u e a ime-scale unde s anding – since e u n has al eady occu ed – hey lack he ex ended
engagemen necessa y o e eal empo al complexi ies in he e u n egime, especially because
ime is so cen al in assump ions abou ein eg a ion and de elopmen e ec s.
77
Second, howe e , ime-sensi i e e u n esea ch needs o go beyond he mig an le el. We also
ha e o know mo e abou he ‘ ime poli ics’ (Cwe ne 2004; Eule e el. 2019) o poli ical and
adminis a i e e u n egime ac o s and hei ansna ional complexi ies. Rein eg a ion poli ics
is pa o hese ime poli ics, o eseeing and imp in ing ce ain assumed empo ali ies on
e u ned mig an s ha migh no be possible o di icul o ul il. Bu he e is a mul iplici y o
o he ‘ ime poli ics’ and empo al complexi ies in he e u n egime. Deba es a ound e u n and
ein eg a ion wi hin s a es as well as among popula ions a e a ec ed by and equally a ec o he
poli ical domains, such as in e na ional nego ia ions wi h No he n ac o s, o socie al deba es
abou s a e esponsibili ies o mig an s and non-mig an s. Fo example, he as -paced
empo ali ies o mig a ion- ela ed de elopmen p og ammes o he EUTF o he high pace o
depo a ion ope a ions as demanded by he EU do no syn hesize wi h he o e all slowe ansi ional
p ocess o he Gambian poli ical sys em, al hough i s democ a iza ion ini ia ion had se ed as he
basis o he inc eased e u n and de elopmen coope a ion. Howe e , he ( e-)es ablishmen o
democ a ic p inciples a e au oc a ic ule, such as eedom o exp ession, ci izen esponsi eness o
us in democ a ic ins i u ions, need longe han ha , and a e a he same ime complica ed by he
e u n dynamics hey enabled (F esia 2014; Kose & an Hea 2003).
Th ough such empo al s udies owa ds he poli ical le el, we also need o conside he agencies
o he poli ical and adminis a i e ac o s in he coun y o o igin/ e u n, and how hei agencies
a e embedded in b oade socie al and poli ical nego ia ions in hei local con ex . In Eu ope, we
epea edly see inc eased e o s o Eu opean go e nmen s o e u n mig an s o hei coun ies
o o igin/ e u n while simul aneously we ecognise ha hese e o s a e a less ui ul han
an icipa ed. Wi h new ins umen s such as he e ised Schengen isa code ha allows sanc ions
owa ds na ionals o coun ies ha show lacking e u n coope a ion, i can be expec ed ha
geopoli ically une en nego ia ions a ound e u n u he inc ease. This bea s isks o con lic i e
nego ia ions, des abilizing s a e esponsi eness owa ds hei ci izens in coun ies o
o igin/ e u n and inc easing ep ession o ee speech i he ma e o e u n becomes poli ically
con es ed. In o de o c i ically examine he consequences o such poli ics, s udying he ole o
e u n poli ics in coun ies o o igin/ e u n con ex s is an impo an coun e -balancing ac o
policy-c i ical esea ch.
Taken oge he , hese con ibu ions challenge dominan logics in e u n- ela ed esea ch by
o eg ounding mig an and o igin-s a e agency, unco e ing he unequal empo ali ies a play,
and exposing how e u n go e nance is embedded in con es ed knowledge p oduc ion. By
ea ing e u n as a ansna ional poli ical p ocess a he han a echnical policy end poin o an
indi idualized expe ience, I o e a concep ual and me hodological amewo k o s udying
e u n ha is a en i e o powe , meaning-making, and social ans o ma ion. These insigh s no
only eo ien academic inqui y bu also open up space o mo e e lexi e, poli ically g ounded
engagemen wi h e u n in bo h schola ship and p ac ice.
84
Con ad Suso, Ca he ine (2020): “In olun a y immobili y and he un ul illed i e o passage:
Implica ions o mig a ion managemen in The Gambia, Wes A ica.” In e na ional
Mig a ion 58(4): 184–194. doi:10.1111/imig.12675.
Con ad Suso, Ca he ine (2022): “To ally napse: aspi a ions o mobili y in Essau, The
Gambia.” Thi d Wo ld Qua e ly 43(8): 1915–1931. doi:10.1080/01436597.2022.2074827.
Cou in, Susan Bible (2015): “Depo a ion s udies: o igins, hemes and di ec ions.” Jou nal o
E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 41(4): 671–681. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2014.957175.
C ane, Aus in, and Vic o ia Lawson (2020): “Humani a ianism as con lic ed ca e: managing
mig an assis ance in EU assis ed olun a y e u n policies.” Poli ical Geog aphy 79:
102152. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2020.102152.
Cwe ne , Saulo B. (2001): “The imes o mig a ion.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies
27 (1): 7–36. doi:10.1080/13691830125283.
Cwe ne , Saulo B. (2004): “Fas e , as e and as e : he ime poli ics o asylum in he UK.”
Time & Socie y 13(1): 71–88. doi:10.1177/0961463X04040747.
Dahl ik, Julia (2017): “Asylum as cons uc ion wo k: heo izing adminis a i e p ac ices.”
Mig a ion S udies 5(3): 369–388. doi:10.1093/mig a ion/mnx043.
Da ids, Tine, and Ma ieke an Hou e (2014): “Mo ing back o mo ing o wa d? Re u n
mig a ion, de elopmen and peace-building.” New Di e si ies 16(2): 71–87.
De Geno a, Nicholas (2002): “Mig an ‘illegali y’ and depo abili y in e e yday li e.” Annual
Re iew o An h opology 31(1): 419–447. doi:10.1146/annu e .an h o.31.040402.085432.
De Geno a, Nicholas, and Na halie Mae Peu z (eds.) (2010): The depo a ion egime:
so e eign y, space, and he eedom o mo emen . Du ham, NC: Duke Uni e si y P ess.
de Haas, Hein (2010): “Mig a ion and de elopmen : a heo e ical pe spec i e.” In e na ional
Mig a ion Re iew 44(1): 227–264. doi:10.1111/j.1747-7379.2009.00804.x.
de Haas, Hein (2014): Mig a ion heo y – quo adis? Wo king Pape 100. Ox o d:
In e na ional Mig a ion Ins i u e.
Debna h, P iyanka (2016): Le e aging e u n mig a ion o de elopmen : he ole o coun ies
o o igin. A li e a u e e iew. KNOMAD Wo king Pape 17.
De illa d, Alexand e, Alessia Bacchi, and Ma ion Noack (2015): A su ey on mig a ion
policies in Wes A ica. Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (IOM).
D o bohm, Heike (2015): “The e e sal o mig a o y amily li es: a Cape Ve dean
pe spec i e on gende and sociali y p e- and pos -depo a ion.” Jou nal o E hnic and
Mig a ion S udies 41(4): 653–670. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2014.961905.
D o bohm, Heike, and Ines Hasselbe g (2015): “Depo a ion, anxie y, jus ice: new
e hnog aphic pe spec i es.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 41(4): 551–562.
doi:10.1080/1369183X.2014.957171.
