‘I take care and the state sabotages from the beginning to the end!’: tracing ‘volunteering’ in European provision arrangements for refugees and asylum seekers

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Citizenship Studies Pub Date : 2022-12-05 DOI:10.1080/13621025.2022.2151570
Katrin Kremmel
{"title":"‘I take care and the state sabotages from the beginning to the end!’: tracing ‘volunteering’ in European provision arrangements for refugees and asylum seekers","authors":"Katrin Kremmel","doi":"10.1080/13621025.2022.2151570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the spring of 2015, the citizens’ initiative ‘We Welcome’ in a small municipality in Western Austria published a manifesto to announce that it had invented and granted ‘municipal asylum’ to two asylum seekers, to protect them from deportation by national authorities. In this article, I follow the logics of the extended case method as I discuss the initiative We Welcome as an extraordinary example of volunteering in the asylum regime. Recent literature on the role of volunteers in refugee reception fails to historically situate volunteering as part and parcel of provision arrangements for asylum seekers and refugees. I address this gap by looking into the emergence of ‘volunteering’ as an object of knowledge production and policy-making since the 1980s. I further show that the experiences of the initiative’s participants run counter to hegemonic discourses, which picture ‘volunteering’ as a means to produce trust and social cohesion. Instead of eliciting their trust, their experiences as volunteers deeply alienated them from the nation-state, and their citizenship was unsettled.","PeriodicalId":47860,"journal":{"name":"Citizenship Studies","volume":"27 1","pages":"465 - 480"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Citizenship Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2151570","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT In the spring of 2015, the citizens’ initiative ‘We Welcome’ in a small municipality in Western Austria published a manifesto to announce that it had invented and granted ‘municipal asylum’ to two asylum seekers, to protect them from deportation by national authorities. In this article, I follow the logics of the extended case method as I discuss the initiative We Welcome as an extraordinary example of volunteering in the asylum regime. Recent literature on the role of volunteers in refugee reception fails to historically situate volunteering as part and parcel of provision arrangements for asylum seekers and refugees. I address this gap by looking into the emergence of ‘volunteering’ as an object of knowledge production and policy-making since the 1980s. I further show that the experiences of the initiative’s participants run counter to hegemonic discourses, which picture ‘volunteering’ as a means to produce trust and social cohesion. Instead of eliciting their trust, their experiences as volunteers deeply alienated them from the nation-state, and their citizenship was unsettled.
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
“我很小心,国家从头到尾都在搞破坏!”:追踪欧洲难民和寻求庇护者提供安排中的“志愿服务”
摘要2015年春季,奥地利西部一个小城市的公民倡议“我们欢迎”发表了一份宣言,宣布发明并向两名寻求庇护者提供“城市庇护”,以保护他们免受国家当局的驱逐。在这篇文章中,我遵循扩展案例法的逻辑,讨论“我们欢迎”倡议,将其作为庇护制度中志愿服务的一个非凡例子。最近关于志愿人员在难民接待中的作用的文献,在历史上没有将志愿服务作为为寻求庇护者和难民提供服务安排的一部分。我通过研究自20世纪80年代以来“志愿服务”作为知识生产和决策对象的出现来解决这一差距。我进一步表明,该倡议参与者的经历与霸权话语背道而驰,霸权话语将“志愿服务”视为产生信任和社会凝聚力的一种手段。他们作为志愿者的经历非但没有赢得他们的信任,反而使他们与民族国家深深疏远,他们的公民身份也不稳定。
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
Citizenship Studies
Citizenship Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: Citizenship Studies publishes internationally recognised scholarly work on contemporary issues in citizenship, human rights and democratic processes from an interdisciplinary perspective covering the fields of politics, sociology, history and cultural studies. It seeks to lead an international debate on the academic analysis of citizenship, and also aims to cross the division between internal and academic and external public debate. The journal focuses on debates that move beyond conventional notions of citizenship, and treats citizenship as a strategic concept that is central in the analysis of identity, participation, empowerment, human rights and the public interest.
期刊最新文献
Subaltern citizenship: naturalization and belonging for New Russian citizens from Central Asia. Affecting belonging: experimental education, cultural resources, and affective cultural citizenship in contemporary China Confucian education, cultural responsibility, and Chinese identity: why do Chinese immigrant parents engage their children in learning Confucian classics? What does the ideal citizen look like in China’s new era? A bottom-up view Posthuman citizenship
×
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:604180095
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