Abstract
Return migration is one of the complex categories of migration, which becomes even more complicated in the context of refugees’ return to their country of origin. A plethora of terms is used to describe the return of refugees/asylum seekers, having strong political and policy relevance. To unpack the features and drivers of conceptual complexity, I propose three interrelated arguments. The first is that labelling – the choice of one concept over another – in return migration often depends on who uses the term (e.g. scholars, policymakers, practitioners, migrants) and in which part of the world. The second argument is that return, similar to binaries in other areas of migration, is often associated with binaries, such as voluntary and forced return. Despite policy categories that reiterate the ‘voluntary’ character of return, the actual practices rarely confirm that return is voluntary and often remain in grey areas, as the emerging literature on bordering practices shows. The third argument is that there are multiple levels at which labelling and binaries are constructed in relation to each other. The identifiable scales include the academic level, the policy level and the migrants themselves.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.