Regularisation in Europe and North America: Comparative Reflections on Societal Challenges and Benefits
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In recent decades, irregular migration has emerged as a significant policy concern across the Europe and North America. While border enforcement continues to dominate political discourse, regularisation — mainly the conferral of a regular residence status to those without it — has also become a key policy instrument. Indeed, States have intermittently adopted mass amnesties or individualised mechanisms to address the legal and social limbo of irregular residents. Even in Latin America, over 100 regularisations have been implemented in the 21st century. Such measures are part of the toolkit for policymakers dealing with irregular migration, although they cannot invariably be regarded as standard programmes. This is evident not only in contexts characterised, on the one hand, by high numbers of irregular migrants and, on the other, by persistent labour demands which create ambivalent opportunities. The rationale for regularisation is often but not always pragmatic: persistent labour demands, humanitarian concerns, and the presence of long-term undocumented residents contribute to adopt and shape regularisation solutions. This report undertakes a detailed comparative analysis across nine Global North countries: Canada, Ireland, the United States, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Belgium, France, and Italy. Drawing on country-specific research and interview evidence from these cases, the objective is to analyse the societal challenges and benefits of regularisation. The report also aims to highlight how the selective and conditional logic underpinning regularisation schemes may reproduce social hierarchies. It contributes to current debates by addressing regularisation capacity to either challenge or reaffirm civic stratification and by reflecting on its broader implications for labour markets, welfare systems, and public goods. Importantly, we underscore from the outset that our objective is to examine the limitations and contradictions of regularisation policies, while maintaining a forward-looking and constructive perspective. Although often selective, fragmented, and embedded within broader exclusionary frameworks, regularisation schemes nonetheless represent meaningful—if constrained—opportunities. Migrants are not merely passive recipients of these measures; rather, they often mobilise them strategically, navigating their complexities in ways that may elude or surpass established critical categories. By foregrounding these tensions, this report seeks to advance a nuanced understanding of regularisation as a site of both constraint and possibility, with the ultimate goal of informing more inclusive, just, and effective migration governance.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle