Research
Database

Das beantragte Forschungsprojekt untersucht Abschiebungen und "freiwillige" Rückkehr aus Deutschland nach Pakistan und fokussiert dabei auf die "politische Ökonomie der Emotionen" in der Remigration, verstanden als Produktion, Austausch und Zirkulation von Emotionen im Gefüge von Beziehungen, Erfahrungen, Verpflichtungen und Erwartungen zwischen (Re-)Migranten, verwandtschaftlichen, lokalen und transnationalen Kontexten, sowie staatlichen und nichtstaatlichen Institutionen. Nachdem Deutschland in den vergangenen Jahren vermehrt zum Zielland pakistanischer Migranten geworden ist, nehmen im Zuge verschärfter Asylpolitik Abschiebungen und die Förderung "freiwilliger" Rückkehr zu. Das Projekt geht davon aus, dass Migration nie ein rein "rationales", "interessengeleitetes" Phänomen ist, sondern dass Migration, Remigration eingeschlossen, stark mit Emotionen verbunden ist. Das Projekt gliedert sich ein in das wachsende ethnologische Forschungsinteresse an Abschiebungen, das jedoch bislang vor allem auf Afrika und Lateinamerika gerichtet ist. Die Untersuchung beginnt mit der sehr unübersichtlichen Situation hinsichtlich Abschiebung und Rückkehrförderung in Deutschland. Darauf aufbauend werden die Emotionen, mit denen die Motivationen, Erwartungen und Erfahrungen der (Re)Migration einhergehen, untersucht, bezogen sowohl auf pakistanische Migranten in Deutschland, denen eine Rückkehr bevorsteht, als auch auf Remigrierte, die schon in Pakistan angekommen sind. Schließlich will das Projekt die gesellschaftlichen Konsequenzen und Effekte der Abschiebung und/oder "freiwilligen" Rückkehr in Pakistan erforschen, indem es das soziale Umfeld von Remigranten (Familie, Verwandtschaftsnetzwerke, peer groups, Dorf oder urbane Nachbarschaft, soziale Netzwerke), seine ökonomischen und (lokal-)politischen Strukturen, und die in diesem Kontext produzierten und zirkulierenden Emotionen untersucht. Neben der empirisch-ethnographischen Untersuchung von Abschiebung und Remigration nach Pakistan beabsichtigt das Projekt, einen theoretischen und methodologischen Beitrag zur Rolle von Emotionen im Kontext von Remigration und Abschiebung zu erarbeiten und damit einen Beitrag zur "anthropology of removal" (N. Peutz) zu leisten.

The GLOBE project will provide a comprehensive framework in which an integrated global border management system must be developed. The project will take into account the current and future technological environment. Additionally, GLOBE’s scope reaches even further by looking into other key aspects of border management beyond isolated technology, such as the legal and political environment, the social and economic impact of border problems and, more specifically, the impact on information management and integration. The proposal has been built up on the conceptualisation of the end users needs. These needs are well known by the partners of the consortium due to the close relationship with these institutions through the hands-on experience that all companies have in the different border control areas. End users from several countries have participated in the conceptualization of the proposal to make sure it includes what they consider to be the most relevant issues in their areas of expertise. The GLOBE proposal has been prepared in such a way that as to cover the full scope of an integrated border management system, moving throughout the four main layers of border control (Country of origin, transit areas, regulated and unregulated border lines and internal territory). As a result, GLOBE will identify what already exists, what is being done, what needs to be improved, how to integrate all the information together and how to present it so it proves useful for all relevant EU and national institutions to make better decisions for dealing with issues of such importance as illegal immigration and movements of illegal goods and materials. GLOBE has been awarded the eSEC (Spanish Security and Trust Technological Platform) certification of integration within the Research Agenda established by the Spanish Electronics, Information Technology and Telecommunications Industries Association.

