scholarly journals Heritage as an affective and meaningful information literacy practice: An interdisciplinary approach to the integration of asylum seekers and refugees

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kahina Le Louvier ◽  
Perla Innocenti
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Literacy Practice ◽  
Meaningful Information ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees

Politics of Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Turkey: Limits and Prospects of Populism

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Resul Kılınç ◽  
Şule Toktaş
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Syrian Civil War ◽  
Turkish Politics ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Mass Influx ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees ◽  
The Eu

This article addresses the international movement of asylum seekers and refugees, particularly Syrian immigrants, and their impact on populism in Turkish politics between 2011 and 2018. The article argues that populist politics/rhetoric directed against Syrians in Turkey remained limited during this period, especially from a comparative perspective. At a time when rising Islamophobia, extreme nationalism, and anti-immigrant sentiments led to rise of right-wing populism in Europe, populist platforms exploiting specifically migrants, asylum seekers, and the Syrians in Turkey failed to achieve a similar effect. The chapter identifies two reasons for this puzzling development even as the outbreak of the Syrian civil war triggered a mass influx of asylum seekers and irregular immigrants into Turkey. First, the article focuses on Turkey’s refugee deal with the EU in response to “Europe’s refugee crisis,” through which Turkey has extracted political and economic leverage. Next, the article sheds light on Turkey’s foreign policy making instruments that evolved around using the refugee situation as an instrument of soft power pursuant to its foreign policy identity. The article concludes with a discussion of the rise of anti-Syrian sentiments by 2019.

scholarly journals Subjective social mobility, quality of life and mental health of asylum seekers/refugees in Germany

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Costa ◽  
L Biddle ◽  
C Mühling ◽  
K Bozorgmehr
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Status ◽  
Social Mobility ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Subjective Social Status ◽  
Downward Mobility ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees

Abstract Background Changes in the subjective social status (SSS) of migrants, specifically between the pre- and post-migratory movement, can be a relevant determinant of their mental health condition. This study analyzed the effect of downward subjective social mobility to the mental health of asylum seekers and refugees (ASR) in Germany. Methods Through a random sampling procedure, 560 adult ASR (18+ years) were recruited across 58 collective accommodation centers in Germanys' 3rd largest state (2018). SSS was assessed with the MacArthur social ladder (10-rungs), in reference to the participants' position in the country of origin and in Germany. Quality of Life (QoL, measured with EUROHIS-QOL), anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-2) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2), were considered as mental health outcomes. Generalized linear regression models were fitted to measure associations between changes in SSS and each outcome. Results A loss of 3 or more steps in SSS from origin to Germany (compared to no-change) was significantly associated with poorer scores in QoL (B, standardized coefficient= -2.679, standard error, se = 1.351, p = 0.047), with more symptoms of depression (B = 1.156, se = 0.389, p = 0.003) and anxiety (B = 0.971, se = 0.432, p = 0.025), in models adjusted for SSS in the country of origin. The strength and direction of associations was unaltered after further adjusting for sex, age, educational level and time since arrival, although the coefficient for QoL was non-significant for those declaring a 3-step downward mobility (B= -2.494, se = 1.351, p = 0.066 for QoL; B = 1.048, se = 0.393, p = 0.008 for depression; and B = 1.006, se = 0.438, p = 0.022 for anxiety). Discussion The results suggest that interventions should focus on those experiencing social downward mobility and not only prioritize individuals with low social status. Early integration efforts and intersectoral measures to counter social downward mobility could prevent poor mental health among ASR. Key messages We analysed the impact to the quality of life and mental health of asylum seekers and refugees, of a change in subjective social status from country of origin to Germany. Asylum seekers and refugees residing in Germany, who perceived a downward social status mobility following their migration process, are at risk for poorer mental health.

scholarly journals The End of the Deterrence Paradigm? Future Directions for Global Refugee Policy

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen ◽  
Nikolas F. Tan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Indirect Costs ◽  
Burden Sharing ◽  
Refugee Policy ◽  
Direct And Indirect Costs ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Migration Control ◽  
Asylum Seekers And Refugees

