An Appraisal of the Conflict Model of Migration with Reference to Democratic, Development and Demographic Deficits

Öz

Migration and the impact of immigrants in receiving countries have been a key concern in many countries. The USA’s restrictions on rights of Mexican immigrants, the role of anti-immigration propaganda behind the Brexit decision in the UK, European countries efforts to curb migration by raising walls are reflections of increasing xenophobia. Such understanding places a lot of emphasis on the destination and benefits in the destination while also focusing mostly on economic aspects. The rights are also open for commodification and applied in a selective fashion while excluding most of ‘others’. Such restrictive approach towards the rights of ‘others’ conis leading to what is called ‘neo-liberal paradox’ and immigration in this context formulated as a problem to be ‘curbed’. However, in the Conflict Model of Migration, the root causes of conflict lies with inequalities, deficits in three areas: The 3Ds (Democratic Deficit, Development Deficit and Demographic Deficit). The 3Ds are in the roots of individuals’ perception of human insecurity. In this study, we statistically show the impact of 3Ds on international migration flows. By distancing itself from perspectives paving way to anti-immigration sentiments, this study focuses on empirical and theoretical exploration of drivers of migration.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• International migration,mobility,conflict theory,democratic,developmental,demographic deficits

Göç Çatışma Modelinin Katılım, Kalkınma ve Kitle Açıkları Üzerinden Bir Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Göç ve göçmenlerin gittikleri ülkelere etkileri bugün hemen hemen tüm ülkelerin öncelikli gündemlerini oluşturmaktadır. Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nin Meksikalı göçmenlere yönelik hak kısıtlamaları, İngiltere’nin Brexit kararının arkasındaki anti-göçmen propagandalar, Avrupa ülkelerinin yeni duvarlarla göçü engelleme çabaları, giderek artan yabancı düşmanlığını yansıtmaktadır. Bu türden bir yaklaşım göç edilen ülkeye ve orada elde edilecek çıkarlara fazlaca vurgu yaparken işin ekonomik yönlerine odaklanır. Bu anlayışta haklar da metalaşmaya açıktır ve ‘diğerlerini’ dışlayıcı bir seçicilik söz konusudur. Bu ‘neoliberal paradoks’a yol açar. Böylelikle, neo-liberalizmde göç, göç alan ülkelerin halledilmesi gereken bir ‘sorunu’ olarak görünür. Ancak ‘Çatışma Modeli’ çerçevesinde çatışmaların kökeninde üç temel alandaki eşitsizlikler yatar: 3 KA (‘Katılım Açığı’; ‘Kalkınma Açığı’ ve ‘Kitle Açığı’). 3KA bireyin insani güvensizlik algısı edinmesinin temel nedenlerini oluşturur. Bu çalışmada istatistiki olarak 3KA’nın uluslararası göç akımlarına etkisini gösterdik. Göçmen karşıtı söylemlere yol açabilen yaklaşımlardan uzaklaşarak, bu çalışmada göçün temel nedenleri ampirik ve kuramsal olarak tartışılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Uluslararası göç,hareketlilik,çatışma kuramı,katılım,kalkınma ve kitle açığı

Kaynakça

1. Alfred, C. (2018, 8 Ocak). Year in review: The refugee crisis in 2017. Erişim: https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2017/12/28/year-in-review-the-refugee-crisis-in-2017
2. Alvarado, S. E. ve Massey, D. S. (2010). Search of peace: Structural adjustment, violence, and international migration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 630 (1): 137-161.
3. Ayoob, M. (1983). Security in the Third World: The worm about to turn? International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs), 60 (1): 41-51.
4. BBCNews. (2016, 31 Ağustos). Drug dealers, criminals, rapists’: What Trump thinks of Mexicans. Erişim: http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-37230916/drug-dealers-criminals-rapists-what-trump-thinks-of-mexicans.
5. Bellon, T. ve Copley, C. (2018,10 Ocak). In aging Germany, refugees seen as tomorrow’s skilled workers. Erişim: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-training-anal/in-aging-germany-refugees-seenas-tomorrows-skilled-workers-idUSKCN0RA1E920150910.
6. Bilton, T., Bonnett, K., Jones, P., Lawson, T., Skinner, D., Stanworth, M. ve Webster, A. (2009). Sosyoloji, (Çev.) İnal, K., Kartal, Y., Özkale, N., Toraman, K., Özkan, Y. ve Güngen, A. R., Siyasal Kitabevi, Ankara.