iBorderCtrl envisages to enable faster thorough border control for third country nationals crossing the borders of EU, with technologies that adopt the future development of the Schengen Border Management. The project will present an optimal mixture of an enhanced, voluntary form of a Registered Traveller Programme and an auxiliary solution for the Entry/Exit System based on involving bona fide travellers. iBorderCtrl designs and implements a system that adopts mobility concepts and consists of a two-stage procedure, designed to reduce cost/time spent per traveller at the crossing station. It leverages software and hardware technologies ranging from portable readers/scanners, various emerging and novel subsystems for automatic controls, wireless networking for mobile controls, and secure backend storage and processing. The two-stage procedure includes: (A) the registration before the travel to gather initial personal, travel document and vehicle data, perform a short, automated, non-invasive interview with an avatar, subject to lie detection and link the traveller to any pre-existing authority data. Utilizing multifactor analytics and risk-based approach, the data registered is processed and correlated with publicly open data or external systems such as the SIS II. Processing will need the travellers consent as set in EU legislation and national law. (B) the actual control at the border that complements pre-registered information with results of security controls that are performed with a portable, wireless connected iBorderCtrl unit that can be used inside buses/trains or any point. Multiple technologies check validity and authenticity of parameters (e.g. travel documents, visa, face recognition of traveller using passport picture, real-time automated non-invasive lie detection in interview by officer, etc.). The data collected are encrypted, securely transferred and analysed in real time, providing an automated decision support system for the border control officers.

Bij de beoordeling van asielverzoeken is informatie over de situatie in het land van herkomst van de asielzoeker van groot belang. Dergelijke informatie helpt namelijk bij het beantwoorden van de vraag of de asielzoeker in aanmerking komt voor een asielvergunning. De Immigratieen Naturalisatiedienst (IND) gebruikt hiervoor meestal rapporten die het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken opstelt, de zogeheten ‘ambtsberichten’. Wanneer geen, dan wel geen recente, ambtsberichten over een land zijn verschenen (in 2018 betrof dit bijna de helft van de eerste asielaanvragen) betrekt de IND vaak landeninformatie uit andere bronnen bij de beoordeling van asielverzoeken. Er zijn namelijk ook andere organisaties die rapporten opstellen over de situatie in landen van herkomst van asielzoekers die in meer of mindere mate gelijkenis vertonen met de ambtsberichten. Daarnaast is er informatie beschikbaar via bijvoorbeeld nieuwsberichten. De staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid heeft de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) om advies gevraagd over de vraag hoe de IND bij het ontbreken van een algemeen ambtsbericht het beste gebruik kan maken van deze andere bronnen van informatie. De staatssecretaris ervaart het namelijk als een probleem dat het gebruik van andere bronnen van landeninformatie dan de ambtsberichten niet op een transparante manier is ingebed in het beleidsproces, de uitvoering en de rechtsbescherming. Het is niet duidelijk wanneer een dergelijke bron wel of niet gebruikt kan worden en wanneer een bron als betrouwbaar kan worden aangemerkt. Ook vraagt ze of het mogelijk is om een rangorde aan te brengen in de bronnen. In dit advies beantwoorden wij de volgende adviesvraag: Hoe kunnen bij het ontbreken van een (actueel) ambtsbericht andere openbare bronnen van landeninformatie zo goed mogelijk gebruikt worden in het beleids- en besluitvormingsproces, de uitvoering en rechtsbescherming en in hoeverre is hierin een rangorde aan te brengen? De centrale vraag beantwoorden we aan de hand van de volgende deelvragen: 1) Welke criteria zijn in wet- en regelgeving, jurisprudentie en literatuur te onderscheiden voor de beoordeling en het gebruik van landeninformatie?; 2) Wat wordt momenteel bij het ontbreken van een ambtsbericht als bruikbare en onbruikbare bron aangemerkt om de (veiligheids)situatie in landen van herkomst te beoordelen? Hoe wordt hiermee omgegaan door beleid/uitvoering/rechtspraak?; 3) Wat is de werkwijze en rol van het European Asylum Support Office (EASO) op het gebied van het verzamelen, weergeven en beoordelen van landeninformatie? ; 4) Op welke landeninformatie baseren andere Europese landen hun beleidsproces, uitvoering en rechtsbescherming?; 5) Wat zijn de voor- en nadelen van het gebruik van andere openbare landeninformatie dan de ambtsberichten? Voor het beantwoorden van de adviesvraag hebben we een jurisprudentie- en literatuuronderzoek verricht, 54 IND-dossiers bestudeerd en beleidsmedewerkers, wetenschappers en vertegenwoordigers van belangenorganisaties geconsulteerd.

