By: Julia Duffner
The University of Cologne
The debate around migration, as well as the academic and practical approach to migration are inextricably linked to power dynamics. This became particularly clear in the contributions during the Autumn Research Academy "Dialogues on Migration Governance in the Mediterranean Region". In October 2023, students and faculty members from the University of Cologne and the American University of Cairo participated in an Autumn Research Academy, engaging on Dialogue on Migration Governance in the Mediterranean Region.
Research and practice in the field of migration in the Mediterranean region offer insight into the interactions of power, borders, and the constant dynamics of movement. The world as we know is divided into nation-states, and borders come to the fore and exercise power; these nation-states thus serve as defining parameters as delimited units in scientific and political discourse. However, borders are a construct that conveys stasis and denounces fluidity, inherently embodying notions of separation and obstacles. Nevertheless, a more accurate look reveals that stasis is the exception, while mobility, migration, movement, and change are the norm. In the following, I would like to elaborate on how the Research Academy has revealed that dealing with migration in the Mediterranean region always involves negotiating and confronting power dynamics.
What is the norm? Mobility or stasis?
The Autumn Research Academy "Dialogues on Migration Governance in the Mediterranean Region" impressively illustrates how global power systems are inherently anchored in migration studies, both on the political and on the academic level. In the academic context, migration studies are discussed within the discourse of globalization. Within anthropological research, the mobility turn emerged in the 1980s (Schiller und Salazar 2013: 184). Global movements of people, objects, and financial flows received a great deal of attention. With this paradigm shift researchers in anthropology recognized people not only as recipients but also as actors in the globally interconnected world. Life courses were recognized as decentralized, and anthropological research focused on the movement of these life courses. But Nina Glick Schiller and Noel B. Salazar ask the question: shouldn't we have stasis studies instead of mobility studies? Isn't mobility the norm and stasis the exception (Schiller and Salazar 2013: 185)?
With the mobility turn, the concept of globalization gains importance. However, scholars such as Raewyn Connell and Nour Dados (2012) criticize that it obscures the underlying geopolitical power dynamics. They therefore argue for the use of the terms Global North and Global South, as these highlight the hegemonies and ongoing power inequalities that have their roots in the history of imperialism and its continuities: ”The North- South language provided an alternative to the concept of ‘globalization,’ contesting the belief in a growing homogenization of cultures and societies“ (Connell and Dados 2012: 12). These power inequalities have also influenced the academic discourse on globalization; this is because theorizing takes place in the Global North. Raewyn Connell makes it clear that the Global North is a metropolis where theory is made and received, while in the Global South the corresponding empiricism is collected. She draws parallels to resource extractivism and exploitation in the periphery, the Global South, and processing in the metropole, the Global North, and uses these terms to refer to the pronounced power structures (cf. Connell 2014: 521). The resulting epistemic violence is reinforced by the need for researchers to publish in internationally renowned journals, which are mainly published in the US and Europe.
Thus, the globalization discourse of the Global North is strongly oriented toward nation-states and their borders. Research either takes place within these borders or takes them as a central point of reference. During the Research Academy, Ibrahim Awad from the American University of Cairo pointed out that theories of migration are founded in the countries of immigration and shaped by their ideas and experiences, creating a discourse dominated by Western narratives and hegemonies. This is particularly evident in the ambivalent perception of migration: glorification and demonization. On the one hand, people who live in and travel to many places on this globe are considered cosmopolitan and enjoy a high reputation; on the other hand, migration is stigmatized and forbidden, and demonized in public and political discourse (cf. Schiller and Salazar 2013: 184). Mobility studies, that are shaped and shape these discourses, create social fields of power and hierarchy. Another aspect that characterizes the hegemonies in migration studies is the focus on South-North migration, which covers only a fraction of global migration movements. There are much larger migration movements in the South-South context, but here too the metropolitan position of the Global North becomes visible and produces and reproduces the described bias: the political interest of the Global North in South-North migration and the associated financial support leads to a one-sided research priority and conditions hegemonies. In her presentation at the Research Academy, Michaela Pelican emphasized that decolonization requires a diversification of perspectives in migration studies and thus a focus on South-South migration. With 36% of migration taking place within the Global South, more migration takes place within the Global South than between South and North. She also calls for the inclusion of migrants' subjective perspectives in research by acknowledging migrants' agency and focusing on their aspirations and capabilities.
Thinking out of the box of a nation state
The role of the nation-state is central to the question of hegemonies in migration studies. Both on the political level and in academic discourse. Methodological nationalism is a concept in the social sciences that describes a homogenization of nation states and delimitable units based on borders (Schiller and Salazar 2013: 185). Nation-states and borders are understood as frames of reference, and migration is seen as the entry and exit of closed units. There is much criticism of the methodological nationalism and a transnational approach to migration is called for. In order to dismantle hegemonies and achieve the decolonization of knowledge, colonial continuities must always be kept in mind. In view of the fact that borders and nation-states were often created in a colonial context, Ibrahim Awad asked: is the migrant irregular or is the border irregular?