Ecks ein, Ha y (1992): “Case s udy and heo y in poli ical science.” In Rega ding Poli ics:
Essays on Poli ical Theo y, S abili y, and Change, by Ha y Ecks ein, 117–176. Be keley:
Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess.
85
E dal, Ma a Bi and, and Ce i Oeppen (2018): “Fo ced o lea e? The discu si e and
analy ical signi icance o desc ibing mig a ion as o ced and olun a y.” Jou nal o E hnic
and Mig a ion S udies 44(6), 1–18. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2017.1384149.
E dal, Ma a Bi and, and Ce i Oeppen (2022): “Theo ising olun a iness in e u n.” In
Handbook o e u n mig a ion, edi ed by Russell King and Ka ie Kuschminde , 70–83.
Chel enham, UK: Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Escoba , A u o (2012): Encoun e ing de elopmen : he making and unmaking o he hi d
wo ld. P ince on, N.J: P ince on Uni e si y P ess.
Eule, Tobias G., Lisa Ma ie Bo elli, Annika Lindbe g, and Anna Wyss (2019): “Time as
was e and ac ic.” In Mig an s be o e he law, by Tobias G. Eule, Lisa Ma ie Bo elli,
Annika Lindbe g, and Anna Wyss, 149–186. Cham: Sp inge In e na ional Publishing.
Fais , Thomas (2008): “Mig an s as ansna ional de elopmen agen s: an inqui y in o he
newes ound o he mig a ion–de elopmen nexus.” Popula ion, Space and Place 14(1):
21–42. doi:10.1002/psp.471.
Fais , Thomas (2024): “C oss-bo de me hods: he challenge o me hodological na ionalism
and he p ospec s o ansna ional me hodology.” In Handbook on mig a ion and
de elopmen , edi ed by Raúl Delgado Wise, B anka Likic-B bo ic, Ronaldo Munck, and
Ca l-Ul ik Schie up, 57–75. Chel enham, UK: Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Fais , Thomas, Ma gi Fause , and E eline Reisenaue (2013): T ansna ional mig a ion.
Camb idge: Poli y P ess.
Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Elena, and Me e Louise Be g (2018): “Inaugu al edi o ial.” Mig a ion
and Socie y 1(1): – ii. doi:10.3167/a ms.2018.010101.
Flahaux, Ma ie-Lau ence (2017): “The ole o mig a ion policy changes in Eu ope o e u n
mig a ion o Senegal.” In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew 51(4): 868–892.
doi:10.1111/im e.12248.
Flahaux, Ma ie-Lau ence, and Hein de Haas (2016): “A ican mig a ion: ends, pa e ns,
d i e s.” Compa a i e Mig a ion S udies 4(1). doi:10.1186/s40878-015-0015-6.
Fly bje g, Ben (2006): “Fi e misunde s andings abou case-s udy esea ch.” Quali a i e
Inqui y 12 (2): 219–245. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363.
Fo schungsg uppe “T ansi Mig a ion.” (2007): Tu bulen e Rände : neue Pe spek i en au
Mig a ion an den G enzen Eu opas. Biele eld: ansc ip .
F ankenhaeuse , Malin, Ma ion Noack, Alessia Bacchi, Niels Keijze , Hen ike Kla e , and
Anna Knoll (2013): Mig a ion and de elopmen policies and p ac ices. A mapping s udy o
ele en Eu opean coun ies and he Eu opean Commission. Vienna and Maas ich :
In e na ional Cen e o Mig a ion Policy De elopmen and Eu opean Cen e o
De elopmen Policy Managemen .
F esia, Ma ion (2014): “Pe o ming epa ia ion? The ole o e ugee aid in shaping new
beginnings in Mau i ania.” De elopmen and Change 45(3): 434–457.
doi:10.1111/dech.12086.
F on ex (2021): “De ec ions o illegal bo de -c ossings.” h ps://da a.eu opa.eu/da a/da ase s/
de ec ions-o -illegal-bo de -c ossings?locale=de (accessed 19 May 2025).
86
F owd, Philippe M. (2018): “De elopmen al bo de wo k and he In e na ional O ganiza ion
o Mig a ion.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 44(10): 1656–1672.
doi:10.1080/1369183X.2017.1354046.
Gaibazzi, Paolo (2014): “Visa p oblem: ce i ica ion, kinship, and he p oduc ion o
‘ineligibili y’ in The Gambia.” Jou nal o he Royal An h opological Ins i u e 20: 38–55.
Gaibazzi, Paolo (2015): Bush bound: young men and u al pe manence in mig an Wes
A ica. New Yo k: Be ghahn Books.
Gaye, M. (2023): “Gambia has no in e es in depo a ion o ci izens – FM Tanga a.” The
Voice, Augus 14. h ps://www. oicegambia.com/2023/08/14/gambia-has-no-in e es -in-
depo a ion-o -ci izens- m- anga a/ (accessed 19 May 2025).
The Gambia Bu eau o S a is ics (2023): Gambia labou o ce su ey 2022-2023. Banjul: The
Gambia Bu eau o S a is ics.
The Gambia Bu eau o S a is ics (2024a): “Popula ion – o al.” Banjul: The Gambia Bu eau
o S a is ics. A ailable a : h ps://www.gbosda a.o g/da a/40-popula ion-and-household-
cha ac e is ics/1653-popula ion- o al (accessed 19 May 2025).
The Gambia Bu eau o S a is ics (2024b): The Gambia 2024 popula ion and housing census,
p elimina y epo . Banjul: The Gambia Bu eau o S a is ics.
Geige , Ma in, and An oine Pécoud (eds.) (2010): The poli ics o in e na ional mig a ion
managemen . Houndmills, Basings oke, Hampshi e; New Yo k: Palg a e Macmillan.
Geige , Ma in, and An oine Pécoud (2020): The In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion:
he new UN mig a ion agency in c i ical pe spec i e. Cham: Sp inge .
Geo ge, Alexande L., and And ew Benne (2005): Case s udies and heo y de elopmen in
he social sciences. Camb idge, MA: MIT P ess.
Ge lo , Naemi (2018): “Be e mig a ion managemen . Die GIZ im Eu o-a ikanischen
G enz egime.” Mo emen s 4(2): 163–246.
Gmelch, Geo ge (1980): “Re u n mig a ion.” Annual Re iew o An h opology 9: 135–159.
Hamidu, Jamilla (2015): “A e Ghanaian diaspo a middle class? Linking middle class o
poli ical pa icipa ion and s abili y in Ghana.” A ican De elopmen 40(1): 139–157.
Hammond, Lau a (2014): “‘Volun a y’ epa ia ion and ein eg a ion.” In The Ox o d
handbook o e ugee and o ced mig a ion s udies, edi ed by Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Gil
Loesche , Ka y Long, and Nando Sigona. Ox o d: Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
Hammond, Lau a (2015): “Diaspo a e u nees o Somaliland: he oes o de elopmen o job-
s ealing scound els?” In A ica’s e u n mig an s: he new de elope s?, edi ed by Lisa
Åkesson and Ma ia E iksson Baaz, 44–63. London: Zed Books.