Asylum seekers and refugees continue to face serious obstacles in their efforts to access asylum. Some of these obstacles are inherent to irregular migration, including dangerous border crossings and the risk of exploitation. Yet, refugees also face state-made obstacles in the form of sophisticated migration control measures. As a result, refugees are routinely denied access to asylum as developed states close their borders in the hope of shifting the flow of asylum seekers to neighboring countries. Restrictive migration control policies are today the primary, some might say only, response of the developed world to rising numbers of asylum seekers and refugees. This has produced a distorted refugee regime both in Europe and globally — a regime fundamentally based on the principle of deterrence rather than human rights protection. While the vast majority of European states still formally laud the international legal framework to protect refugees, most of these countries simultaneously do everything in their power to exclude those fleeing international protection and offer only a minimalist engagement to assist those countries hosting the largest number of refugees. By deterring or blocking onward movement for refugees, an even larger burden is placed upon these host countries. Today, 86 percent of the world's refugees reside in a low- or middle-income country, against 70 percent 20 years ago (Edwards 2016; UNHCR 2015, 15). The humanitarian consequences of this approach are becoming increasingly clear. Last year more than 5,000 migrants and refugees were registered dead or missing in the Mediterranean (IOM 2016). A record number, this makes the Mediterranean account for more than two-thirds of all registered migrant fatalities worldwide (IOM 2016). Many more asylum seekers are subjected to various forms of violence and abuse during the migratory process as a result of their inherently vulnerable and clandestine position. As the industry facilitating irregular migration grows, unfortunately so too do attempts to exploit migrants and refugees by smugglers, criminal networks, governments, or members of local communities (Gammeltoft-Hansen and Nyberg Sørensen 2013). The “deterrence paradigm” can be understood as a particular instantiation of the global refugee protection regime. It shows how deterrence policies have come to dominate responses to asylum seekers arriving in developed states, and how such policies have continued to develop in response to changes in migration patterns as well as legal impositions. The dominance of the deterrence paradigm also explains the continued reliance on deterrence as a response to the most recent “crisis,” despite continued calls from scholars and civil society for a more protection-oriented and sustainable response. The paper argues that the current “crisis,” more than a crisis in terms of refugee numbers and global protection capacity, should be seen a crisis in terms of the institutionalized responses so far pursued by states. Deterrence policies are being increasingly challenged, both by developments in international law and by less wealthy states left to shoulder the vast majority of the world's refugees. At the same time, recent events suggest that deterrence policies may not remain an effective tool to prevent secondary movement of refugees in the face of rising global protection needs, while deterrence involves increasing direct and indirect costs for the states involved. The present situation may thus be characterized as, or at least approaching, a period of paradigm crisis, and we may be seeing the beginning of the end for deterrence as a dominant policy paradigm in regard to global refugee policy. In its place, a range of more or less developed alternative policy frameworks are currently competing, though so far none of them appear to have gained sufficient traction to initiate an actual paradigm shift in terms of global refugee policy. Nonetheless, recognizing this as a case of possible paradigm change may help guide and structure this process. In particular, any successful new policy approach would have to address the fundamental challenges facing the old paradigm. The paper proceeds in four parts. Firstly, it traces the rise of the deterrence paradigm following the end of the Cold War and the demise of ideologically driven refugee protection on the part of states in the Global North. The past 30 years have seen the introduction and dynamic development of manifold deterrence policies to stymie the irregular arrival of asylum seekers and migrants. This array of measures is explored in the second part of the paper through a typology of five current practices that today make up “normal policymaking” within the deterrence regime. Third, the paper argues that the current paradigm is under threat, facing challenges to its legality from within refugee and human rights law; to its sustainability due to the increasing unhappiness of refugee-hosting states with current levels of “burden-sharing”; and to its effectiveness as direct and indirect costs of maintaining the regime mount. Finally, the paper puts forward three core principles that can lay the groundwork in the event of a paradigm shift: respect for international refugee law; meaningful burden-sharing; and a broader notion of refugee protection that encompasses livelihoods and increased preparedness in anticipation of future refugee flows.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document