Nation-states themselves exercise power and lead to injustices, for example by creating categories such as the "good refugee," which showcase the demonization and glorification of migration in public and political discourse.
Migration justice through applied research?
While Ibrahim Awad sees the role of knowledge production in academia as informing and educating people and reaching decision-makers, Jill Alpes emphasizes the need for research to be action-oriented and critical. In this way, research can have a direct impact at the policy level.
The methodological challenge of studying a diffuse complex such as the nation-state in a scholarly context is the focus of attention onto its organs and institutions, similar to Jill Alpes' focus on litigation and jurisdiction, as she explained in her presentation at the Research Academy. She devotes her applied research to push-backs and litigation, examining the process of validation and invalidation of push-backs in depth and asking under what conditions truth claims in human rights advocacy and litigation can have a political and/ or legal impact. Push-back is the practice of turning away or pushing back people seeking protection in violation of international law and preventing refugees from exercising their fundamental right to asylum.
Her studies illustrate how academics can have a significant impact on policymakers to actively advocate for migration justice. Jill Alpes uses law as a tool to illuminate this particular aspect of the nation-state from both within and without. In doing so, she emphasizes that research findings must be practice oriented. Her approach is not just to translate academic knowledge for a wider audience, but to actively transmit it into action and policy. As a best practice, she recommends researchers to engage in direct collaboration with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to fully disclose and share all collected data. This transparent exchange allows the knowledge gained to be directly transferred into concrete actions and policy initiatives.
The importance of applied research was highlighted during the Research Academy not only through the work of Jill Alpes, but also through the experience of Sea Watch. Two representatives of Sea Watch shared their practical experience of sea rescues in the Mediterranean and the impact of migration policies. They drew attention to numerous institutionalized human rights violations, particularly by Frontex, the European Union's border and coast guard agency.
Interconnectedness between moving entities
The Research Academy also focused on the migration of more-than-human beings and the significance of religion. As already described, migration studies gained influence in the context of the mobility turn of the 1980s. The texts of Arjun Appadurai and his flow theory were influential in this period. The examples of interconnectedness between moving entities presented at the Research Academy go beyond Appadurai's theory, as they aim to overcome the separation into delimitable scapes.
Arjun Appadurai's work on flow theory and various scapes marked the beginning of the mobility turn in the 1980s. "Ethnoscape", "Technoscape", "Financescape", "Mediascape" and "Ideoscape" are the categories he uses to illustrate that ideas, narratives, stories, but also technologies, money flows and media circulate globally (Appadurai 1996). This concept of flow has been criticized by Nina Glick Schiller and Noel B. Salazar, among others, who question whether the idea of flow develops a narrative that seems to effortlessly overcome obstacles and operate in clearly definable scapes (Schiller and Salazar 2013: 186).
Contributions to the Research Academy followed an approach, similar to that of Glick Schiller and Salazar, against hierarchization and clear demarcation of simplified categorization in migration research, and instead call for a networking approach like Bruno Latours actor network theory. The speakers like Nina ter Laan, Christoph Lange and Saleh Seid called for a nuanced approach that takes into account the growing interconnectedness of humans, animals, plants and other "more-than-human" beings. Bruno Latour coined the actor-network theory to overcome a duality between nature and culture and to assume inseparable connections between humans and more-than-humans as equal entities (Latour 2005).
The Research Academy included presentations and workshops on the migration-religion nexus. Nina ter Laan noted that attention to the diverse and complex ways in which migration intersects with religion can challenge and deepen our understanding of migration, as well as provide a lens for the study of religion.
Religion migrates, changes, adapts and accompanies migrants in their experiences across borders and nations. Gerda Heck explained how Pentecostal churches serve as religious infrastructure and hold together mobile communities. Another example where translocal contact zones emerge are the burial places of migrants. For many migrants, religion is an important reference point for identity and belonging.
The exploration of "more-than-human" migration was further enriched by various examples. For example, Christoph Lange's in-depth discussion of how the opening of the Suez Canal led to changes in Mediterranean biodiversity, Khalid Mouna's work on how new hybrid cannabis seeds are affecting local agriculture, and Saleh Seid's presentation on the impact of infrastructure programmes such as the Ethiopian dam on various entities. Object conservation and tracking is used as a research method to explore migration in terms of narrative objects. Amira Ahmed states that object conservation and tracking can 'tell stories' and preserve the cultural heritage of migrants and refugees.
For the second part of the Research Academy in Cairo in June, I'm going to raise the question of how hegemonies can be dismantled in the theorization of migration studies. I am also interested in how applied research can contribute to the decolonization of knowledge and the dismantling of hegemonies, and how it can contribute to migration justice.
References
- Appadurai, Arjun (1996): Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.
- Connell, Raewyn (2014): Rethinking Gender from the South. Feminist Studies 40(3), 518-539.
- Connell, Raewyn and Dados, Nour (2012): The Global South. Contexts, 11(1), 12-13.
- Latour, Bruno (2005): Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Schiller, Nina Glick and Salazar, Noel B. (2013): Regimes of Mobility across the Globe (January 2013). Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 39(2).