He manowicz, Joseph C. (2013): “The longi udinal quali a i e in e iew.” Quali a i e
Sociology 36(2): 189–208. doi:10.1007/s11133-013-9247-7.
Hess, Sabine, and Be nd Kaspa ek (2012): G enz egime. 1: Disku se, P ak iken, Ins i u ionen
in Eu opa. Be lin; Hambu g: Assozia ion A.
Hess, Sabine, Be nd Kaspa ek, and Ma ia Schwe l (2018): “Regime is nich Regime is nich
Regime. Zum heo iepoli ischen Einsa z de e hnog a ischen (G enz-)Regimeanalyse.” In
87
Was is ein Mig a ions egime? Wha is a mig a ion egime?, edi ed by And eas Po ,
Ch is oph Rass, and F ank Wol , 257–283. Wiesbaden: Sp inge Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Hone a h, Pia, and Ma ianne Haase (2016): Re u n mig a ion and ein eg a ion policies: a
p ime . Deu sche Gesellscha ü In e na ionale Zusammena bei (GIZ) GmbH, and
Ge man Ma shall Fund o he Uni ed S a es.
Ho a h, Kenne h, Anna Amelina, and Ka in Pe e s (2017): “Re- hinking he poli ics o
mig a ion. On he uses and challenges o egime pe spec i es o mig a ion esea ch.”
Mig a ion S udies 5(3): 301–314. doi:10.1093/mig a ion/mnx055.
Hughes, A nold, and Da id Pe ec (2006): A poli ical his o y o The Gambia, 1816 – 1994.
Roches e , NY: Uni e si y o Roches e P ess.
Hul in, Niklas, Baba Jallow, Benjamin N. Law ance, and Assan Sa (2017): “Au oc acy,
mig a ion, and The Gambia’s ‘unp eceden ed’ 2016 Elec ion.” A ican A ai s 116(463),
1–20. doi:10.1093/a a /adx007.
Ia ia, Vanessa (2011): “A emp ing e u n: I aqis’ emig a ion om I aq.” Re uge: Canada’s
Jou nal on Re ugees 1(28): 109–122.
In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (2019): “Fo y yea s o IOM assis ance o e u ning
mig an s.” In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion. h ps://www.iom.in /news/ o y-yea s-
iom-assis ance- e u ning-mig an s (accessed 19 May 2025).
In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (2024): Assis ed olun a y e u n and ein eg a ion
key highligh s 2023. Annexes. Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion.
In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (2018): Mig a ion lows o Eu ope: 2017 o e iew.
Displacemen acking ma ix. Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion.
In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (2020): “IOM hi s miles one: 5,000+ Gambians
suppo ed wi h assis ed e u n.” News – global. Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion o
Mig a ion. h ps://www.iom.in /news/iom-hi s-miles one-5000-gambians-suppo ed-
assis ed- e u n (accessed 19 May 2025).
Jagne, Kebba-Oma (2022): “Mobilising human capi al o ha ness he demog aphic di idend:
he ole o he diaspo a as ac o s o change in The Gambia.” In The demog aphic di idend
and he powe o you h: oices om he global diplomacy lab, edi ed by Ei liani Abdul
Rahman, ElsaMa ie D’Sil a, and Sonja Pe e ande l, 27–42. USA: An hem P ess.
Jaw, Sai Ma y (2017): Res o ing democ acy in The Gambia? An analysis o diaspo a
engagemen in Gambian poli ics. Mas e Thesis, Be gen: Uni e si y o Be gen.
Jaw, Sai Ma y, and Thomas Isbell (2020): Ci izen engagemen in Gambia: enough o secu e
democ a ic gains? A oba ome e Dispa ch No. 348. A oba ome e .
h ps://www.a oba ome e .o g/publica ion/ad348-ci izen-engagemen -gambia-enough-
secu e-democ a ic-gains/ (accessed 19 May 2025).
Johnson, Wal e (2003): “On agency.” Jou nal o Social His o y 37 (1): 113–124.
doi:10.1353/jsh.2003.0143.
Kali , Ba ak (2017): “Be ween ‘ olun a y’ e u n p og ams and so depo a ion. Sending
ulne able mig an s in Spain back ‘home’.” In Re u n mig a ion and psychosocial
wellbeing, edi ed by Zana Va hi and Russell King, 56–71. London: Rou ledge.
88
Kandilige, Leande , and Ge aldine Adiku (2020): “The quagmi e o e u n and ein eg a ion:
challenges o mul i‐s akeholde co‐o dina ion o in olun a y e u ns.” In e na ional
Mig a ion 58(4): 37–53. doi:10.1111/imig.12644.
Kaplan Ma cusán, Ad iana (2005): “F om Senegambia o Spain.” Mig a ion 43/44/45: 52–65.
Kapu , De esh (2014): “Poli ical e ec s o in e na ional mig a ion.” Annual Re iew o
Poli ical Science 17(1): 479–502. doi:10.1146/annu e -polisci-043010-095807.
Ka lsen, The ese Bos up (2016): The No wegian egime o e u ns. A go e nmen ali y-
pe spec i e on he de elopmen o e u n p ac ices in No way. Mas e hesis. Malmö:
Malmö Uni e si y Facul y o Cul u e and Socie y.
Kaspa ek, Be nd (2021): Eu opa als G enze: eine E hnog aphie de G enzschu z-Agen u
F on ex. Biele eld: T ansc ip .
Kaspa ek, Be nd (2024): “Mig a ion and bo de egimes.” In Resea ch handbook on he
sociology o mig a ion, edi ed by Giuseppe Scio ino, Ma ina C ajne , and Pe e Ki is o,
109–121. Resea ch Handbooks in Sociology. Chel enham, UK; No hamp on, MA:
Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Kebbeh, Oma C. (2013): The Gambia: mig a ion in A ica’s “smiling coas .” Mig a ion
Policy Ins i u e.
Keeley, James F. (1990): “Towa d a Foucauldian analysis o in e na ional egimes.”
In e na ional O ganiza ion 44(1): 83–105. doi:10.1017/S0020818300004653.
Kei a, Lamin (2023): “You h and p o es : how ‘#Gambia’ ended decades o au oc a ic ule.”
Canadian Jou nal o A ican S udies / Re ue Canadienne Des É udes A icaines 57(3):
585–604. doi:10.1080/00083968.2023.2254859.
Kessle , Ch is l, and S e an Ro he (2016): Democ a iza ion h ough mig a ion? Poli ical
emi ances and pa icipa ion o Philippine e u n mig an s. Lanham: Lexing on Books.
Khos a i, Shah am (ed.) (2018a): A e depo a ion: e hnog aphic pe spec i es. Cham:
Palg a e Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-57267-3.
Khos a i, Shah am (2018b): “S olen ime.” Radical philosophy 203: 38–41.