Since 1993, all nationals of the EU Member States hold EU citizenship, which entails the right to move and reside freely within EU territory. Since 1999, immigration has been a matter of shared competence between the EU and its Member States. The EU increasingly faces the question whether this common immigration policy as well as the common status of EU citizenship do not also require harmonization of the rules on acquisition and loss of nationality, or even the transfer of national competences to the EU, because the nationality law rules of individual Member States can be used to circumvent the common EU migration policy. In fact, a considerable number of Member States grant particular groups of people (former emigrants and their descendants living outside the EU, co-ethnics in neighbouring countries that are not part of the EU) facilitated access to their nationality and also encourage dual nationality. The link of these ‘external EU citizens’ with the EU is often very weak. At the same time, there are large numbers of EU resident people who continue to suffer the hardship of being stateless because they cannot qualify for the nationality of an EU Member State. Both the facilitated access to the EU through dual nationality and the vulnerable position of EU resident stateless persons gives the EU a strong interest in interfering with Member State autonomy in nationality law. The proposal will study global trends regarding dual nationality and statelessness by investigating how North America, and to a lesser extent Latin America, deal with these phenomena. For that purpose, research missions will be conducted on both continents. The results are compared with European data already collected by the applicant and the EUDO citizenship project. As nationality law will increasingly become a policy concern to the EU, the applicant’s global research will contribute to both the academic and policy-orientated debate on the future role of the EU in matters of nationality law.

Bij de beoordeling van asielverzoeken is informatie over de situatie in het land van herkomst van de asielzoeker van groot belang. Dergelijke informatie helpt namelijk bij het beantwoorden van de vraag of de asielzoeker in aanmerking komt voor een asielvergunning. De Immigratieen Naturalisatiedienst (IND) gebruikt hiervoor meestal rapporten die het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken opstelt, de zogeheten ‘ambtsberichten’. Wanneer geen, dan wel geen recente, ambtsberichten over een land zijn verschenen (in 2018 betrof dit bijna de helft van de eerste asielaanvragen) betrekt de IND vaak landeninformatie uit andere bronnen bij de beoordeling van asielverzoeken. Er zijn namelijk ook andere organisaties die rapporten opstellen over de situatie in landen van herkomst van asielzoekers die in meer of mindere mate gelijkenis vertonen met de ambtsberichten. Daarnaast is er informatie beschikbaar via bijvoorbeeld nieuwsberichten. De staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid heeft de Adviescommissie voor Vreemdelingenzaken (ACVZ) om advies gevraagd over de vraag hoe de IND bij het ontbreken van een algemeen ambtsbericht het beste gebruik kan maken van deze andere bronnen van informatie. De staatssecretaris ervaart het namelijk als een probleem dat het gebruik van andere bronnen van landeninformatie dan de ambtsberichten niet op een transparante manier is ingebed in het beleidsproces, de uitvoering en de rechtsbescherming. Het is niet duidelijk wanneer een dergelijke bron wel of niet gebruikt kan worden en wanneer een bron als betrouwbaar kan worden aangemerkt. Ook vraagt ze of het mogelijk is om een rangorde aan te brengen in de bronnen. In dit advies beantwoorden wij de volgende adviesvraag: Hoe kunnen bij het ontbreken van een (actueel) ambtsbericht andere openbare bronnen van landeninformatie zo goed mogelijk gebruikt worden in het beleids- en besluitvormingsproces, de uitvoering en rechtsbescherming en in hoeverre is hierin een rangorde aan te brengen? De centrale vraag beantwoorden we aan de hand van de volgende deelvragen: 1) Welke criteria zijn in wet- en regelgeving, jurisprudentie en literatuur te onderscheiden voor de beoordeling en het gebruik van landeninformatie?; 2) Wat wordt momenteel bij het ontbreken van een ambtsbericht als bruikbare en onbruikbare bron aangemerkt om de (veiligheids)situatie in landen van herkomst te beoordelen? Hoe wordt hiermee omgegaan door beleid/uitvoering/rechtspraak?; 3) Wat is de werkwijze en rol van het European Asylum Support Office (EASO) op het gebied van het verzamelen, weergeven en beoordelen van landeninformatie? ; 4) Op welke landeninformatie baseren andere Europese landen hun beleidsproces, uitvoering en rechtsbescherming?; 5) Wat zijn de voor- en nadelen van het gebruik van andere openbare landeninformatie dan de ambtsberichten? Voor het beantwoorden van de adviesvraag hebben we een jurisprudentie- en literatuuronderzoek verricht, 54 IND-dossiers bestudeerd en beleidsmedewerkers, wetenschappers en vertegenwoordigers van belangenorganisaties geconsulteerd.

