Contesting security: Multiple modalities, NGOs, and the security-migration nexus in Scotland

IF 2.5 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
I. Paterson
{"title":"Contesting security: Multiple modalities, NGOs, and the security-migration nexus in Scotland","authors":"I. Paterson","doi":"10.1017/eis.2022.22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The security-migration nexus is ubiquitous throughout Europe and beyond. An avalanche of scholarship has explored the construction of migration as a security threat in general and, in the UK, the creation of the ‘hostile environment’ in particular – the problematic nature of each being well documented. Yet, far less attention has been paid to activities that contest this process. Deploying Balzacq's four modalities of contestation – desecuritisation, resistance, emancipation, and resilience – this article addresses the imbalance, exploring how asylum and refugee sector NGOs engage in and contest security-migration politics. Using Scotland (2018–19) as an illustrative case and analysing discursive and predominantly non-discursive activities, findings demonstrate that NGOs are successfully contesting the security-migration nexus in Scotland across four principal categories, supporting the ‘surviving’ and ‘thriving’ of asylum seeker and refugee communities, problematising previous conceptualisations of ‘UK’ asylum and refugee politics, with implications extending globally. The article helps refine the theorisation of contestation, demonstrating first, the need to move beyond studies of ‘desecuritisation’, with consequences for understandings of ‘success’ in securitisation, and second, the potential blindness of single-modality studies to vital, meaningful contestation, resulting in the production of less comprehensive visions of the security world.","PeriodicalId":44394,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Security","volume":"8 1","pages":"172 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/eis.2022.22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The security-migration nexus is ubiquitous throughout Europe and beyond. An avalanche of scholarship has explored the construction of migration as a security threat in general and, in the UK, the creation of the ‘hostile environment’ in particular – the problematic nature of each being well documented. Yet, far less attention has been paid to activities that contest this process. Deploying Balzacq's four modalities of contestation – desecuritisation, resistance, emancipation, and resilience – this article addresses the imbalance, exploring how asylum and refugee sector NGOs engage in and contest security-migration politics. Using Scotland (2018–19) as an illustrative case and analysing discursive and predominantly non-discursive activities, findings demonstrate that NGOs are successfully contesting the security-migration nexus in Scotland across four principal categories, supporting the ‘surviving’ and ‘thriving’ of asylum seeker and refugee communities, problematising previous conceptualisations of ‘UK’ asylum and refugee politics, with implications extending globally. The article helps refine the theorisation of contestation, demonstrating first, the need to move beyond studies of ‘desecuritisation’, with consequences for understandings of ‘success’ in securitisation, and second, the potential blindness of single-modality studies to vital, meaningful contestation, resulting in the production of less comprehensive visions of the security world.
竞争安全:苏格兰的多种模式、非政府组织和安全移民关系
摘要安全与移民之间的联系在整个欧洲及其他地区无处不在。雪崩般的学术研究探讨了移民作为一种普遍的安全威胁的构建,尤其是在英国,“敌对环境”的创造——每种情况的问题性质都有充分的记录。然而,对与这一进程相抗衡的活动的关注要少得多。运用巴尔扎克的四种竞选模式——去安全、抵抗、解放和恢复力——本文探讨了这种不平衡,探讨了庇护和难民部门的非政府组织如何参与和竞选安全移民政治。以苏格兰(2018-19)为例,分析了话语和以非话语为主的活动,研究结果表明,非政府组织正在成功地从四个主要类别对苏格兰的安全移民关系进行争论,支持寻求庇护者和难民社区的“生存”和“繁荣”,对以前“英国”庇护和难民政治概念的质疑,其影响波及全球。这篇文章有助于完善争论的理论,首先证明了超越“去安全化”研究的必要性,以及对证券化“成功”的理解,其次,单一模式研究对重要、有意义的争论的潜在盲目性,导致对安全世界产生不太全面的愿景。
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
3.40
自引率
13.60%
发文量
30
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信