Kleis , Nauja (2020): “T ajec o ies o in olun a y e u n mig a ion o Ghana: o ced
eloca ion p ocesses and pos - e u n li e.” Geo o um 116: 272–281.
doi:10.1016/j.geo o um.2017.12.005.
Kleis , Nauja, and Do e Tho sen (eds.) (2017): Hope and unce ain y in con empo a y
A ican mig a ion. New Yo k: Rou ledge.
Koch, Anne (2014): “The poli ics and discou se o mig an e u n: he ole o UNHCR and
IOM in he go e nance o e u n.” Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 40(6): 905–
923. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2013.855073.
Koch, Anne, Anne e Webe , and Isabelle We en els (2018): P o i ee s o mig a ion?
Au ho i a ian s a es in A ica and Eu opean mig a ion managemen . SWP Resea ch Pape
4. Be lin: S i ung Wissenscha und Poli ik.
Ko a, She i , and Momodou N. Da boe (2017): “The Gambia’s elec o al ea hquake.”
Jou nal o Democ acy 28(2): 147–156. doi:10.1353/jod.2017.0031.
89
Kose , Khalid (2001): The e u n and ein eg a ion o ejec ed asylum seeke s and i egula
mig an s. Mig a ion Resea ch Se ies No. 4. Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion o
Mig a ion.
Kose , Khalid, and Ka ie Kuschminde (2015): “Key indings o compa a i e esea ch on
assis ed olun a y e u n and ein eg a ion o mig an s.” Mig a ion Policy P ac ice 5(1):
28–31.
Kose , Khalid, and Nicholas an Hea (2003): Asylum mig a ion and implica ions o
coun ies o o igin. Wo king Pape 20. WIDER Discussion Pape . Helsinki: The Uni ed
Na ions Uni e si y Wo ld Ins i u e o De elopmen Economics Resea ch (UNU-WIDER).
K awa zek, Félix, and Lea Mülle -Funk (2020): “Two cen u ies o lows be ween ‘he e’ and
‘ he e’: poli ical emi ances and hei ans o ma i e po en ial.” Jou nal o E hnic and
Mig a ion S udies 46(6): 1003–1024. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2018.1554282.
K use, Jan (2014): Quali a i e In e iew o schung: ein in eg a i e Ansa z. Weinheim: Bel z
Ju en a.
Kuschminde , Ka ie (2017a): Rein eg a ion s a egies. London: Palg a e Macmillan.
Kuschminde , Ka ie (2017b): Taking s ock o assis ed olun a y e u n om Eu ope:
Decision making, ein eg a ion and sus ainable e u n – ime o a pa adigm shi . RSCAS
Wo king Pape 2017/31. Flo ence: Eu opean Uni e si y Ins i u e.
Kuschminde , Ka ie (2017c): “In e oga ing he ela ionship be ween emig a ion and
sus ainable e u n.” In e na ional Mig a ion 55(6): 107–121. doi:10.1111/imig.12378.
Landau, Lo en B. (2019): “A ch ono ope o con ainmen de elopmen : Eu ope’s mig an
c isis and A ica’s e e i o ialisa ion.” An ipode 51(1): 169–186. doi:10.1111/an i.12420.
Lecade , Cla a (2018): “Pos -depo a ion mo emen s: o ms and condi ions o he s uggle
amongs sel -o ganising expelled mig an s in Mali and Togo.” In A e depo a ion, edi ed
by Shah am Khos a i, 187–204. Cham: Sp inge In e na ional Publishing.
Lee kes, A jen, and Ma ieke an Hou e (2020): “Beyond he depo a ion egime: di e en ial
s a e in e es s and capaci ies in dealing wi h (non-)depo abili y in Eu ope.” Ci izenship
S udies 24(3): 319–338. doi:10.1080/13621025.2020.1718349.
Lee kes, A jen, Rianne an Os, and Eline Boe sema (2017): “Wha d i es ‘so depo a ion’?
Unde s anding he ise in assis ed olun a y e u n among ejec ed asylum seeke s in he
Ne he lands.” Popula ion, Space and Place 23(8): e2059. doi:10.1002/psp.2059.
Le i , Peggy, and Deepak Lamba-Nie es (2011): “Social emi ances e isi ed.” Jou nal o
E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 37(1): 1–22. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2011.521361.
Li, Tania Mu ay (2007): The will o imp o e: go e nmen ali y, de elopmen , and he p ac ice
o poli ics. Du ham, NC: Duke Uni e si y P ess. doi:10.1215/9780822389781.
Lie ae , Ine (2021): “Mig an s’ pos - e u n wellbeing: A iew om he Caucasus.”
In e na ional Mig a ion 59(2): 239–254. doi:10.1111/imig.12777.
Lie ae , Ine, E ic B oekae , and Ilse De luyn (2017a): “The bounda ies o ansna ionalism:
he case o assis ed olun a y e u n mig an s.” Global Ne wo ks 17(3): 366–381.
Lie ae , Ine, E ic B oekae , and Ilse De luyn (2017b): “F om social ins umen o mig a ion
managemen ool: assis ed olun a y e u n p og ammes – he case o Belgium: social
90
policy & adminis a ion.” Social Policy & Adminis a ion 51(7): 961–980.
doi:10.1111/spol.12185.
Lie ae , Ine, Ilse De luyn, and E ic B oekae (2014): “Re u nees’ pe spec i es on hei e-
mig a ion p ocesses.” In e na ional Mig a ion 52(5): 144–158. doi:10.1111/imig.12052.
Lie ae , Ine, and Ka ie Kuschminde (2021): “Con ex ualizing and concep ualizing
ein eg a ion p ocesses in he con ex o e u n.” In e na ional Mig a ion 59 (2): 140–147.
doi:10.1111/imig.12830.
Lindbe g, Annika, and Shah am Khos a i (2021): “Si ua ing depo a ion and expulsion in
mig a ion go e nance.” In Handbook on he Go e nance and Poli ics o Mig a ion, edi ed
by Emma Ca mel, Ka ha ina Lenne , and Regine Paul, 354–366. No hamp on: Edwa d
Elga Publishing.
Lippha d , Anna, and Inga Schwa z (2018): “Follow he people! Examining mig a ion
egimes h ough he ajec o ies o unau ho ized mig an s.” In Was is ein
Mig a ions egime? Wha is a mig a ion egime?, edi ed by And eas Po , Ch is oph Rass,
and F ank Wol , 187–204. Wiesbaden: Sp inge Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Loesche , Gil, Alexande Be s, and James Milne (2012): UNHCR: he poli ics and p ac ice
o e ugee p o ec ion. New Yo k: Rou ledge.
Lynch, Gab ielle, and Pe e VonDoepp (2020): Rou ledge handbook o democ a iza ion in
A ica. Abingdon: Rou ledge.
Maâ, Anissa (2021): “Manu ac u ing collabo a ion in he depo a ion ield: in e media ion and
he ins i u ionalisa ion o he In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion’s ‘ olun a y e u n’
p og ammes in Mo occo.” The Jou nal o No h A ican S udies 26(5): 1–22.
doi:10.1080/13629387.2020.1800210.
Ma ino, Rossella, and Ine Lie ae (2022): “The legi imisa ion o he policy objec i e o
sus ainable ein eg a ion.” In Handbook o Re u n Mig a ion, edi ed by Russell King and
Ka ie Kuschminde , 167–184. Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Ma ino, Rossella, Jo is Schapendonk, and Ine Lie ae (2023): “T ansla ing EU ope’s e u n
mig a ion egime o The Gambia: The inco po a ion o local CSOs.” Geopoli ics 28(3):
1033–1056. doi:10.1080/14650045.2022.2050700.
Massey, Douglas S., Joaquin A ango, G aeme Hugo, Ali Kouaouci, Adela Pelleg ino, and J.
Edwa d Taylo (1993): “Theo ies o in e na ional mig a ion: a e iew and app aisal.”
Popula ion and De elopmen Re iew 19(3): 431. doi:10.2307/2938462.
Meuse , Michael, and Ul ike Nagel (1991): “Expe lnnenin e iews – iel ach e p ob , wenig
bedach : Ein Bei ag zu quali a i en Me hodendiskussion.” In Quali a i -empi ische
Sozial o schung, edi ed by De le Ga z and Klaus K aime , 441–471. Wiesbaden: VS
Ve lag ü Sozialwissenscha en.
Mixed Mig a ion Cen e and Uni e si y o Edinbu gh (2022): Longi udinal esea ch wi h
people on he mo e: Me hodological epo on pilo ing epea ed in e iews wi h e ugees and
mig an s in Eas and No h A ica. June. h ps://mixedmig a ion.o g/wp-con en /uploads/
2022/06/234_Longi udinal_Resea ch_people_on_ he_mo e.pd (accessed 19 May 2025).
91
Moyo, Inocen (2020): Mig a ion conund ums, egional in eg a ion and de elopmen : A ica-
Eu ope ela ions in a changing global o de . Singapo e: Palg a e Macmillan.
Mig a ion and Sus ainable De elopmen in he Gambia P ojec (2020): O e iew o he
Gambian diaspo a popula ion. MSDG B ie ing Pape . h p://gambiandiaspo a.ne /wp-
con en /uploads/2021/01/MSDG-BP-9-O e iew-o - he-Gambian-Diaspo a-Popula ion-
Oc -2020_2.pd (accessed 19 May 2025).
Mwakikagile, God ey (2010): E hnic di e si y and in eg a ion in The Gambia: he land, he
people and he cul u e. Da es Salaam: Con inen al P ess.
Neale, B en (2016): Wha is quali a i e longi udinal esea ch? London: Bloomsbu y
Academic. doi:10.5040/9781472532992.
Newman-G igg, E in (2020): “Be ween mig a ion and de elopmen : he IOM’s de elopmen
und.” In The In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion: The new ’UN mig a ion agency in
c i ical pe spec i e, edi ed by Ma in Geige and An oine Pécoud, 99–122.
Nnaocha, Caje an I eanyi, and Ousman Mamakeh Bojang (2018): “Dic a o ship in A ican
poli ics and go e nance: he Yahya Jammeh ad en u e on The Gambia, Wes A ica
(1994–2017).” In Pe spec i es in his o y, de elopmen and in e na ional ela ions:
Fes sch i o P o esso Ib ahim James, edi ed by Ib ahim James, Te hemba Wuam, and
Philibus Audu Nwamagyi, 435–456. Kaduna, Nige ia: Kaduna S a e Uni e si y.
Noll, G ego (1999): “Rejec ed asylum seeke s: he p oblem o e u n.” In e na ional
Mig a ion 1(37): 267–288.
Nybe g-Sø ensen, Ninna, Nicholas an Hea , and Poul Engbe g-Pede sen (2002): “The
mig a ion–de elopmen nexus: e idence and policy op ions.” In e na ional Mig a ion
40(5): 49–73. doi:10.1111/1468-2435.00211.
Nzally, Jimmy Hend y (2022): “Con empo a y democ a iza ion p ocesses in A ica: pos
dic a o ship, and The Gambia’s agile democ acy.” In e na ional Jou nal o Poli ical
Science and Public Adminis a ion 2(2). doi:10.51483/IJPSPA.2.2.2022.1-15.
Øs e gaa d-Nielsen, E a (2003): “The poli ics o mig an s’ ansna ional poli ical p ac ices.”
In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew 37(3): 760–786.
Paasche, E lend (2014): Why assis ed e u n p og ammes mus be e alua ed. Insigh s om
he p ojec ‘Possibili ies and eali ies o e u n mig a ion.’ PRIO Policy B ie No. 8. Oslo:
Peace Resea ch Ins i u e.
Piñei o, Es eban, No a Loche , and Na halie Pasche (2022): “The a o so powe
banishmen . New insigh s in o he Swiss depo a ion egime.” E hnic and Racial S udies
45(16): 28–48. doi:10.1080/01419870.2021.1989010.
Pipe , Nicola (2009): “Tempo a y mig a ion and poli ical emi ances: he ole o
o ganisa ional ne wo ks in he ansna ionalisa ion o human igh s.” Eu opean Jou nal o
Eas Asian S udies 8(2): 215–243. doi:10.1163/156805809X12553326569678.
Po , And eas, Ch is oph Rass, and F ank Wol (eds.) (2018): Was is ein Mig a ions egime?
Wha is a mig a ion egime? Wiesbaden: Sp inge Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
92
Radziwinowiczówna, Agnieszka (2021): “The pos -depo a ion despe a ion and e unneling
o aspi a ions o he Mexicans depo ed om he Uni ed S a es:” T ans e s 11(2): 76–97.
doi:10.3167/TRANS.2021.110206.
Radziwinowiczówna, Agnieszka (2022): “Violence ha builds so e eign y: he ansna ional
iolence con inuum in depo a ion om he Uni ed S a es.” Jou nal o E hnic and
Mig a ion S udies 48(5): 1095–1112. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2020.1850244.
Radziwinowiczówna, Agnieszka (ed.) (2024): Resea ch me hods in depo a ion: he powe -
knowledge app oach. Chel enham, UK, and No hamp on, MA: Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Rass, Ch is oph, and F ank Wol (2018): “Wha is in a mig a ion egime? Genealogical
app oach and me hodological p oposal.” In Was is ein Mig a ions egime? Wha is a
mig a ion egime?, edi ed by And eas Po , Ch is oph Rass, and F ank Wol , 19–64.
Wiesbaden: Sp inge Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Republic o he Gambia (2018): The Gambia Na ional De elopmen Plan (2018-2021).
Banjul. h p://gambiandiaspo a.ne /wp-con en /uploads/2018/10/Gambia-Na ional-
De elopmen -Plan-NDP-2018-21.pd (accessed 19 May 2025).
Rodkey, E in (2016): “Disposable labo , epu posed: ou sou cing depo ees in he call cen e
indus y.” An h opology o Wo k Re iew 37(1): 34–43. doi:10.1111/aw .12083.