Operational management of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) which entered into operation on 09 April 2013 replacing SIS1. SIS II, the largest information system for public security in Europe, allows information exchanges between national border control, customs and police authorities ensuring that the free movement of people within the EU can take place in a safe environment. It also contains alerts on missing persons, in particular children, as well as information on certain property, such as banknotes, cars, vans, firearms and identity documents that may have been stolen, misappropriated or lost. Currently SIS II is used by 29 countries (25 EU MS + 4 Associated Countries). 25 EU: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Associated Countries connected to SIS II are: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. Statistics are available to the public as analyses presented in studies on annual basis. **Statistics of interest:** Refusals of entry -> statistics on alerts art 24 SIS II Regulation “refused entry or stay in the Schengen area when the authorities had already made a decision that they should not enter”

Objectives: The overall objective of the project is to develop solutions for protracted displacement situations (PDS) that are better tailored to the needs and capacities of persons affected by displacement. Current policies struggle to find solutions to forced displacement. Refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) are often stuck in ‘limbo’, i.e. living in situations of vulnerability, dependency and immobility, due to continuous cycles of displacement and a lack of durable options. The project will therefore aim at answering the questions whether and how PDS, dependency and vulnerability are related to the factors of connectivity and mobility. It will further look at how in turn, connectivity and mobility can be operationalized to enhance the self-reliance and resilience of displaced people. Summary: Protracted displacement situations are estimated to affect about 13 million individuals globally, approximately two-thirds of the 20 million refugees today. PDS affects both refugees who have left their countries of origin as well as internally displaced individuals subsisting in precarious living conditions and seeking stability and safety with no prospects of local integration, resettlement, or safe return. TRAFIG will conduct its research by analysing specific sites of exhibited protracted displacement situations throughout Asia, Africa and Europe in order to better understand the daily lives and challenges of those living in PDS, and to ultimately devise new and creative approaches for the alleviation of these problems. Moreover, TRAFIG seeks to explore the relationship between connectivity and mobility, and the realities of protracted displacement situations which increase vulnerability in order to understand how PDS can be challenged. ICMPD’s policy unit leads the stakeholder engagement and dialogue with policymakers and further seeks innovative options for the exploitation of results. In addition, the unit examines governance frameworks on displacement at the European and global level. Project Partners: BICC (Bonn International Center for Conversion), Addis Ababa University, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, CMI (Chr. Michelsen Institute), Danube University Krems, Dignity Kwanza – Community Solutions, FIERI (Forum of International and European Research on Immigration), ICMPD (International Centre for Migration Policy Development), SHARP (Society for Human Rights & Prisoners’ Aid), Universiteit Leiden, University of Sussex, Yarmouk University