7. Bloch, A. (2006). Emigration from Zimbabwe: Migrant perspectives. Social Policy & Administration, 40 (1): 67-87.
8. BM (Birleşmiş Milletler) (2018, 14 Şubat). 1994 Human Development Report. from Erişim: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/255/hdr_1994_en_complete_nostats.pdf.

9. Booth, K. (1991). Security and emancipation. Review of International Studies, 17 (4): 313-326.
10. Brauch, H. G. (2011). “Concepts of security threats, challenges, vulnerabilities and risks”. İçinde Coping with global environmental change, disasters and security. H. G. Brauch, Ú. Oswald Spring, C. Mesjasz, J. Grin, P. Kameri-Mbote, B. Chourou, P. Dunay ve J. Birkmann (ed.). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 61-106.
11. Castles, S. (2004). Why migration policies fail. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 27 (2): 205-227.
12. Castles, S. (2011). Migration, crisis, and the global labour market. Globalizations, 8 (3): 311-324.
13. Chimienti, M. ve Solomos, J. (2011). Social movements of irregular migrants, recognition, and citizenship. Globalizations, 8 (3): 343-360.
14. Civelek, K. (2016). “Bölüm 7: Çatışma ve göç kültürü modeli bağlamında bir roman okuması: Le Clézio’nun göçmen yıldızı. İçinde: A. Tilbe ve S. Bosnalı (der.) Göç üzerine yazın ve kültür incelemeleri, Londra: Transnational Press London, sf. 87-99.
15. Cohen, J. H. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2011). Cultures of migration: The Global Nature of Contemporary Mobility: University of Texas Press: USA.
16. Cohen, J. H. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2016). “Migration and insecurity: Rethinking mobility in the neoliberal age”. İçinde After the crisis, anthropological thought, neoliberalism and the aftermath. London: Routledge, 96-113.
17. Crowley, J. (2001). The political participation of ethnic minorities. International Political Science Review, 22(1): 99-121.
18. Crépeau, F., Nakache, D. ve Atak, I. (2007). International migration: Security concerns and human rights standards. Transcultural Psychiatry, 44 (3): 311-337.
19. Dahrendorf, R. (1959). Class and class struggle in ındustrial society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
20. Demirgil, H. (2017). “Parametrik olmayan (non-parametric) hipotez testleri”. Ş. Kalaycı (Ed.) SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri içinde (s. 85-112). 8. Baskı. Ankara: Dinamik Akademi.
21. Duménil, G. ve Lévy, D. (2011). The crisis of neoliberalism: Harvard University Press: USA.
22. Dünya Bankası (2018, 30 Nisan). Data: GDP per capita, PPP (current international). Erişim: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD.
23. Eastmond, M. ve Ascher, H. (2011). In the best interest of the child? The politics of vulnerability and negotiations for asylum in Sweden. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37 (8): 1185-1200.
24. Eroğlu Utku, D. (2018). “Eleştirel güvenlik: “Tehdit” eden göçmenden “referenas objesine” göç ve güvenlik ilişkisi. N. Özkural ve S. Turan (Ed.) uluslararası ilişkilerde güvenlik kuramları ve sorunlarına çağdaş yaklaşımlar içinde (s. 97-135). Londra: Transnational Press London.
25. Express.co.uk. (2018, 19 Şubat). EU Loophole Could See 77 Million Turks Head to Britain. Warn Farage and Johnson. Erişim: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/661387/Migrant-crisis-Nigel-Farage-Turkey-EU-visafree-travel.
26. Faist T ve Özveren E. (2017). Transnational social spaces: agents, networks and institutions. Oxon: Routledge.
27. Friebel, G. ve Guriev, S. (2006). Smuggling humans: A theory of debt-financed migration. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4 (6): 1085-1111.
28. Gordon, J. (2005). Suburban sweatshops: Harvard University Press.USA.
29. GWP (Gallup World Poll) (2018, 30 Nisan). Research and solve global major ıssues. Erişim: http://analytics.gallup.com/213704/world-poll.aspx
30. Harvey, D. (2007). Neoliberalism as creative destruction. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 610 (1): 21-44.