Roos, Ch is o , Flo ian T aune , and Ilke Adam (2024): “Bu eauc a ic mig a ion poli ics in
Wes A ica: oppo uni ies and dependencies c ea ed by EU unding.” In e na ional
Mig a ion Re iew 58(1): 296–318. doi:10.1177/01979183221142775.
Ruben, Rue d, Ma ieke an Hou e, and Tine Da ids (2009): “Wha de e mines he
embeddedness o o ced- e u n mig an s? Re hinking he ole o p e- and pos - e u n
assis ance.” In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew 43(4): 908–937. doi:10.1111/j.1747-
7379.2009.00789.x.
Rudol , Ma kus (2022): Talking a c oss-pu poses? On ambiguous ela ionships be ween
in e na ional policies on e u n and ein eg a ion and hei local concep ualisa ions in
Ghana, The Gambia and Senegal. BICC Wo king Pape No. 1/2022. Bonn: Bonn
In e na ional Cen e o Con lic S udies.
Sacche i, Sand a (2016): “Assis ed ‘ olun a y’ e u n o women o Koso o: he o ic and
eali y wi hin he amewo k o de elopmen .” Regions and Cohesion 6(2): 35–58.
doi:10.3167/ eco.2016.060204.
Saine, Abdoulaye S., and Eb ima Ceesay (2012): “Pos -coup poli ics and au ho i a ianism in
The Gambia: 1994–2012.” In S a e and socie y in The Gambia since independence, edi ed
by Abdoulaye Saine, Eb ima Ceesay, and Eb ima Sall, 151–186. T en on, NJ: A ica
Wo ld P ess.
Saine, Abdoulaye S., Eb ima Jogomai Ceesay, and Eb ima Sall (eds.) (2013): S a e and
socie y in The Gambia since independence. T en on, NJ: A ica Wo ld P ess.
Sallah, Tijan M. (2012): “S ange a me s and he de elopmen o The Gambia’s peanu
ade.” In S a e and socie y in The Gambia since independence, edi ed by Abdoulaye S.
Saine, Eb ima Jogomai Ceesay, and Eb ima Sall, 57–78. T en on, NJ: A ica Wo ld P ess.
93
Samuel Hall and In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mig a ion (2017): Se ing s anda ds o an
in eg a ed app oach o ein eg a ion. Summa y epo . Gene a: In e na ional O ganiza ion
o Mig a ion.
Schapendonk, Jo is, and Lo ha Smi h (2018): “Whose agenda? Bo om up posi ionali ies o
Wes A ican mig an s in he amewo k o Eu opean Union mig a ion managemen .”
A ican Human Mobili y Re iew 4(1): 1175–1204.
Schneide , Jan, and Axel K eienb ink (2010): Assis ed e u n in Ge many: p og ams and
s a egies ela ing o he os e ing o assis ed e u n and ein eg a ion in hi d coun ies.
S udy I/2009 wi hin he amewo k o he Eu opean Mig a ion Ne wo k (EMN). Wo king
Pape No. 31. Nu embe g: Fede al O ice o Mig a ion and Re ugees (BAMF).
Schul z, Susanne U. (2022): “Failed” mig a o y ad en u es? Malian men acing condi ions
pos depo a ion in sou he n Mali. Biele eld: ansc ip .
Schus e , Liza, and Nassim Majidi (2013): “Wha happens pos -depo a ion? The expe ience
o depo ed A ghans.” Mig a ion S udies 1(2): 221–240. doi:10.1093/mig a ion/mns011.
Schus e , Liza, and Nassim Majidi (2015): “Depo a ion s igma and e-mig a ion.” Jou nal o
E hnic and Mig a ion S udies 41(4): 635–652. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2014.957174.
Schwa z, S ephanie (2019): “Home, again: e ugee e u n and pos -con lic iolence in
Bu undi.” In e na ional Secu i y 44(2): 110–145. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00362.
Scio ino, Giuseppe (2004): “Be ween phan oms and necessa y e ils. Some c i ical poin s in
he s udy o i egula mig a ions o wes e n Eu ope.” IMIS-Bei äge No. 24: 17–44.
Sina i, Giulia (2015): “Re u n mig a ion as a win-win-win scena io? Visions o e u n among
Senegalese mig an s, he s a e o o igin and ecei ing coun ies.” E hnic and Racial S udies
38(2): 275–291. doi:10.1080/01419870.2013.868016.
Spilimbe go, An onio (2009): “Democ acy and o eign educa ion.” Ame ican Economic
Re iew 99(1): 528–543. doi:10.1257/ae .99.1.528.
S a is isches Bundesam (2023): “Auslände : Deu schland, S ich ag, Geschlech ,
Au en hal s i el/Ausgewähl e Au en hal s i el, Lände g uppie ungen/S aa sangehö igkei .”
(Tabelle 12521-0008). GENESIS-Online. h ps://www-genesis.des a is.de/genesis/online
(accessed 19 May 2025).
S a is isches Bundesam (2017): Be ölke ung und E we bs ä igkei 2016. Schu zsuchende.
E gebnisse des Auslände zen al egis e s. Fachse ie 1 Reihe 2.4. Wiesbaden: S a is isches
Bundesam .
S a is isches Bundesam (2019): Be ölke ung und E we bs ä igkei 2018. Schu zsuchende.
E gebnisse des Auslände zen al egis e s. Fachse ie 1 Reihe 2.4. Wiesbaden: S a is isches
Bundesam .
S and, A ne, Synnø e K is ine Neps ad Bendixsen, Hilde Lidén, E lend Paasche, and Lo ise
Aalen (2016): P og ammes o assis ed e u n o A ghanis an, I aqi Ku dis an, E hiopia
and Koso o: a compa a i e e alua ion o e ec i eness and ou comes. Be gen: Ch .
Michelsen Ins i u e.
100
B.V In e iews wi h Mig an s in Ge many
Label
Cha ac e iza ion
Place
Time
Da a collec ion o ma
R22
po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
Decembe 2020
in e iew
R23
po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
Decembe 2020
in e iew
I02
mig an & ac i is
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
May 2017
in e iew
Mig01
po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
Sep embe 2019
in e iew
Mig02
po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
Sep embe 2019
in e iew
Mig03
po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
No embe 2019
in e iew
Mig04
2 po en ially e u ning
Baden Wü embe g,
Ge many
No embe 2019
g oup in e iew
B.VI Pa icipan Obse a ions
Label
cha ac e iza ion
Place
Time
PO01
Ge man adminis a ion ‘Gambia ask o ce’ mee ing
S u ga , Ge many
Decembe 2017
PO02
“You h Agains I egula Mig a ion” weekly mee ing
G ea e Banjul A ea,
The Gambia
Feb ua y 2018
PO03
Homeless ansi e u nees
G ea e Banjul A ea,
The Gambia
Feb ua y 2018
PO04
YEP Roadmap Valida ion Wo kshop
G ea e Banjul A ea,
The Gambia
Feb ua y 2018
PO05
Ge man adminis a ion ‘Gambia ask o ce’ mee ing
S u ga , Ge many
No embe 2018
PO06
Ge man adminis a ion Gambia AVRR Wo kshop
Esslingen, Ge many
Janua y 2019
PO07
Ge man adminis a ion Wes A ica AVRR
Wo kshop
Ulm, Ge many
July 2019
101
APPENDIX C: EXEMPLARY QUESTION GUIDES
These ques ion guides se e as exempla y. Ques ion guides we e adap ed o each in e iew con ex and in e iew wa e.
