The camp as a custodian institution: the case of Krnjača Asylum Centre, Belgrade, Serbia

IF 1.7 4区 社会学 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Jessica L. Collins, C. Minca, Richard Carter‐White
{"title":"The camp as a custodian institution: the case of Krnjača Asylum Centre, Belgrade, Serbia","authors":"Jessica L. Collins, C. Minca, Richard Carter‐White","doi":"10.1080/04353684.2022.2154241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Care and control are concepts frequently invoked within Camp Studies, often as a means of characterizing the varied logics of institutional camps. This article builds on recent geographical literature by going beyond care and control and proposing a renewed focus on the idea of custodianship within a range of historical and contemporary camp contexts, from colonial and totalitarian concentration camps to present-day refugee camps. The notion of the camp as a custodian institution, that is, a sovereign authority whose biopolitical interventions imply both the preservation and curtailment of life, provides an effective means of apprehending the complex nature of camp governance, particularly the shifting intensity of power relations between camp management and residents. We develop this conceptual discussion via existing literature on concentration camps, before grounding our analysis in the case study of Krnjača Asylum Centre, a refugee camp along the so-called Balkan Route in Serbia. Our empirical discussion of Krnjača indicates that the concept of custodianship can be useful in understanding seemingly distinct and even contradictory modes of camp governance as part of a single coherent regime of power, from the imposition and negotiation of everyday rules and regulations to the strict containment measures put into place during COVID-19. [ FROM AUTHOR]","PeriodicalId":47542,"journal":{"name":"Geografiska Annaler Series B-Human Geography","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geografiska Annaler Series B-Human Geography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.2022.2154241","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Care and control are concepts frequently invoked within Camp Studies, often as a means of characterizing the varied logics of institutional camps. This article builds on recent geographical literature by going beyond care and control and proposing a renewed focus on the idea of custodianship within a range of historical and contemporary camp contexts, from colonial and totalitarian concentration camps to present-day refugee camps. The notion of the camp as a custodian institution, that is, a sovereign authority whose biopolitical interventions imply both the preservation and curtailment of life, provides an effective means of apprehending the complex nature of camp governance, particularly the shifting intensity of power relations between camp management and residents. We develop this conceptual discussion via existing literature on concentration camps, before grounding our analysis in the case study of Krnjača Asylum Centre, a refugee camp along the so-called Balkan Route in Serbia. Our empirical discussion of Krnjača indicates that the concept of custodianship can be useful in understanding seemingly distinct and even contradictory modes of camp governance as part of a single coherent regime of power, from the imposition and negotiation of everyday rules and regulations to the strict containment measures put into place during COVID-19. [ FROM AUTHOR]
作为监护机构的营地:塞尔维亚贝尔格莱德krnja庇护中心的案例
关怀和控制是营地研究中经常引用的概念,通常作为描述机构营地各种逻辑的一种手段。本文以最近的地理文献为基础,超越了关怀和控制,并提出了在历史和当代营地背景下(从殖民和极权主义集中营到当今的难民营)对监护概念的重新关注。营地作为一个管理机构的概念,即一个主权当局,其生物政治干预意味着保护和削减生命,提供了一种有效的手段来理解营地管理的复杂性,特别是营地管理和居民之间权力关系的变化强度。我们通过现有的关于集中营的文献展开这一概念性讨论,然后以krnja庇护中心(塞尔维亚所谓的巴尔干路线沿线的一个难民营)的案例研究为基础进行分析。我们对krnja a的实证讨论表明,从日常规则和条例的强制实施和谈判,到2019冠状病毒病期间实施的严格遏制措施,监护概念有助于理解作为单一连贯政权一部分的看似不同甚至矛盾的营地治理模式。[源自作者]
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
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Geografiska Annaler, Series B, is a prestigious international journal publishing articles covering all theoretical and empirical aspects of human and economic geography. The journal has no specific regional profile but some attention is paid to research from the Nordic countries, as well as from countries around the Baltic Sea. Geografiska Annaler, Series B is supported by the Swedish Council for Research in Humanities and Social Sciences.
×
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