DemandAT is an interdisciplinary research project funded under the EU Seventh Framework Programme. The project brings together nine partners across seven European countries to investigate approaches to addressing and reducing demand for trafficking in human beings through anti-trafficking efforts and policies. While responses to trafficking have traditionally focused on combating the criminal networks involved in trafficking or protecting the human rights of victims, European countries are increasingly exploring ways of influencing demand for the services or products of those trafficked within their own economies and societies – for example, through criminalising clients, better control of recruitment agencies, or fair trade campaigns. DemandAT contributes to a better understanding of how policymakers can influence demand for trafficking and actively engages with EU and national level policymakers. The project benefits from continuous stakeholder interaction and is informed by a stakeholder advisory board comprising representatives from the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women, the International Organization for Migration, the International Trade Union Confederation, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United Nationas Office for Drugs and Crime amongst others. The project’s research takes a broad approach to trafficking analysing a range of forced and exploitative labour scenarios. It explores what demand means in the context of trafficking in human beings conceptually and examines how demand for products and services provided by trafficked women, men and children operates in practice. The measures implemented to reduce demand for trafficking are analysed and their efficacy in reducing demand is assessed. Insights are drawn from related areas to develop a broader perspective of the range of regulatory options that exist for influencing demand for trafficking in human beings. Research Phases The research is structured into three, interlocking, phases: Phase 1: Analysis of the theoretical and empirical literature on demand for trafficking in human beings and regulating demand in different disciplines, fields and countries. This includes economic and genealogical analysis of the concept of demand and a comprehensive overview of demand in different forms of trafficking. January 2014-June 2015. Phase 2: Involves three in-depth empirical case studies on different trafficking fields: domestic work, prostitution and imported goods. A further two case studies will be conducted investigating different policy approaches: law enforcement actors and campaigns. September 2014-December 2016. Phase 3: The final phase involved integrating the project insights into a coherent framework with a focus on dissemination. January 2017-June 2017. Research Areas The project is divided into a series of work packages that cover different aspects of trafficking and examine different measures for addressing demand for trafficking in human beings. The substantive work packages include: The Concept of Demand Researchers at the University of Bremen lead on developing an analysis of the meaning and implications of demand from a genealogical and economic perspective; exploring the conceptual foundations of the debate on demand in trafficking. January 2014- June 2015. Policy Instruments in Steering Demand Researchers at the University of Edinburgh provide a conceptual analysis of the regulatory tools available for steering demand drawing on related fields to examine measures to steer demand for lower cost goods/services and for illicit goods/services. January 2014 – June 2015. Demand in Different Forms of Trafficking in Human Beings Researchers at La Strada International lead a systematic review of the literature on demand-side factors and demand-side policies. This review is conducted in relation to trafficking for the purposes of: the commercial sex market, labour exploitation, forced begging, forced/servile marriages, forced criminal activities and illegal organ removal. January 2014 – June 2015. Government Responses: Comparative Country Analysis Researchers at International Centre for Migration Policy Development provide a comparative overview of the development and implementation of policies targeting demand for trafficking in selected EU and non-EU countries. This includes an analysis of the debates on the expected and actual outcomes of demand related policies. January 2014 – June 2015. Domestic Work Researchers at the European University Institute investigate types of domestic work that involve extreme forms of exploitation focusing on the dynamics between demand and supply with a view to proposing improved policy options for combatting trafficking and exploitation in domestic work. The countries studied are: Belgium, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK. September 2014 – December 2016. Globalised production of Goods Researchers at the University of Durham evaluate the impact of existing initiatives to address trafficking and forced labour in global supply chains. Field research in non-EU countries will inform the development of industry-specific strategies to address trafficking and forced labour in supply chains. September 2014 – December 2016. Prostitution Researchers at Lund University conduct a comparative analysis of how demand for trafficking is tackled in different policy approaches to prostitution. Germany, New Zealand and Sweden provide case studies for different policy models on prostitution. January 2014 – December 2016 Law Enforcement Actors Researchers at DCAF lead in developing a better understanding of the role, potential and limits of law enforcement actors in addressing demand for trafficking. The analysis focuses on security sector actors (police, border guards, judges and prosecutors) and labour inspectorates. September 2014 – December 2016 Addressing Demand with Smart Campaigns Researchers at the University of Bremen lead in evaluating anti-trafficking campaigns and developing a method for assessing their impact in reducing demand for trafficking in order to inform the planning, implementation and evaluation of such campaigns. September 2014 – December 2016.