{"title":"弱势移民的治理:庇护接收中的程序、资源和影响","authors":"Sophie Andreetta, Sophie Nakueira","doi":"10.1080/13621025.2022.2137942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores how vulnerability is understood, appropriated and translated into procedural regulations and actual bureaucratic practices based on two case studies: 1) the reception of asylum seekers in Belgium; and 2) the reception of asylum seekers and provision of aid services in humanitarian operations in Uganda. These two cases demonstrate that ‘vulnerable groups’ and the corresponding procedural and substantial safeguards or protections are often defined flexibly, depending on the resources available to public institutions on the one hand, and specific agency guidelines and definitions of ‘vulnerable’ status on the other. Our ethnographic data show that reception bureaucrats are uncomfortably wedged between their desire to help and their obligation to follow state policies. To reconcile these (sometimes contradictory) obligations, they break administrative guidelines, use their own resources to make up for the shortcomings of their institution, or systematically decline migrants’ requests in the hope of demonstrating the absurdity of current reception policies.","PeriodicalId":47860,"journal":{"name":"Citizenship Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":"961 - 977"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The governance of vulnerable migrants: procedure, resources and affect in asylum reception\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Andreetta, Sophie Nakueira\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13621025.2022.2137942\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article explores how vulnerability is understood, appropriated and translated into procedural regulations and actual bureaucratic practices based on two case studies: 1) the reception of asylum seekers in Belgium; and 2) the reception of asylum seekers and provision of aid services in humanitarian operations in Uganda. These two cases demonstrate that ‘vulnerable groups’ and the corresponding procedural and substantial safeguards or protections are often defined flexibly, depending on the resources available to public institutions on the one hand, and specific agency guidelines and definitions of ‘vulnerable’ status on the other. Our ethnographic data show that reception bureaucrats are uncomfortably wedged between their desire to help and their obligation to follow state policies. To reconcile these (sometimes contradictory) obligations, they break administrative guidelines, use their own resources to make up for the shortcomings of their institution, or systematically decline migrants’ requests in the hope of demonstrating the absurdity of current reception policies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Citizenship Studies\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"961 - 977\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Citizenship Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2137942\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Citizenship Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2022.2137942","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
The governance of vulnerable migrants: procedure, resources and affect in asylum reception
ABSTRACT This article explores how vulnerability is understood, appropriated and translated into procedural regulations and actual bureaucratic practices based on two case studies: 1) the reception of asylum seekers in Belgium; and 2) the reception of asylum seekers and provision of aid services in humanitarian operations in Uganda. These two cases demonstrate that ‘vulnerable groups’ and the corresponding procedural and substantial safeguards or protections are often defined flexibly, depending on the resources available to public institutions on the one hand, and specific agency guidelines and definitions of ‘vulnerable’ status on the other. Our ethnographic data show that reception bureaucrats are uncomfortably wedged between their desire to help and their obligation to follow state policies. To reconcile these (sometimes contradictory) obligations, they break administrative guidelines, use their own resources to make up for the shortcomings of their institution, or systematically decline migrants’ requests in the hope of demonstrating the absurdity of current reception policies.
期刊介绍:
Citizenship Studies publishes internationally recognised scholarly work on contemporary issues in citizenship, human rights and democratic processes from an interdisciplinary perspective covering the fields of politics, sociology, history and cultural studies. It seeks to lead an international debate on the academic analysis of citizenship, and also aims to cross the division between internal and academic and external public debate. The journal focuses on debates that move beyond conventional notions of citizenship, and treats citizenship as a strategic concept that is central in the analysis of identity, participation, empowerment, human rights and the public interest.