C.I Ques ion Guide o Re u ned Mig an s – Wa e 1
Thank you e y much o you willingness o pa icipa e in my esea ch on e u n mig a ion o he Gambia. I wan o lea n abou expe iences o Gambian mig an s when hey e u n
and abou he ways hey hink abou poli ical issues. Fo his, I will lis en o you s o ies and you iews and maybe ask some ques ions in be ween. So I will be mo e o a lis ene
han o an in e iewe . Do you ha e any ques ions ega ding my wo k o wha I wan om you? (explain in e iew o ma )
BLOCK 0 – Opene
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
S a wi h a a he speci ic ques ion depending on how I know he pe son (e.g. depending on who I go he con ac om) o a e y open ques ion i I eel ha his will ge he pe son
alking, e.g.: So, how ha e you been doing la ely?
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- mos p essing issues, e.g. ega ding amily, housing, social, economic
- e lec ion o he e u n i sel
- e u n in socie al discussion (s igma/solida i y)
-
BLOCK 1 – In Ge many
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
Be o e we go mo e in o de ail abou you li e he e, can you ell me abou you si ua ion in Ge many be o e you e u ned?
- Maybe you can ell me a bi abou you li e he e, wha you we e doing o e he e.
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- li ing si ua ion (ci y, accommoda ion)
- las asylum s a us
- social li e
- job/income si ua ion
- suppo owa ds his amily
- ole o op ion o e u n
- suppo s uc u es
- Ge man ins i u ions & s a e suppo / o ce
- Poli ical ac i ism/ac i e posi ioning in
Ge many
- How did you spend you ime he e?
- Who did you spend i wi h?
- And wha abou you legal s a us? How did i de elop?
- So wha was he mos impo an you did o e he e in Ge many?
- And who suppo ed you o do/achie e ha ? How abou Ge man ins i u ions?
- Wha do you hink abou he ules and laws hey ha e in Ge many?
- Do you hink he Ge man go e nmen is a good go e nmen ?
- How a e hey in implemen ing he ules and laws? Good o he people?
- So all in all, did you eel suppo ed o o ced by he Ge man laws?
- A en’ you also a bi ang y abou no being able o s ay longe ? Un ai ?
- Did you speak ou you opinion openly abou he Ge man au ho i ies somehow? - Why (no )?
102
BLOCK 2 – Re u ning
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
So, why did you inally e u n?
- Did you ake a decision o do ha ?
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- du a ion o s ay
- ype o e u n ( olun a y/in olun a y)
- amily s andpoin s
- decision-making in luence ac o s: amily,
ins i u ions, social ne wo k, indi idual
si ua ion
- Who helped you o ake he decision?
- Did you pa en s o iends in he Gambia in luence you decision? - T y?
- Why no - he Ge mans? / - you Gambian iends?
- How did o he Gambians hink abou you e u ning? Why no ?
- So, wha happened a e you decided o e u n?
- And wha did you do o p epa e he e u n?
- Who helped you wi h he planning?
- We e you o e ed mo e suppo o p epa e you e u n?
- Wha did he e u n ad iso s do? - help you?
- And wha did you hink o ha ?
- Was he e any hing ha he Ge man au ho i ies could ha e done o make he e u n be e o you?
- And when you landed, wha happened?
- How was ha ? / Was ha good?
BLOCK 3 – P esen
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
And now you a e back. Can you maybe ell me wha we e he mos impo an hings ha happened in you li e since hen?
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- ime o e u n
- pe cei ed scope o agency
- impo ance o di e en ac o s
(poli ical/social)
- ole o (poli ical/o he ) suppo
- Was coming back like you had imagined?
- Wha is he bes suppo ha you ha e he e?
- And how has you amily eac ed o you e u n?
- Had hey been suppo i e o you aking he backway in he i s place?
- And a e you ying o make some money?
- How did you spend he ein eg a ion unding?
- And how abou o he people ha ha e e u ned? How a e hey doing?
- Did hey ace mo e o less p oblems han you do?
- Wha do some people ha ha e e u ned do di e en ly han you?
- Wha abou depo ees/ olun a y e u nees, how is hei si ua ion di e en ?
103
BLOCK 4 – Fu u e
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
And wha do you see o happen in you li e in he nea u u e?
- Wha do you hink will happen o you li e in he upcoming mon hs?
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- u u e p ospec s
- ole o economic/ social/ poli ical si ua ion
o decision-making
- means o ge ahead
- ole o (poli ical) suppo o ge ing ahead
- e-mig a ing as an op ion
- poli ical ac i ism as po en ial means o
shape own u u e
- Is he e some hing ha you eally wan o achie e in he upcoming mon hs?
- And wha a e you doing o each ha ? - which conc e e s eps?
- And who o wha suppo s you?
- How did you use he ein eg a ion money om he IOM so a ?
- Which o he inancial o o ganiza ional suppo did you ha e?
- Which kind o suppo would you need?
- Wha would you ha e done di e en ly i you had known how hings now de eloped?
- And wha abou mig a ing again? Is i an op ion o you?
BLOCK 5 – Poli ics
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
I am in e es ed in wha you hink abou poli ics mo e gene ally. Which changes do you see in he Gambia wi h he new go e nmen ?
- When you compa e he ime be o e and a e you jou ney, how is he Gambia di e en now om you pe spec i e?
Expec ed con en
Follow-up ques ions
- pe cei ed socie al changes h ough poli ical
change
- ele ance o poli ics in li e
- poli ical opinions
- poli ics & e u n
- na ional s. in e na ional ac o s
- pe cei ed scope o poli ical agency
- And wha can he go e nmen do o s eng hen he Gambian people in you opinion?
- Ha e you go he imp ession ha he go e nmen se es hei people be e now because i is mo e democ a ic?
- Wha do you hink abou ying o in luence poli ical decisions in he Gambia?
- Who do you hink can pa icipa e in poli ics? How?
- Wha do e u ned mig an s ha e o do wi h he go e nmen ?
- How could he si ua ion o e u n mig an s be imp o ed?
- Wha did you hink o he p o es s agains depo a ion?
- And wha abou g oups o backway e u nees ha o med associa ions, wha do you hink o ha ?
- Do you hink in Ge many people can speak hei mind on poli ics mo e openly han in he Gambia?
- Wha do you see di e en abou Ge many now han be o e you ook he backway?
- Do you hink ha Ge many should be esponsible o suppo you now o he Gambia?
