The Strategic Politics of Cross-Border Mobility: A Typology of Migration Interdependence

IF 2.4 1区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Gerasimos Tsourapas
{"title":"The Strategic Politics of Cross-Border Mobility: A Typology of Migration Interdependence","authors":"Gerasimos Tsourapas","doi":"10.1177/01979183251369832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do states navigate cooperation and coercion in the governance of labor migration? This article introduces a novel framework for understanding strategic behavior in migration diplomacy, grounded in the concept of migration interdependence. It argues that state strategy is shaped not only by material power but also by the distribution of exposure to the consequences of disrupted migration flows. When stronger states are more exposed, cooperation becomes rational; when stronger states are less exposed, or when weaker states possess credible alternatives, coercion becomes viable. The article develops a two-axis typology to explain these dynamics and applies it to four bilateral labor migration corridors: New Zealand–Pacific Islands, Russia–Central Asia, Gulf States–Nepal, and Malaysia–Indonesia. These cases span Global South and South–North relationships, allowing for controlled comparison across varied structural configurations. Methodologically, the article employs a focused comparative approach combining process tracing and a structured typological framework, drawing on primary and secondary sources to triangulate evidence and elucidate variation across migration corridors. It identifies four factors that condition states’ strategic options: remittance dependency, labor market reliance, migration portfolio diversification, and institutionalization. The article advances migration studies by reconceptualizing labor mobility as a site of deliberate, strategic state engagement rather than a passive byproduct of domestic pressures. Simultaneously, it enriches international relations theory by offering a nuanced understanding of how power and migration interdependence intertwine to shape state behavior within asymmetric contexts. By identifying conditions that enable coercion, the article offers a critical policy tool for anticipating and mitigating exploitative practices in migration diplomacy.","PeriodicalId":48229,"journal":{"name":"International Migration Review","volume":"71 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Migration Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01979183251369832","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How do states navigate cooperation and coercion in the governance of labor migration? This article introduces a novel framework for understanding strategic behavior in migration diplomacy, grounded in the concept of migration interdependence. It argues that state strategy is shaped not only by material power but also by the distribution of exposure to the consequences of disrupted migration flows. When stronger states are more exposed, cooperation becomes rational; when stronger states are less exposed, or when weaker states possess credible alternatives, coercion becomes viable. The article develops a two-axis typology to explain these dynamics and applies it to four bilateral labor migration corridors: New Zealand–Pacific Islands, Russia–Central Asia, Gulf States–Nepal, and Malaysia–Indonesia. These cases span Global South and South–North relationships, allowing for controlled comparison across varied structural configurations. Methodologically, the article employs a focused comparative approach combining process tracing and a structured typological framework, drawing on primary and secondary sources to triangulate evidence and elucidate variation across migration corridors. It identifies four factors that condition states’ strategic options: remittance dependency, labor market reliance, migration portfolio diversification, and institutionalization. The article advances migration studies by reconceptualizing labor mobility as a site of deliberate, strategic state engagement rather than a passive byproduct of domestic pressures. Simultaneously, it enriches international relations theory by offering a nuanced understanding of how power and migration interdependence intertwine to shape state behavior within asymmetric contexts. By identifying conditions that enable coercion, the article offers a critical policy tool for anticipating and mitigating exploitative practices in migration diplomacy.
跨国界流动的战略政治:一种移民相互依存的类型
在劳动力迁移的治理中,国家如何驾驭合作与强制?本文以移民相互依存的概念为基础,介绍了一个理解移民外交战略行为的新框架。它认为,国家战略的形成不仅取决于物质力量,还取决于受到移民流动中断影响的风险分布。当实力较强的国家面临更多风险时,合作就变得理性;当实力较强的国家受到的影响较小,或者实力较弱的国家拥有可靠的替代方案时,强制就变得可行。本文开发了一个双轴类型来解释这些动态,并将其应用于四个双边劳动力迁移走廊:新西兰-太平洋岛屿、俄罗斯-中亚、海湾国家-尼泊尔和马来西亚-印度尼西亚。这些案例跨越了全球南北关系,允许在不同的结构配置之间进行可控的比较。在方法上,本文采用集中的比较方法,结合过程追踪和结构化的类型学框架,利用主要和次要来源对证据进行三角测量,并阐明跨迁移走廊的变化。报告确定了影响国家战略选择的四个因素:对汇款的依赖、对劳动力市场的依赖、移民组合多样化和制度化。这篇文章通过将劳动力流动重新定义为一种深思熟虑的、战略性的国家参与,而不是国内压力的被动副产品,从而推进了移民研究。同时,它通过提供对权力和移民相互依存如何在不对称背景下相互交织以塑造国家行为的细致理解,丰富了国际关系理论。通过确定胁迫的条件,本文为预测和减轻移民外交中的剥削行为提供了一个重要的政策工具。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
7.90%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: International Migration Review is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal created to encourage and facilitate the study of all aspects of sociodemographic, historical, economic, political, legislative and international migration. It is internationally regarded as the principal journal in the field facilitating study of international migration, ethnic group relations, and refugee movements. Through an interdisciplinary approach and from an international perspective, IMR provides the single most comprehensive forum devoted exclusively to the analysis and review of international population movements.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信