从脆弱到信任

Q1 Social Sciences Migration and Society Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.3167/arms.2022.050106
Pierre Monforte, Gaja Maestri
{"title":"从脆弱到信任","authors":"Pierre Monforte, Gaja Maestri","doi":"10.3167/arms.2022.050106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the complex and ambivalent nature of the encounters between British volunteers and refugees within the 2015 Refugees Welcome movement. The 72 interviews we conducted with volunteers active in different charities and informal networks reveal the significance of the logic of trust in these encounters. We show that although participants often base their engagement on claims that disrupt dominant narratives about border controls, they also tend to endorse and reproduce bordering processes based on the perceived trustworthiness of refugees and, sometimes, exclude some groups from their support. Taking insights from the literature on encounters and critical humanitarianism, our article highlights from a theoretical and empirical perspective how “ordinary participants” in the refugee support sector can subvert humanitarian borders, but also participate in the construction of new types of borders based on domopolitics. More generally, the article aims to highlight civil society’s voluntary participation in the governance of migration.","PeriodicalId":52702,"journal":{"name":"Migration and Society","volume":"254 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Vulnerability to Trust\",\"authors\":\"Pierre Monforte, Gaja Maestri\",\"doi\":\"10.3167/arms.2022.050106\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines the complex and ambivalent nature of the encounters between British volunteers and refugees within the 2015 Refugees Welcome movement. The 72 interviews we conducted with volunteers active in different charities and informal networks reveal the significance of the logic of trust in these encounters. We show that although participants often base their engagement on claims that disrupt dominant narratives about border controls, they also tend to endorse and reproduce bordering processes based on the perceived trustworthiness of refugees and, sometimes, exclude some groups from their support. Taking insights from the literature on encounters and critical humanitarianism, our article highlights from a theoretical and empirical perspective how “ordinary participants” in the refugee support sector can subvert humanitarian borders, but also participate in the construction of new types of borders based on domopolitics. More generally, the article aims to highlight civil society’s voluntary participation in the governance of migration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Migration and Society\",\"volume\":\"254 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Migration and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3167/arms.2022.050106\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Migration and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/arms.2022.050106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文考察了2015年难民欢迎运动中英国志愿者和难民之间复杂而矛盾的遭遇。我们对活跃在不同慈善机构和非正式网络中的志愿者进行了72次采访,揭示了信任逻辑在这些遭遇中的重要性。我们的研究表明,尽管参与者的参与往往基于破坏有关边境管制的主流叙述的主张,但他们也倾向于基于难民的可信赖性来支持和再现边境进程,有时会将某些群体排除在他们的支持之外。我们的文章从关于遭遇和批判人道主义的文献中获得见解,从理论和实证的角度强调了难民支持部门的“普通参与者”如何颠覆人道主义边界,同时也参与基于霸权政治的新型边界的建设。更广泛地说,这篇文章旨在强调公民社会在移民治理中的自愿参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
From Vulnerability to Trust
This article examines the complex and ambivalent nature of the encounters between British volunteers and refugees within the 2015 Refugees Welcome movement. The 72 interviews we conducted with volunteers active in different charities and informal networks reveal the significance of the logic of trust in these encounters. We show that although participants often base their engagement on claims that disrupt dominant narratives about border controls, they also tend to endorse and reproduce bordering processes based on the perceived trustworthiness of refugees and, sometimes, exclude some groups from their support. Taking insights from the literature on encounters and critical humanitarianism, our article highlights from a theoretical and empirical perspective how “ordinary participants” in the refugee support sector can subvert humanitarian borders, but also participate in the construction of new types of borders based on domopolitics. More generally, the article aims to highlight civil society’s voluntary participation in the governance of migration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
The “Transnational Business of Death” Among Somali Migrants in the Streets of Athens Enacting “Bottom-up” Solidarity in Labor Market Integration for Refugees in England The Gendered Necropolitics of Migration Control in a French Postcolonial Periphery Writing as Living On Using Photovoice to Explore Migrant Women's Sociospatial Engagement in Diverse Local Urban Areas of Santiago, Chile
×
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