Migration Governance in South Africa

Dr. Gabriel Lubale
{"title":"Migration Governance in South Africa","authors":"Dr. Gabriel Lubale","doi":"10.24940/ijird/2023/v12/i10/oct23008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The emerging global migration governance architecture is very different from the formal multilateralism of the post-1945 era that influenced the evolution of transboundary issues of trade, the environment, and finance. States have recognised that they cannot address the challenge of migration without international cooperation. Consequently, multiple institutions co-exist across the bilateral, regional, inter-regional, and multilateral levels, through both formal and informal structures. Proponents of a 'management' approach to global migration governance, primarily countries in the Global North, have preferred to keep intergovernmental discussions regarding migration outside of the United Nations (UN) in various state-led fora in different regional and global settings. Equally, countries in the Global South, along with normative organizations such as ILO, OHCHR, and IOM, have sought to further a rights-based approach to the governance of migration within the UN. IOM's recommendation that has been faulted by academia for being biased: International migration in countries in the Global South, including South Africa, is that migration management frameworks should be anchored in sound policies and underpinned by enabling legal frameworks and implementation strategies that have the support of all stakeholders and devoid of these symptoms of a lack of coordination, coherence and cooperation. The academic critique fails to appreciate that public administration has many lenses that are not in public domains. This paper is explanatory research that is built on exploratory and descriptive research types. It goes further to determine causes and reasons, extend the theory or principles, and provide evidence to support or refute explanations or predictions. The research philosophy of this paper is pragmatism underpinned by the nature of reality, the nature of knowledge of migration governance and the role of values of the researcher. It reviewed relevant literature to the paper, applicable policies, laws, discourses, and practices following a qualitative method with reflexive and critical comparison approach combining broad, multidisciplinary literature review; evaluating of promotion, application, and treaty review of international standards; the direct participation in policy processes in two Reginal Economic Communities in Africa: EAC and IGAD. The relevant literature reviewed are publications on migration, migration management, migration governance, migration development, border management, national security, human rights, international relations, social protection, international labour and skills mobility, development, and related themes. This paper adopted the model of migration that draws upon recent developments in migration theory: the Model Mechanisms that Produce Migration. MMPM does away with the notion of root causes; the notion of 'root causes' originated in the European policy debates about conflict-driven displacement. The attempts to tackle root causes centred on humanitarian action to prevent violence, end human rights abuses, and facilitate peace-building. This flawed preventative logic was transferred to economically motivated migration with the assumption that migration can be stemmed by alleviating poverty and creating jobs. The knowledge growth about the mixed nature of migration flows and migration motivations has been recognized by governments and international agencies and is broadly applicable across different categories of migrants, including refugees. The Model is built around three steps. Migration governance in South Africa remains a complex and challenging issue, requiring a comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated approach from the government and other stakeholders described as a whole-of-society and government approach and partnership. Adequate State funding and stakeholders' participation in the implementation of the South Africa White Paper on International Migration has the potential to address many of the challenges associated with migration governance in the country and the SADC region effectively and sustainably.","PeriodicalId":503137,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Innovative Research and Development","volume":"172 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Innovative Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24940/ijird/2023/v12/i10/oct23008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The emerging global migration governance architecture is very different from the formal multilateralism of the post-1945 era that influenced the evolution of transboundary issues of trade, the environment, and finance. States have recognised that they cannot address the challenge of migration without international cooperation. Consequently, multiple institutions co-exist across the bilateral, regional, inter-regional, and multilateral levels, through both formal and informal structures. Proponents of a 'management' approach to global migration governance, primarily countries in the Global North, have preferred to keep