Building Bridges Between Civil Society and Migration Studies: The Case of Turkey

Year 2022, Volume: 21 Issue: Özel Sayı - Türkiye’nin Göç Siyaseti Özel Sayısı, 159 - 182, 11.11.2022

Damla Aksel Büke Boşnak

https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1177764

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Over the last thirty years, globalization-related developments have led to new debates on civil society and international migration. Despite the diverse theoretical approaches in civil society and migration studies, the increasing role of civil society in migration calls for building bridges between these fields of study.
Purpose: Drawing on liberal and critical approaches in civil society studies, this article analyzes the impact of civil society on migration processes through three thematic areas – integration, transnational movements, and global governance. In particular, it aims to establish theoretical and empirical bridges between civil society and migration studies through the example of Turkey.
Method: The article first employs a systematic literature review to map academic debates on civil society in Turkey’s migration field. Second, a thematic analysis is carried out on the primary documents on civil society.
Findings: The paradigm shift in Turkey’s migration policies has triggered civil society's proliferation and diversification. However, the centralization of the state’s power in migration governance and civil society policies channeled civil society into working in a limited area and utilizing short-term strategies. Consequently, academic debates predominantly focus on the role of civil society in service provision. Originality: This article is original in comprehensively analyzing the civil society studies through the paradigm shift in the field of migration in Turkey.

Keywords

civil society, international migration, Turkey, service provision, integration, transnational movements, global migration governance

SİVİL TOPLUM VE GÖÇ ÇALIŞMALARINDA KÖPRÜLER KURMAK: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Son otuz yılda küreselleşmenin etkisiyle yaşanan dönüşümler, uluslararası göç ve sivil toplum alanlarında yeni tartışmaların gelişmesini beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu iki alana dair akademik çalışmalarda farklı kuramsal yaklaşımlar görülmekle birlikte, sivil toplumun göç süreçlerinde her geçen gün daha önemli bir aktör olarak yer alması iki alan arasında köprüler kurulmasını zaruri hale getirmektedir.
Amaç: Bu makale, sivil toplum alanındaki kuramsal tartışmalardan yola çıkarak, liberal ve eleştirel yaklaşımlar üzerinden Türkiye örneğini ele almayı amaçlamaktadır. Makalede Türkiye’de uluslararası göç alanında faaliyet gösteren sivil toplum alanına dair akademik çalışmaların haritalandırılmasından faydalanılarak, üç tematik alan üzerinden –entegrasyon, ulusaşırı hareketler ve küresel yönetişim– sivil toplumun, göç süreçlerine etkisi analiz edilmektedir. Bu bağlamda Türkiye örneği üzerinden sivil toplum ve göç çalışmaları arasında teorik ve ampirik köprüler kurulması hedeflenmektedir.
Yöntem: Makalede ilk olarak Türkiye’de göç alanında faaliyet gösteren sivil toplum alanına dair akademik çalışmaları haritalandırabilmek amacıyla sistemli bir literatür taraması yapılmaktadır. İkinci olarak, sivil toplum kuruluşlarının birincil dokümanları üzerinden tematik analiz gerçekleştirilmektedir.
Bulgular: Türkiye’nin göç politikalarında yaşanan paradigma değişikliği, bu alanda çalışan sivil toplum kuruluşlarının sayıca artması ve çeşitlenmesini beraberinde getirmektedir. Ancak devletin hem göç yönetişimi hem de sivil toplum politikalarında merkezi otoritesini güçlendirmesi, sivil toplum kuruluşlarının sınırlı bir alanda ve kısa süreli stratejilere yönelik çalışabilmesine yol açmaktadır. Bu durum alandaki akademik çalışmaların da sivil toplumun hizmet sağlayıcılığı rolüne odaklanmasını beraberinde getirmektedir.
Özgünlük: Türkiye’deki göç alanında yaşanan paradigma değişikliği üzerinden sivil toplum alanını kapsamlı olarak analiz etmesi açısından bu makale özgünlük taşımaktadır. 

