Opportunities re-structured, policy actors re-defined : EU immigration policy and Turkish migrant associations in France and Germany
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the supranational policy engagement of Turkish migrant associations in France and Germany in EU immigration policy process from a comparative perspective. It seeks the answer to the following question: What explains similarities and differences in terms of forms and levels of participation by migrant associations in different national contexts as they engage in the EU immigration policy process? In addressing this question, it analyzes the forms and levels of migrants' supranational engagement by focusing on the combined impact of emerging macro-level political opportunity structures (EU institutional context and EU) and micro-level (collective action problems of nationally organized stakeholders) variables. The study claims that in spite of the newly introduced supranational channels into the EU policy process, the collective organizational experience at the national level locks-in a certain path dependency that holds back the new policy actors (migrant groups) from making full use of EU-level opportunities. Consequently an incompatibility surfaces between the supranational opportunities provided by the EU and the capabilities of national-level stakeholders who intend to use them. Through an examination of two cases, this study claims that there exists a supranational opportunity/national capability rift in terms of stakeholder participation in EU policy processes. Underlying this rift are the problems intrinsic to the design of supranational opportunities which impair their potential to cater to national-level clients. At the same time, while national-level capabilities allow actors to operate in the domestic context (albeit with problems), they are not readily transposed so as to permit reaping supranational benefits. Accordingly, this study claims that despite the variety and extensiveness of EU efforts, the re-definition of the dynamics of policy involvement and the expansion of the policy space to include multiple stakeholders remain at an incipient stage. The problems and limits of activities at the supranational level continue to originate from constraints associated with the nation state as much, if not more, than the problems of the supranational channels themselves.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".