Wall, Wall in the Mirror: Which Is the Sturdiest of Them All?

Abstract

This research examines the comparative effectiveness of physical versus virtual border walls in managing illegal border crossings along the U.S.-Mexico border, focusing on Yuma, Arizona, and Laredo, Texas. It addresses the question of which type of infrastructure is more efficient in reducing migration and how these approaches influence crossing patterns. Previous studies have largely concentrated on other factors of migration such as economic conditions, overlooking the role of evolving border security systems. This gap in the literature calls for a deeper analysis of these evolving strategies. Utilizing U.S. Customs and Border Protection data from 2020 to 2024, the study analyzes border encounters in these regions, employing time series analysis to investigate shifts in crossing rates and demographic trends. Our findings reveal that physical barriers are effective when properly maintained but lose deterrence power when consistent maintenance and construction is absent. Conversely, virtual walls provide consistent monitoring but are less effective in significantly deterring crossings. Both methods present significant ethical concerns, as physical walls drive migrants to more dangerous routes, while virtual walls amplify surveillance and privacy issues. We conclude that a hybrid approach, integrating physical and technological solutions, could better balance migration management with ethical border enforcement.