Keywords

sivil toplum, uluslararası göç, Türkiye, hizmet sağlayıcılık, entegrasyon, ulusaşırı hareketler, küresel göç yönetişimi

References

• Adamson, W. (1980). Hegemony and revolution: A study of Antonio Gramsci's political and cultural theory. London: University of California Press.
• Ager, A. & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of refugee studies, 21(2), 166-191.
• Ambrosini, M. (2013). Fighting discrimination and exclusion: Civil society and immigration policies in Italy. Migration Letters, 10(3), 313-323.
• Anadolu Eğitim Platformu (2013, Ocak 20). Kardeş aile projesi yayılıyor. https://www.anadoluplatformu.org.tr/kardes-aile-projesi-yayiliyor/ (Erişim Tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• Bayraktar, Z. (2014). Geleneğin aktarımında ve yaşatılmasında göçmen sivil toplum kuruluşlarının rolü: İzmir Bosna Sancak Kültür ve Yardımlaşma Derneği örneği. TÜRÜK Uluslararası Dil Edebiyat ve Halk Bilimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(3), 193-206.
• Berman, S. (1997). Civil society and the collapse of the Weimar Republic. World Politics, 49(3), 401-429.
• Boşnak, B. (2021). Politics of subsidiarity in refugee reception: The case of civil society in Turkey. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 19(3), 301-315.
• Brand, L. A. (2006). Citizens abroad: emigration and the state in the Middle East and North Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Buttigieg, J. (1995). Gramsci on civil society. Boundary 2, 22(3), 1-32.
• Bülbülzade Vakfı (2018, Nisan 10). Suriyeli muhacirlere sosyal uyum rehberi çıktı. https://www.bulbulzade.org/egitim/item/700-suriyeli-muhacirlere-sosyal-uyum-rehberi-cikti (Erişim Tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• Citizens for Syria (2016). Mapping the Syrian civil society actors. https://citizensforsyria.org/OrgLiterature/CfS-mapping-phase1-EN.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• Collyer, M. (2006). Transnational political participation of Algerians in France. Extra-territorial civil society versus transnational governmentality. Political Geography, 25(7), 836-849.
• Cuttitta, P. (2020). Non-governmental/civil society organisations and the European Union-externalisation of migration management in Tunisia and Egypt. Population, Space and Place, 26(7), 1-13.
• Danış, D. & Nazlı, D. (2019). A faithful alliance between the civil society and the state: Actors and mechanisms of accommodating Syrian refugees in Istanbul. International Migration, 57(2), 143-157.
• Danış, D. & Parla, A. (2009). Nafile soydaşlık: Irak ve Bulgaristan Türkleri örneğinde göçmen, dernek ve devlet. Toplum ve Bilim, 114, 131-158.
• De Haas, H., Czaika, M., Flahaux, M.-L., Mahendra, E., Natter, K., Vezzoli, S. & Villares-Varela, M. (2019). International migration: Trends, determinants, and policy effects. Population and Development Review, 45(4), 885-922.
• Della Porta, D. (2020). Building bridges: Social movements and civil society in times of crisis. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 31(5), 938-948.
• De Tocqueville, A. (2016). Amerika’da demokrasi. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Ferris, E. E. & Martin, S. F. (2019). The global compacts on refugees and for safe, orderly and regular migration: Introduction to the special issue. International Migration, 57(6), 5-18.
• Flick, U. (2013). The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. London: Sage.
• Garkisch, M., Heidingsfelder, J. & Beckmann, M. (2017). Third sector organizations and migration: A systematic literature review on the contribution of third sector organizations in view of flight, migration and refugee crises. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(5), 1839-1880.
• GFMD (2015). GFMD CSD 2015 civil society delegates. https://gfmdcivilsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/List-of-Participants-GFMD-2015-CSD.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 07.07.2022).