31. Hollifield, J. F. (2004). The emerging migration state. International Migration Review, 38 (3): 885-912.
32. ILO (2018, 3 Mart). The cost of migration: what low-skilled migrant workers from pakistan pay to work in saudi arabia and the united arab emirates. Erişim: http://www.ilo.org/islamabad/whatwedo/publications/WCMS_514127/lang--en/index.htm.
33. IOM THE UN Migration Agency, (2018, 10 Mayıs) The world’s congested human migration routes in 5 maps, Erişim: http://weblog.iom.int/world’s-congested-human-migration-routes-5-maps.
34. Jenkins J. C., Taylor, C. L., Abbott, M., Maher T. V. ve Peterson, L. (2013, 1 Ekim). The world handbook of political ındicators IV. The Ohio State University, Mershon Center for International Security Studies, Columbus: Ohio State. Erişim: https://sociology.osu.edu/worldhandbook.
35. Khattab, N., Johnston, R., Sirkeci, I., ve Modood, T. (2010). The impact of spatial segregation on the employment outcomes amongst Bangladeshi men and women in England and Wales. Sociological Research Online, 15(1): 1-13.
36. Knox, P. ve Pinch, S. (2010). Urban Social geography: an introduction. Sixth edition, Prentice Hall, London.
37. Koser, K. (2000). Asylum policies, trafficking and vulnerability. International Migration, 38 (3): 91-111.
38. Koser, K. (2008). Why migrant smuggling pays. International Migration, 46 (2): 3-26.
39. Köroğlu, N. ve Utku Eroğlu, D. (2017). Anti-immigration vs anti-eu: analysis of brexit decision of the UK. Paper presented at the The Migration Conference 2017, Harokopio Universitesi, Atina, 23-26 Ağustos.
40. Lahav, G. ve Messina, A. M. (2005). The limits of a European immigration policy: Elite opinion and agendas within the European Parliament. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 43(4), 851-875.
41. Massey, D. S. (2016). Göç kuramlarında kayıp halka. Göç Dergisi, 3 (2): 143-165.
42. McNevin, A. (2006). Political belonging in a neoliberal era: The struggle of the sans-papiers. Citizenship Studies, 10 (2): 135-151.
43. MPI (The Migration Policy Institute) (2013, 1 Ekim). Migration Data Hub. Erişim: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/migration-data-hub?qt-data_hub_tabs=1#datahub-tabs.
44. Murdock, H. (2018, 26 Şubat). From Syria to Europe: The price they pay. Erişim: http://www.voanews.com/a/syriaeurope-refugees-cost-price/3072200.html
45. Ong, A., (2006), Neoliberalism as exception: mutations in citizenship and sovereignty, London :Duke University Press.
46. O’neill, M. (2010). Asylum, migration and community, Bristol: Policy Press.
47. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation Development) (2018, 10 Mart). OECD income distribution database (idd): gini, poverty, income, methods and concepts. Erişim: http://www.oecd.org/social/incomedistribution-database.htm
48. OECD (2018, 19 Mart). Measuring and reporting intellectual capital-experience, issues and prospects. Erişim: http://www.oecd.org/sti/ind/1948014.pdf
49. Öner, N. A. Ş. ve Genç, D. (2015). Vulnerability leading to mobility: Syrians’ exodus from Turkey. Migration Letters, 12 (3): 251-262.
50. Palloni, A., Massey, D. S., Ceballos, M., Espinosa, K. ve Spittel, M. (2001). Social capital and international migration: A test using information on family networks. American Journal of Sociology, 106 (5): 1262-1298.
51. Pieke, F. N. ve Biao, X. (2009). Legality and labour: Chinese migration, neoliberalism and the state in the UK and China. Geopolitics, History and International Relations, 1(1): 11-45.
52. Putnam, R. D. (1999). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of american community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
53. Reher, D.S. (2004). The demographic transition revisited as a global process. Population, Space and Place, 10: 19-41.
54. Roskin, M. G. (2012). Countries and concepts: politics, geography, culture. 12. Baskı.Boston: Pearson.
55. Ryan, L., Sales, R., Tilki, M. ve Siara, B. (2008). Social networks, social support and social capital: The experiences of recent Polish migrants in London. Sociology, 42 (4): 672-690.
56. Samers, M. (2010). Migration. Oxon: Routledge.
57. Sassen, S. (1996). New employment regimes in cities: the impact on immigrant workers. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 22 (4): 579-594.
58. Sassen-Koob, S. (1984). Notes on the incorporation of third world women into wage-labor through immigration and off-shore production. International Migration Review, 18 (4): 1144-1167.
59. Shear, M. D.ve Davis, J. H. (2018, 3 Mart). Trump moves to end daca and calls on congress to act. Erişim: http://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/us/politics/trump-daca-dreamers-immigration.html
60. Sirkeci, İ. (2003). Migration, ethnicity and conflict: the environment of insecurity and turkish kurdish international migration. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Sheffield: University of Sheffield.
61. Sirkeci, I. (2005). War in Iraq: Environment of insecurity and international migration. International Migration, 43(4), 197-214.
62. Sirkeci, İ. (2006). The environment of insecurity in turkey and the emigration of turkish kurds to germany. New York: Edwin Mellen Press.
63. Sirkeci, İ. (2007). Human insecurity and streams of conflict for a re-conceptualization of international migration. Population Review, 46 (2): 32-50.
64. Sirkeci, İ. (2009). Transnational mobility and conflict. Migration Letters, 6 (1): 3-14.
65. Sirkeci, İ., Cohen, J. H. ve Yazgan, P. (2016). Conflict, insecurity and mobility. Londra: Transnational Press London.
66. Sirkeci, İ. (2017). Turkey’s refugees, Syrians and refugees from Turkey: A country of insecurity. Migration Letters, 14 (1): 127-144.
67. Sirkeci, İ. (2012). Transnasyonal mobilite ve çatışma. Migration Letters, 9 (4): 353-363.
68. Sirkeci, İ. ve Esipova, N. (2013). Turkish migration in Europe and desire to migrate to and from Turkey. Border Crossing: International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 3 (1): 1-13.
69. Sirkeci, İ. ve Cohen, J. H. (2015, 7 Mayıs). Not migrants and ımmigration, but mobility and movement. Erişim: http://citiesofmigration.ca/ezine_stories/not-migrants-andimmigration-but-mobility-and-movement.
70. Sirkeci, İ. ve Cohen, J. H. (2016). Cultures of migration and conflict in contemporary human mobility in Turkey. European Review, 24 (3): 381-396.
71. Sirkeci, İ., Cohen, J. H. ve Can, N. (2012). “Internal mobility of foreign-born in Turkey”. İçinde Minority Internal migration in europe. (N. Finney ve G. Catney, G. (eds.). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 175-193.
72. Sirkeci, İ., Cohen, J. H. ve Yazgan, P. (2012). Turkish culture of migration: Flows between Turkey and Germany, socio-economic development and conflict. Migration Letters, 9 (1): 33-46.
73. Sirkeci, İ. ve Martin, P. L. (2014). Sources of irregularity and managing migration: The case of Turkey”. Border Crossing: International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4 (1-2): 1-16.
74. Sirkeci, İ. (2018). Göçün 3 KA’sı. İçinde Dünyaya ve türkiye’ye sosyolojik bakış: başkent üniversitesi fen edebiyat fakültesi sosyoloji bölümü paneller dizisi I-II. (Uğuzman T, Fırıncı Orman T, Coşkun Ç, Karan O, Özüz E). Başkent Üniversitesi Geliştirme Vakfı İktisadi İşletmesi. Ankara.
75. Soysal, Y. N. (1994). Limits of citizenship: migrants and postnational membership in europe, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
76. Stewart, E. (2005). Exploring the vulnerability of asylum seekers in the UK. Population, Space and Place, 11 (6): 499-512.
77. Stratton, J. (2009). Uncertain lives: migration, the border and neoliberalism in Australia. Social Identities, 15 (5): 677-692.
78. Statistics Times (2018), List of Countries by Projected GDP per capita, http://statisticstimes.com/economy/countries-by-projected-gdp-capita.php, Erişim: 06.06.2018.
79. Thejournal.ie. (2017). Catalan leader says he isn’t in belgium to claim asylum, but rather for safety purposes and freedom. Erişim: http://www.thejournal.ie/catalonia-leader-seeks-asylum-in-3672114-Oct2017/, 14.10.2014.
80. Tilbe, A. (2016). “Bölüm 1: Göç kültürü ve çatışma modeli bağlamında Latife Tekin’in sevgili arsız ölümüne bir bakış”. İçinde Göç üzerine yazın ve kültür incelemeleri. A. Tilbe ve S. Bosnalı (Der.). Londra: Transnational Press London, 1-20.
