The role of non- state actors' cognitions in the spiralling of the securitisation of migration: prejudice, narratives and Italian CAS reception centres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today’s management of migration is strongly dependent on the role of reception centres. Despite their crucial role, scholars of the securitisation of migration have overlooked at how they affect the process. In the light shed by this special issue, the present contribution analyses non-state actors’ cognitions and narratives in the management of reception centres, so as to explain their performative roles in securitising or de-securitising human mobility as a threat. Its findings prove that, when reception centres’ managers hold prejudicial cognitions, they develop negative practices that produce hostile and stereotyped narratives. A multi-method comparative case study, including covert ethnography, field observation and in-depth interviews, shows that, differently from speech-acts, narratives do not need to be accepted by the audience to exercise their effects. The audience is impressed from the narratives, which in a performative act, make people feel and perceive what the narration stages [Alexander, J. 2004. ‘Cultural Pragmatics: Social Performance between Ritual and Strategy.’ Sociological Theory 22 (4): 527–573; Lyotard, J. F. 1979. La condition postmoderne: rapport sur le savior. English Translation “The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge”. Manchester University Press]. Akin accountings contribute to spiralling the process, by self-fulfilling and reinforcing the securitisation of migration.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".