Wednesday, March 28, 2018
Toledo Room (InterContinental Chicago Magnificent Mile)
Recent increases in refugee migrations to Europe have brought to the fore that national and supra-national regulations of migration are a lynchpin in how international migration shapes the urban. (Dis)convergences of logics and modes of managing migration are felt increasingly in localised settings. Beyond refugee migrations it is crucial to better understand how the regulation of migration in general produces differentiated legal subjects in cities. Empirically investigating the implications of legal status diversity, I here draw on 40 semi-structured interviews conducted with recent migrants to a mid-sized German city and on 10 interviews with experts providing legal advice to migrants in that city. I show how differential access to the city is experienced by migrants who moved through various immigration routes. I start with theoretical considerations about uncertainties of outcomes inherent in current regulatory regimes and on their (in)compatibility with fostering urban resilience. I then use the empirical material to reinforce theoretical arguments showing that immigration routes are further differentiated through (1) local institutions and street-level bureaucrats translating legal regulations; (2) persistent changes in the rules and regulations pertaining to migrants; and (3) through different decisions made by migrants navigating their arrival process in light of the precarity of their immigration status. The complexities of multiple regulatory frameworks will shape the European city of the future. In conclusion I lament if and how it is possible to foster urban resilience through legal provisions when considering prevalent approaches to immigration control in Europe.
