Same, same but different? A Discourse Network Analysis of the EU's framings of refugee arrivals in 2015 and 2022.

IF 2.8 1区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Pub Date : 2024-11-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/1369183X.2024.2431053
Lara Sosa Popovic, Natalie Welfens
{"title":"Same, same but different? A Discourse Network Analysis of the EU's framings of refugee arrivals in 2015 and 2022.","authors":"Lara Sosa Popovic, Natalie Welfens","doi":"10.1080/1369183X.2024.2431053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The European Union (EU) experienced two major instances of refugee influx: in 2015, refugees, mainly from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq fled civil war, persecution, and dire conditions in neighbouring countries and in 2022, Ukrainians fled from Russia's full-scale invasion. Fusing theoretical insights on framing and crisification of migration, we ask: How do EU actors frame situations of refugee mass influx? Employing a Discourse Network Analysis, we examine EU representatives' framing of both instances with respect to three analytical foci: (1) who or what they considered to be in crisis, (2) their framing of refugees; and (3) who they saw to be responsible for solving the crisis. We show how, in 2015, EU representatives framed mass displacement predominantly as a crisis at and of Europe's borders, and refugees as threats to Member States' public, economic and cultural security. In contrast, in 2022, crisis framings are almost absent or pertain to Ukraine's - and by extension the EU's - security. Ukrainian protection seekers are framed as ethnically and culturally similar and their protection as a humanitarian imperative. Our analysis empirically substantiates debates about double standards in refugee governance and draws attention to actor constellations and the factors that shape crisification of mobility.</p>","PeriodicalId":48371,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies","volume":"51 3","pages":"609-632"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11750152/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2024.2431053","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The European Union (EU) experienced two major instances of refugee influx: in 2015, refugees, mainly from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq fled civil war, persecution, and dire conditions in neighbouring countries and in 2022, Ukrainians fled from Russia's full-scale invasion. Fusing theoretical insights on framing and crisification of migration, we ask: How do EU actors frame situations of refugee mass influx? Employing a Discourse Network Analysis, we examine EU representatives' framing of both instances with respect to three analytical foci: (1) who or what they considered to be in crisis, (2) their framing of refugees; and (3) who they saw to be responsible for solving the crisis. We show how, in 2015, EU representatives framed mass displacement predominantly as a crisis at and of Europe's borders, and refugees as threats to Member States' public, economic and cultural security. In contrast, in 2022, crisis framings are almost absent or pertain to Ukraine's - and by extension the EU's - security. Ukrainian protection seekers are framed as ethnically and culturally similar and their protection as a humanitarian imperative. Our analysis empirically substantiates debates about double standards in refugee governance and draws attention to actor constellations and the factors that shape crisification of mobility.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
157
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies (JEMS) publishes the results of first-class research on all forms of migration and its consequences, together with articles on ethnic conflict, discrimination, racism, nationalism, citizenship and policies of integration. Contributions to the journal, which are all fully refereed, are especially welcome when they are the result of original empirical research that makes a clear contribution to the field of migration JEMS has a long-standing interest in informed policy debate and contributions are welcomed which seek to develop the implications of research for policy innovation, or which evaluate the results of previous initiatives. The journal is also interested in publishing the results of theoretical work.
期刊最新文献
Same, same but different? A Discourse Network Analysis of the EU's framings of refugee arrivals in 2015 and 2022. 'As if the soul returns to the body': affect, stuckedness, and (in)voluntary return to Nicaragua from Spain. Making (in)formality work in a multi-scalar European border regime. Playing dirty: the shady governance and reproduction of migrant illegality. Noninvasive Biomarkers for Alcohol-Related Liver Disease-A Proteomic Related Preliminary Report.
×
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