Governing immigration through probation: The displacement of borderwork and the assessment of desirability in Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lacking an effective recruitment strategy and wanting to satisfy the demand for immigrant labour, Spanish authorities facilitated the entry of (mostly) Latin American ‘tourists’ in the early 2000s, knowing that many were migrants entering Spain to reside and work irregularly. This strategy is one of postponing control – a strategy of displacing some of the filtering work performed by borders and immigration selection across space and time. In this context, facilitating entry, policing the streets, regularizing ‘deserving immigrants’ and deporting ‘undesirable foreigners’ are analysed as complementary dimensions of a diffuse and flexible regime governing immigration through probation. It is argued that this displacement of borderwork allows for the creation of a probationary period during which the conduct of migrants is scrutinized and policed. This article describes the logics and practices of the various institutional actors involved in governing irregular migration in Spain, while paying attention to the role that discretion and competing interests play in the multi-scalar assessment of migrants’ desirability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".