Regulating human movement in a global pandemic: ‘Essential Travel’ during COVID-19

Lorenzo Piccoli, Timothy Jacob-Owens
{"title":"Regulating human movement in a global pandemic: ‘Essential Travel’ during COVID-19","authors":"Lorenzo Piccoli, Timothy Jacob-Owens","doi":"10.1093/migration/mnaf012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Every government in the world introduced international travel restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. For the most part, these restrictions did not take the form of blanket entry bans, but rather acted as human selection mechanisms, with states refusing entry to most people while granting dedicated exemptions to others. This article addresses two interconnected questions: Who was granted entry, and on what basis? Drawing on new data capturing entry bans and selective exemptions in 212 countries and territories worldwide, we interrogate the concept of ‘essential travel’ that emerged in the early phase of the pandemic. We find that during the COVID-19 pandemic, states granted exemptions for up to seventeen categories of person, which we use to build a novel typology of the ‘grounds of entry’ applicable in times of emergency: (1) pre-existing ties, (2) instrumental value, and (3) international protection. By analysing the frequency of the seventeen ‘essential travel’ categories, we find that these grounds were prioritised differently, with much greater emphasis on pre-existing ties than on international protection. This indicates that during the pandemic, states prioritised the needs of ‘their own’, particularly their nationals, over those of vulnerable populations. The article thus highlights both the resilience of nationality and the fragility of asylum as bases for cross-border movement in times of global (health) crisis.","PeriodicalId":504047,"journal":{"name":"Migration Studies","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/files/514567084/PiccoliLJacobOwensT2025MSRegulatingHumanMovement.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Migration Studies","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnaf012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Every government in the world introduced international travel restrictions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. For the most part, these restrictions did not take the form of blanket entry bans, but rather acted as human selection mechanisms, with states refusing entry to most people while granting dedicated exemptions to others. This article addresses two interconnected questions: Who was granted entry, and on what basis? Drawing on new data capturing entry bans and selective exemptions in 212 countries and territories worldwide, we interrogate the concept of ‘essential travel’ that emerged in the early phase of the pandemic. We find that during the COVID-19 pandemic, states granted exemptions for up to seventeen categories of person, which we use to build a novel typology of the ‘grounds of entry’ applicable in times of emergency: (1) pre-existing ties, (2) instrumental value, and (3) international protection. By analysing the frequency of the seventeen ‘essential travel’ categories, we find that these grounds were prioritised differently, with much greater emphasis on pre-existing ties than on international protection. This indicates that during the pandemic, states prioritised the needs of ‘their own’, particularly their nationals, over those of vulnerable populations. The article thus highlights both the resilience of nationality and the fragility of asylum as bases for cross-border movement in times of global (health) crisis.
在全球大流行期间调节人员流动:COVID-19期间的“必要旅行”
为应对COVID-19大流行,世界各国政府都出台了国际旅行限制措施。在大多数情况下,这些限制并没有采取全面禁止入境的形式,而是作为一种人类选择机制,各国拒绝大多数人入境,同时给予其他人专门的豁免。本文解决了两个相互关联的问题:谁被允许进入,以及基于什么?根据全球212个国家和地区的入境禁令和选择性豁免的新数据,我们对大流行早期出现的“必要旅行”概念进行了质疑。我们发现,在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,各国给予了多达17类人员的豁免,我们利用这些豁免建立了一种适用于紧急时期的“入境理由”的新类型:(1)预先存在的关系,(2)工具价值,以及(3)国际保护。通过分析17种“必要旅行”类别的频率,我们发现这些理由的优先级不同,更强调预先存在的关系,而不是国际保护。这表明,在大流行期间,各国优先考虑“本国”的需求,特别是本国国民的需求,而不是弱势群体的需求。因此,这篇文章强调了国籍的复原力和在全球(卫生)危机时期作为跨界流动基础的庇护的脆弱性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书