• GFMD (2015). GFMD civil society achieving migration and development goals: Movement together on global solutions and local action. Recommendation benchmarks actions. http://madenetwork.org/sites/default/files/background-documents/GFMD-2015-Recommendations-booklet-EN-1.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 09.07.2022).
• Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
• Halm, D. ve Sezgin, Z. (2012). Migration and organized civil society. London: Routledge.
• Hayata Destek (2017). Hayata Destek 2017 faaliyet raporu. https://www.hayatadestek.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/2017-faaliyet-raporu.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• Hersant, J. & Toumarkine, A. (2005). Hometown organisations in Turkey: An overview. European Journal of Turkish Studies. Social Sciences on Contemporary Turkey, (2).
• Hodgkinson, V., & Foley, Michael W. (2003). The civil society reader. Hanover [N.H.]; London: University Press of New England.
• İçduygu, A. & Aksel, D. B. (2013). Turkish migration policies: A critical historical retrospective. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 18(3), 167-190.
• İçduygu, A. & Şimşek, D. (2016). Syrian refugees in Turkey: Towards integration policies. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 15(3), 59-69.
• IMPACT Research (2021). Hubs and bubbles: Syrian civil society after a decade of conflict. https://impactres.org/reports/Mapping_CSOs_Phase_4_EN.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• İGAM (2019, Kasım 11). Küresel mülteci formu ulusal hazırlık çalıştayı. https://igamder.org/TR/igam/ulusal-hazirlik-calistayi-raporu-yayinlandi (Erişim Tarihi: 08.07.2022).
• Kaya, A. (2004). Political participation strategies of the Circassian diaspora in Turkey. Mediterranean politics, 9(2), 221-239.
• Kaya, A. (2020). Reception- Turkey research report. RESPOND-Multilevel governance of mass migration in Europe and beyond project (#770564, Horizon2020) Report series. https://respondmigration.com/wp-blog/refugee-reception-policies-practices-responses-turkey-country-report (Erişim Tarihi: 05.07.2022).
• Kırkayak Kültür Derneği (2020). Suriyeli Dom göçmenlerin entegrasyonunu ve toplumsal uyumu Teşvik Etmek. https://www.kirkayak.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Suriyeli-Dom-Gocmenlerin-Entegrasyonunu-2.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.07.2022).
• Kirişçi, K. (2000). Disaggregating Turkish citizenship and immigration practices. Middle Eastern Studies, 36(3), 1-22.
• Kocka, J. (2006). Civil society in historical perspective. European Review, 12(1), 65-79.
• Koçar, Y. (2020). 20. Yüzyılda Türkistan’dan Çukurova’ya göç hareketleri ve Adana’daki Türkistanlıların faaliyetleri. Tarih İncelemeleri Dergisi, 35(2), 501-520.
• Kolukırık, S. (2006). Bulgaristan’dan göç eden Türk göçmenlerin dayanışma ve örgütlenme biçimleri̇: İzmir örneği. CÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30(1), 1-13.
• Mackreath, H. & Sağnıç, Ş. G. (2017). Civil society and Syrian refugees in Turkey. İstanbul: Yurttaşlık Derneği.
• Nimer, M. (2020). Transforming state-civil society relations: Centralization and externalization in refugee education. New Perspectives on Turkey, 63, 32-54.
• Okyay, A. & Zaragoza-Cristiani, J. (2016). The Leverage of the gatekeeper: Power and interdependence in the migration nexus between the EU and Turkey. The International Spectator, 51(4), 51-66.
• Paker, H. (2019). Practicing coexistence in civil society: Syrian refugees in Turkey. İstanbul: IPC.
• Portes, A. & Zhou, M. (2012). Transnationalism and development: Mexican and Chinese immigrant organizations in the United States. Population and Development Review, 38(2), 191-220.
• Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.
• Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R. & Nonetti R. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Rother, S. (2019). The global forum on migration and development as a venue of state socialisation: A stepping stone for multi-level migration governance? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45(8), 1258-1274.
• Rother, S. & Steinhilper, E. (2019). Tokens or stakeholders in global migration governance? The role of affected communities and civil society in the global compacts on migration and refugees. International Migration, 57(6), 243-257.
• Rumford, C. (2006). Theorizing borders. European journal of social theory, 9(2), 155-169.
• Sahin Mencutek, Z. (2021). Refugee community organisations: Capabilities, interactions and limitations. Third World Quarterly, 42(1), 181-199.
• Sassen, S. (2002). Global cities and diasporic networks: Microsites in global civil society. Global civil society, 2002, 217-240.
• Schierup, C.-U., Delgado Wise, R. & Toksöz, G. (2019). Migration, civil society and global governance: An introduction to the special issue. Globalizations, 15(6) 733-745.
• Sert, D. Ş. & Danış, D. (2021). Framing Syrians in Turkey: State control and no crisis discourse. International Migration, 59(1), 197-214.
• SGDD-ASAM (2022). Sosyal uyum. https://sgdd.org.tr/calisma-alanlarimiz/sosyal-uyum/. (Erişim Tarihi: 01.07.2022).
• Soykan, C. & Şenses, N. (2018). The problem of representation: Civil society organizations from Turkey in the GFMD process. Globalizations, 15(6), 824-837.
• Stock, I. (2022). The impact of migration policies on civil society actors’ efforts to improve migrants’ access to social and economic rights in Morocco. The Journal of North African Studies, 27(3), 505-526.
• Sunata, U. & Abdulla, A. (2020). Lessons from experiences of Syrian civil society in refugee education of Turkey. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 18(4), 434-447.
• Sunata, U. & Tosun, S. (2019). Assessing the civil society’s role in refugee integration in Turkey: NGO-R as a new typology. Journal of Refugee Studies, 32(4), 683-703.
• Şakaci, B. K. (2020). Türkiye’nin göç ve iskân politikaları: 1934 tarihli 2510 sayılı iskân kanunu incelemesi, Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 1(3), 36-57.
• Şenses, N. (2020). Göçmen odaklı sivil toplum oluşumları: Değişen eylemler ve siyasetler. Alternatif Politika, 12(1), 50-78.
• Toğral Koca, B. (2019). Local bordering practices, refugees, and civil society: The case of Berlin. Geographical Review, 109(4), 544-561.
• Toğral Koca, B. (2022). Bordering, differential inclusion/exclusion and civil society in the UK. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 46(1), 65-81.
• Toumarkine, A. (2001). Kafkas ve Balkan göçmen dernekleri: Sivil toplum ve milliyetçilik. İçinde Yerasimos, S., Seufert, G. & Vorhoff, K. (der .), Türkiye’de sivil toplum ve milliyetçillik, (s.425-450), İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• UNHCR (2022, Haziran 16). Global trends report 2021. https://www.unhcr.org/62a9d1494/global-trends-report-2021. (Erişim Tarihi: 11.07.2022).
• Ülker, E. (2008). Assimilation, security and geographical nationalization in interwar Turkey: The settlement law of 1934. European Journal of Turkish Studies. Social Sciences on Contemporary Turkey, (7).
• Üstübici, A. (2018). The governance of international migration. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
• Vertovec, S. (2004). Migrant transnationalism and modes of transformation . International migration review, 38(3), 970-1001.
• Wise, R. D. (2018). Is there a space for counterhegemonic participation? Civil society in the global governance of migration. Globalizations, 15(6), 746-761.
• Yıldırım, A. & H. Şimşek (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Zihnioğlu, Ö. & Dalkıran, M. (2022). From social capital to social cohesion: Syrian refugees in Turkey and the role of NGOs as intermediaries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(11), 2455-2472.