intergovernmental discussions regarding migration outside of the United Nations (UN) in various state-led fora in different regional and global settings. Equally, countries in the Global South, along with normative organizations such as ILO, OHCHR, and IOM, have sought to further a rights-based approach to the governance of migration within the UN. IOM's recommendation that has been faulted by academia for being biased: International migration in countries in the Global South, including South Africa, is that migration management frameworks should be anchored in sound policies and underpinned by enabling legal frameworks and implementation strategies that have the support of all stakeholders and devoid of these symptoms of a lack of coordination, coherence and cooperation. The academic critique fails to appreciate that public administration has many lenses that are not in public domains. This paper is explanatory research that is built on exploratory and descriptive research types. It goes further to determine causes and reasons, extend the theory or principles, and provide evidence to support or refute explanations or predictions. The research philosophy of this paper is pragmatism underpinned by the nature of reality, the nature of knowledge of migration governance and the role of values of the researcher. It reviewed relevant literature to the paper, applicable policies, laws, discourses, and practices following a qualitative method with reflexive and critical comparison approach combining broad, multidisciplinary literature review; evaluating of promotion, application, and treaty review of international standards; the direct participation in policy processes in two Reginal Economic Communities in Africa: EAC and IGAD. The relevant literature reviewed are publications on migration, migration management, migration governance, migration development, border management, national security, human rights, international relations, social protection, international labour and skills mobility, development, and related themes. This paper adopted the model of migration that draws upon recent developments in migration theory: the Model Mechanisms that Produce Migration. MMPM does away with the notion of root causes; the notion of 'root causes' originated in the European policy debates about conflict-driven displacement. The attempts to tackle root causes centred on humanitarian action to prevent violence, end human rights abuses, and facilitate peace-building. This flawed preventative logic was transferred to economically motivated migration with the assumption that migration can be stemmed by alleviating poverty and creating jobs. The knowledge growth about the mixed nature of migration flows and migration motivations has been recognized by governments and international agencies and is broadly applicable across different categories of migrants, including refugees. The Model is built around three steps. Migration governance in South Africa remains a complex and challenging issue, requiring a comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated approach from the government and other stakeholders described as a whole-of-society and government approach and partnership. Adequate State funding and stakeholders' participation in the implementation of the South Africa White Paper on International Migration has the potential to address many of the challenges associated with migration governance in the country and the SADC region effectively and sustainably.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
南非的移民管理
新出现的全球移民治理架构与 1945 年后影响贸易、环境和金融等跨界问题演变的正式多边主义大相径庭。各国已经认识到,没有国际合作,就无法应对移民挑战。因此,在双边、地区、地区间和多边层面,通过正式和非正式的结构,多种机构并存。全球移民治理'管理'方法的支持者,主要是全球北方国家,倾向于在联合国(UN)之外,在不同地区和全球背景下,通过各种国家主导的论坛,开展有关移民问题的政府间讨论。同样,全球南方国家与国际劳工组织、联合国人权事务高级专员办事处和国际移民组织等规范性组织一道,寻求在联合国内部推进以权利为基础的移徙管理方法。国际移民组织的建议被学术界指责为有失偏颇:包括南非在内的全球南部国家的国际移徙问题是,移徙管理框架应立足于健全的政 策,并以有利的法律框架和实施战略为基础,得到所有利益攸关方的支持,避免出现缺乏协 调、一致与合作的现象。学术界的批评没有认识到公共行政有许多不属于公共领域的镜头。本文是建立在探索性和描述性研究基础上的解释性研究。它进一步确定原因和理由,扩展理论或原则,并提供证据来支持或反驳解释或预测。本文的研究理念是实用主义,其基础是现实的性质、移民治理知识的性质以及研究者的价值观作用。本文采用定性方法,通过反思和批判性比较的方法,结合广泛的多学科文献综述,审查了与本文相关的文献、适用的政策、法律、论述和实践;对国际标准的推广、应用和条约审查进行了评估;直接参与了非洲两个区域经济共同体的政策制定过程:直接参与东非共同体和政府间发展管理局的政策制定过程。审查的相关文献是关于移民、移民管理、移民治理、移民发展、边境管理、国家安 全、人权、国际关系、社会保护、国际劳工和技能流动、发展及相关主题的出版物。本文采用了借鉴移徙理论最新发展的移徙模式:"产生移徙的机制模式"。产生移民的机制模式摒弃了 "根源 "的概念;"根源 "的概念源于欧洲关于冲突导致的流离失所问题的政策辩论。解决根本原因的尝试集中在人道主义行动上,以防止暴力、结束侵犯人权行为并促进和平建设。这种有缺陷的预防性逻辑被转移到了经济动机的移民问题上,其假设是可以通过减轻贫困和创造就业来阻止移民。关于移民潮和移民动机混合性质的知识增长已得到各国政府和国际机构的认可,并广泛适用于包括难民在内的各类移民。该模式围绕三个步骤展开。南非的移民治理仍然是一个复杂而具有挑战性的问题,需要政府和其他利益相关方采取全面、协调和综合的方法,即全社会和政府的方法和伙伴关系。在实施《南非国际移民白皮书》的过程中,充足的国家资金和利益相关方的参与有可能有效、可持续地解决与南非和南部非洲发展共同体地区移民治理相关的许多挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Success Factors Associated with Frugal Business Modelling: An Exploratory Factor Analysis A Systematic Overview of Fuzzy Extended Entity Relationship (Fuzzy EER) Model Using Practical Examples General Insights into Higher Education Dynamics: Understanding Challenges and Exploring Implications for Moroccan Universities Selected Prospects for the Development of the Ukraine Economy in the Context of Wartime Demographic Transformations Major Constrains to Choice of Waste Management Strategies among the Poor and Non-Poor Households in South-west Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1