Conceptual Complexity About Return Migration of Refugees/Asylum Seekers

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Asian and African Studies
Published
2024-10-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096241283651
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.79

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Conceptual Complexity About Return Migration of Refugees/Asylum Seekers

Zeynep Şahin Mencütek
6 citations
Journal of Asian and African Studies
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
6.79
article

Conceptual Complexity About Return Migration of Refugees/Asylum Seekers

Zeynep Şahin Mencütek
article en
6 citations

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.

Journal of Asian and African StudiesVol. 59(7)
BICC - Bonn International Centre for Conflict Studies (DE)
Directorate-General XII, Science, Research, and Development
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Migration, Refugees, and Integration
6.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Conceptual Complexity About Return Migration of Refugees/Asylum Seekers — Zeynep Şahin Mencütek · Journal of Asian and African Studies (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS