Forthcoming and Online First Articles

International Journal of Migration and Border Studies

International Journal of Migration and Border Studies (IJMBS)

Forthcoming articles have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication but are pending final changes, are not yet published and may not appear here in their final order of publication until they are assigned to issues. Therefore, the content conforms to our standards but the presentation (e.g. typesetting and proof-reading) is not necessarily up to the Inderscience standard. Additionally, titles, authors, abstracts and keywords may change before publication. Articles will not be published until the final proofs are validated by their authors.

Forthcoming articles must be purchased for the purposes of research, teaching and private study only. These articles can be cited using the expression "in press". For example: Smith, J. (in press). Article Title. Journal Title.

Articles marked with this shopping trolley icon are available for purchase - click on the icon to send an email request to purchase.

Online First articles are published online here, before they appear in a journal issue. Online First articles are fully citeable, complete with a DOI. They can be cited, read, and downloaded. Online First articles are published as Open Access (OA) articles to make the latest research available as early as possible.

Open AccessArticles marked with this Open Access icon are Online First articles. They are freely available and openly accessible to all without any restriction except the ones stated in their respective CC licenses.

Register for our alerting service, which notifies you by email when new issues are published online.

We also offer which provide timely updates of tables of contents, newly published articles and calls for papers.

International Journal of Migration and Border Studies (4 papers in press)

Regular Issues

  • 'The press has gone crazy': online media and political rhetoric of immigrants in the USA   Order a copy of this article
    by Jack M. Mills, Silvia Gomes, Jessica Walzak 
    Abstract: Over recent decades, accessibility of mass media has introduced a new arena for the dissemination of political rhetoric to the public, and politicians have capitalised on the capacity for mass media to polarise public opinion on contested social issues. Research has argued that President Trump has extended prior rhetoric on the dangers of illegal immigration to also encompass asylum seekers and other immigrants entering the USA legally in order to solidify political support from citizens fearful or resentful of these minority groups. Through a content analysis of online news articles collected from FOX, CNN, and CBS between 2017-2019, we explore the media representations of immigration, particularly regarding those crossing the USA-Mexico border. Although each media outlet has a particular way of portraying this social and political issue, overall findings illustrate increases to the frequency of news media narratives criminalising refugees crossing the southern border, exacerbating political divides on immigration issues, and garnering support for restrictive, conservative-led anti-immigration policies.
    Keywords: online media; politics; content analysis; immigration; Trump.
    DOI: 10.1504/IJMBS.2022.10048342
     

Special Issue on: Comparative Migration Law Methods, Debates and New Frontiers

  • A critical-contextual approach in comparative migration law   Order a copy of this article
    by Kevin Fredy Hinterberger 
    Abstract: This contribution deals with the critical-contextual method, which is a critical evolution of functionalism and introduced as a specific comparative law approach to migration law. Critical-contextual comparison draws upon three established methods/approaches: functionalism, contextualism and critical approaches. It fuses them to qualify as 'thick' comparison per Frankenberg. Comparisons are 'thick' if they are context-sensitive, critical and reflexive. To contribute to the operation and application of the critical-contextual approach generally, the present article carves out the method of critical-contextual comparison relying on certain findings of a case study on regularisations of irregularly staying migrants in the EU, in particular in Germany, Austria and Spain. The aim is to demonstrate how critical-contextual comparison can be undertaken in the area of migration law and the problems and challenges that may arise.
    Keywords: comparative migration law; contextual comparison; contextualism; critical approaches; critical legal studies; EU law; functionalism; functional method; irregularly staying migrants; migration law; public law; regularisations; return directive.
    DOI: 10.1504/IJMBS.2022.10047059
     
  • Network analysis and comparative migration law: examples from the European Court of Human Rights   Order a copy of this article
    by William Hamilton Byrne, Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen, Henrik Palmer Olsen 
    Abstract: International migration law (IML) is famously fragmented, which provides fertile ground for comparative inquiry. However, this task is inhibited the heterodox nature of IML as it draws on a composite body of law that is expressed in different concepts, interpretations and languages. This paper presents network analysis as one useful methodology for navigating IML’s normative architecture and empirically mapping case law and its interrelations. Part I introduces network analysis as a data driven method for representing the relationship between variables in a legal network. Part II exemplifies its empirical purchase in the European Court of Human Rights’ migration case law. Part III suggests the further added value that arises for a comparative migration law by bringing into scope authoritative judicial practice across wider data sets. Part IV concludes reflexively by asking what unravelling the web of IML might reveal for a field always caught between universalist and relativist theoretical narratives.
    Keywords: migration; non-refoulement; European court of human rights; international migration law; network analysis.
    DOI: 10.1504/IJMBS.2022.10049309
     
  • Coloniality and case law on the Australian asylum offshoring scheme   Order a copy of this article
    by Thomas Spijkerboer 
    Abstract: This article presents an analysis of case law from Nauru, Australia and Papua New Guinea concerning the Australian offshoring scheme for asylum seekers. Its specific focus is to enquire to what extent and how colonial conceptual and ideological patterns of thought play a role in the reasoning of the courts involved. The analysis shows the Australian averseness to have its external action in former colonies subjected to international (human rights) law; and the juggling of sovereignty so that it justifies the administration of policies in former colonies. However, it also shows resistance to this coloniality, be it from actors with relatively little power. These insist on application of well-developed international human rights norms to Australian administration of its policies in two former colonies, and to some extent incorporate international power relations into their sovereignty reasoning. Other courts in the Global South have engaged more fundamentally with core assumptions of international migration law.
    Keywords: asylum; Papua New Guinea; Nauru; Australia; externalisation of migration policy; colonialism; comparative law.
    DOI: 10.1504/IJMBS.2022.10051075