81. Tilbe, A. (2017). “Bölüm 1: Göç kültürü ve çatışma modeli bağlamında Mathias Enard’ın hırsızlar sokağı. İçinde Göç konferansı 2017 seçilmiş bildiriler. A . T ilbe, S . B osnalı v e Y. Toplaoğlu ( Der.). Londra: Transnational Press London, 7-26.
82. Tilbe, A. , K. Civelek (2018) Çatışma ve göç kültürü modeli bağlamında göç romanı okuması: Yüksel Pazarkaya’nın savrulanlar’ı. Göç Dergisi, 5 (1), 77-106.
83. Tilford, S. (2015). Britain, immigration and Brexit. CER Bulletin, 30: 64-162.
84. United Nations (2018, 25 Nisan), ‘244 million international migrants living abroad worldwide Erişim: https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/international-migrants.html.
85. Unutulmaz, O., Sirkeci, İ. ve Eroğlu Utku, D. (2017). “Conclusion”. İçinde Turkey’s Syrians: Today and tomorrow. D. Eroğlu Utku, O. Unutulmaz ve Sirkeci, İ. (Der.) Londra: Transnational Press London, 237-242.
86. Utku, Eroğlu D., (2018), “Eleştirel güvenlik: “Tehdit” eden göçmenden “Referenas Objesine” göç ve güvenlik ilişkisi”. İçinde Uluslararası ilişkilerde güvenlik kuramları ve sorunlarına çağdaş yaklaşımlar S. Turan ve N. Özkural Köroğlu. (Der.). Londra: Transnational Press London.
87. UNDP (2018, 6 Haziran) Küresel insani gelişme raporu engelleri aşmak: göç ve insani gelişme, Erişim: http://www.tr.undp.org/content/turkey/tr/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2009/10/05/human-development-reportchallenges-common-migration-misconceptions.html
88. Van Hear, N. (2006). “I went as far as my money would take me: conflict, forced migration and class”. İçinde Forced migration and global processes: a view from forced migration studies. F. Crepeau, D. Nakache, M. Collyer, N. Goetz, A. Hansen, R. Modi, A. Nadig, S. Spoljar-Vrzina ve M. Willigen (ed.). Oxford: Lexington Books, 125-158.
89. Varsanyi, M. W. (2008). Rescaling the “alien,” rescaling personhood: Neoliberalism, immigration, and the state. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98 (4): 877-896.
90. Wise, R. D., Covarrubias, H. M. ve Puentes, R. (2010). Reframing the debate on migration, development and human rights: fundamental elements. International Network on Migration and Development, 19: 430-443.
91. Yazgan, P., Utku Eroğlu, D. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2015). Syrian crisis and migration. Migration Letters, 12 (3): 181-192.
92. Yüceşahin, M. M. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2017a). Demographic gaps between Syrian and the European populations: What do they suggest? Border Crossing: International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7 (2): 207-230.
93. Yüceşahin, M. M. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2017b). “Chapter ten: Demographic gaps between Syrian and the European populations: What do they suggest?”. In Turkey’s Syrians: Today and tomorrow. D. Eroğlu Utku, K. O. Unutulmaz, İ. Sirkeci (eds.). London: Transnational Press London, 187-211.
94. Yüceşahin, M. M. ve Tulga, A. Y. (2017). Demographic and social change in the Middle East and North Africa: Processes, spatial patterns, and outcomes. Population Horizons, 14 (2): AOP. DOI 10.1515/pophzn-2017-0003.
95. Yüceşahin, M.M. (2009). Türkiye’nin demografik geçiş sürecine coğrafi bir yaklaşım, Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 7 (1): 1-25.
96. Yüceşahin, M.M., KC, S. (2015). Demographic and human capital heterogeneity in selected provinces of Turkey: A scenario analysis using multi-dimensional population projection model. Economics and Sociology, 8 (3): 215-244.
97. Zeyneloğlu, S. ve Sirkeci, İ. (2014). Türkiye’de Almanlar ve Almancılar, Göç Dergisi, 1 (1): 77-118.
98. Zimmerman, C., Kiss, L. ve Hossain, M. (2011). Migration and health: A framework for 21st century policy-making. PLOS Medicine, 8 (5): e1001034.