104
C.II Ques ion Guide o Ins i u ions
Thank you e y much o you willingness o pa icipa e in my esea ch on e u n mig a ion o he Gambia. As I ha e al eady in o med you, I s udy e u n expe iences o Gambian
mig an s in ela ion o he e u n condi ions hey ace. Fo his, I in e iew bo h mig an s and ins i u ions ha a e in ol ed in e u n and ein eg a ion. The e o e, I am in e es ed in he
wo k o *ins i u ion* and he pe spec i es ha you ha e ecei ed on e u n and ein eg a ion h ough you wo k he e. (explain ques ion o ma )
Op ion a (no co-expe ):
BLOCK 1 – P io i ies
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
Can you ell me abou he p io i ized issues a e *ins i u ion* deals wi h a he momen ?
- ega ding he Gambia? (ins i u ions in Ge many)
- ega ding mig a ion? (non- ocused ins i u ions in The Gambia)
- ega ding he e u n o mig an s o he Gambia? (specialized ins i u ions in The Gambia)
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- wo k p io i ies and ole o Gambia/ e u n
he ein
- pe cep ion o ‘ e u nee’
- wo k & challenges ega ding mig a ion/
e u n
- need o managemen o mig a ion/ e u n
- A e he e any u he p io i ies?
- Why is his pa icula ly p io i ized?
- And wha o he aspec s o e u n managemen a e you in ol ed in?
- So which mig an s does *ins i u ion’s* wo k a ec / each/conside ?
- Why does he p og amme/ in e en ion ocus on hese e u nees?
Op ion b (co-expe )
BLOCK 1 – P io i ies
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
(Talk abou ecen e en , e.g.:) When e u n s a ed o become an issue in he Gambia in 2017, especially humani a ian e u nees om Libya se he agenda o mos people I
spoke o. Bu ecen ly, he numbe s o e u n om Eu ope and especially Ge many ha e inc eased s eadily. Which e ec has his had on you wo k p io i ies?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- wo k p io i ies
- pe cep ion/di e en ia ion o ‘ e u nees’
- challenges eg. e u n managemen
- need o managemen o mig a ion/ e u n
- How has i a ec ed he p io i ies o
*ins i u ion*?
- How did he challenges change since
hen?
- And how has i in luenced he ole o *ins i u ion’s* wo k in compa ison o o he
ac o s?
- And wha o he aspec s o e u n managemen a e you in ol ed in?
- So which mig an s does *ins i u ion’s* wo k a ec / each/conside ?
- Why does he suppo /p og amme/ in e en ion ocus on hese e u nees?
105
BLOCK 2 – Own wo k
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
2) So, *ins i u ion* is XXX14. Can you ell me a bi mo e wha you exac ly and conc e ely do o ul il ha ?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- wo k p ocesses
- ne wo ks (ins i u ions & mig an s)
- Mission’s objec i es
- disc epancies planning – eali y
- Which conc e e ac ions a e you
implemen ing ha deal wi h he issue o
e u n?
- In which wo k a eas a e you pe o ming mos success ully a he momen ?
- Wha a e he hings ha make you wo k mos di icul ?
- Which o e all de elopmen s ha you do no ha e an in luence on in you e e yday
wo k ha e g ea impac on you pe o mance?
BLOCK 3 – Gene al Se up and ne wo ks
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
3) As you ha e al eady indica ed/ As we know, he e a e nume ous di e en ac o s in ol ed in he complex p ocesses o e u n poli ics and managemen . Le ’s now maybe u n
owa ds ha ins i u ional con ex . Can you poin ou he mos impo an playe s in ha ield and wha ole hey play o you wo k?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- pe cep ion o ‘who is who’
- coope a ion and in e ac ion
- ins i u ion’s posi ion in he sys em
- esponsibili ies o di e en ins i u ions
- e alua ion o o he ’s wo ks
- And a e he e any mo e?
- And which a e maybe some ha a e a bi
less ele an / ha e been mo e impo an in
he pas / a e ying o ge in ol ed?
- Which ins i u ions does *ins i u ion* mos in ensely coope a e wi h?
- How does his coope a ion look like conc e ely? //Wha do you do oge he ?
- Wi h which Ge man/ Gambian ins i u ions do you communica e? Abou wha ?
- How do you see he coope a ion be ween domes ic and in e na ional ac o s?
- Do he o he s pe o m as good hey should?
- And which o he ins i u ions a e you less in ouch wi h? Why?
BLOCK 4 – Re u n eali ies
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
4) Now we ha e alked abou e u n as a p o essional ield. Tu ning owa ds he e u nees hemsel es, how do you pe cei e hei si ua ion when hey lea e he ai po ?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
14
Ins i u ion-speci ic in o ma ion ha signals ha I ha e been wo king on he issue, and ha I unde s and he ins i u ion’s manda e.
106
- pe cep ion o pos - e u n si ua ion o
mig an s
- pe cep ion o e u nees
- opinions abou igh o suppo
- di e en ia ion o e u nees
- Can you desc ibe o me wha happens o
hem igh a e e u ning and du ing
ein eg a ion?
- Which di e en ein eg a ion op ions exis ?
- So how do hey ge in ouch wi h di e en
ins i u ions/ se ice p o ide s?
- How a e he ones ha ha e al eady e u ned doing so a ?
- Wha a e he mos impo an s eps o in e en ions o hem o ein eg a e looking
a a mo e long- e m pe spec i e?
- Wha in luences whe he an indi idual ein eg a ion goes well o doesn’ ?
- How impo an do you es ima e is he access o se ices o e u nees and hei
ein eg a ion?
- Bu one could also ques ion why e u nees should ge speci ic ins i u ional suppo
whe eas hose who s ayed ace di icul ies as well. Wha do you hink abou ha ?
BLOCK 5 – E alua ion
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
5) Compa ing he sys em in place and he eali y o e u n, how success ul do you assess he e u n managemen ?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- pe cep ion o e all managemen pe o mance
- pe cep ion own pe o mance
- judgemen o he ac o s/ compa ing balance o
in luence
- desc ibing gaps
- In which ways do he ins i u ions no
achie e wha is necessa y?
- How, do you hink, do he e u nees
ge along wi h he suppo hey a e
p o ided so a ?
- Wha would i need (mos ) o make e u n and ein eg a ion (e en) mo e
success ul?
- Which changes would he ins i u ional se up need o pe o m (e en) be e ?
- O does i need some ac o s o s ep back in some way?
- How do he e u nees con ibu e o he cu en s a e o success/pe o mance?
BLOCK 6 – Fu u e
Guiding ques ion / s imulus / p omp
6) Now looking ahead, wha do you expec o happen in u u e ega ding e u n om Eu ope/US?
Expec ed con en
Main aining ques ions
Follow-up ques ions
- assessmen in e na ional mig a ion poli ics
- Which a e he bigges
challenges coming up in u u e
ega ding e u n?
- Wha is he na ional go e nmen doing in o de o deal wi h hese issues?
- And do you hink hey could handle i di e en ly?
- In how a is i he in e na ional ac o s’ esponsibili y also o deal wi h hese
challenges?
- A e hey awa e o ha a all?
- How could *ins i u ion* eac p ope ly o his de elopmen ?
- P o oca i e/c i ical Q