Comparative Migration Studies最新文献

The promise of artificial intelligence has been originally to put technology at the service of people utilizing powerful information processors and 'smart' algorithms to quickly perform time-consuming data analysis. It soon though became apparent that the capacity of artificial intelligence to scrape and analyze big data would be particularly useful in surveillance policies. In the wider areas of migration and asylum management, increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence tools have been used to register and manage vulnerable populations without much concern about the potential misuses of the data collected and the overall ethical and legal underpinnings of these operations. This article examines three cases in point. The first case investigates the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' decision to deploy a biometric matching engine engaging artificial intelligence to make accessing identification documents easier for both refugees and asylum seekers and the states and organizations they interact with. The second case focuses on the New Zealand government's introduction of artificial intelligence to improve border security and streamline immigration. The third case looks at data scraping and biometric recognition tools implemented by the United States government to track (and eventually deport) undocumented migrants. The article first shows how states and international organizations are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence tools to support the implementation of their immigration policies and programs. Subsequently, the article also outlines how even despite well-intentioned efforts, the decision to use artificial intelligence tools to increase efficiency and support the implementation of migration or asylum management policies and programs often involves jeopardizing or altogether sacrificing individuals' human rights, including privacy and security, and raises concerns about vulnerability and transparency.

With a recent surge in the outward movement of the population, a new wave of emigration has been suggested to have started in Hong Kong. It is speculated that recent socio-political changes in Hong Kong may have contributed to this phenomenon. Therefore, five socio-political variables-mobility, sense of place, trust and confidence in the law and the legal system, global citizenship, and perception of inequality-are employed in this study as proposed determinants to investigate the intention of Hong Kong residents to migrate to mainland China and to other international destinations. A random telephone questionnaire survey representative of the local population was conducted, with a total of 801 valid samples collected. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was carried out. The results showed that all five proposed socio-political variables successfully predicted people's migration intention to mainland China and to foreign countries, with important variations between the two choices. Our results carry strong implications for understanding people's concerns behind their intention to emigrate. Further, our findings present a challenge for Hong Kong; society may gradually be failing to accommodate individuals with diverse perceptions and values, particularly in terms of trust and confidence in the law and the legal system, and individuals' sense of global citizenship.

The global pandemic has resulted in ad hoc unilateral policies on migration, mobility and border management while at the same time emphasizing the need for global cooperation. For global governance in this field to be effective, it needs to include stakeholders beyond states and international institutions. The Global Compact for safe, orderly and regular Migration (GCM) highlights the role of those groups directly affected by global policies, i.e. migrants and their organisations. The goal of this paper is to analyse the role of civil society in global migration governance in times of COVID-19. It employs a comparative approach between "invented" and "invited" spaces. "Invited spaces" in this context refer to spaces created by international organisations such as the United Nations Network on Migration's "Stakeholder Listening Sessions" on COVID-19 and the resulting statements. "Invented Spaces" refer to self-organized spaces by civil society actors. The paper will compare these spaces regarding their openness, the central issues and calls for specific policy measures, the stakeholders involved and the strategies they employ. I argue that the pandemic has strengthened the "input" dimension for migrant civil society in global governance. This relates to the structure/format as well as to the content of the participation. "Zoomification" has opened up access to "invited" spaces while pushing forward the creation and scope of "invented" spaces". There are indicators that the pandemic has also influenced parts of the output dimension, although it is too early to assess whether this will have a lasting effect on policies on the ground.