7291347
Descripción
Fichas por Jennifer Kandjii, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
Creado por Jennifer Kandjii
hace más de 7 años
|
|
| Pregunta | Respuesta |
| Economic globalization - destabilizes the nation state and place-based politics. | States recognize the threat and unstable labor market opportunities expanded, esp. in care and service industries. |
| Migrant workers increase, but also ill-paid and vulnerable. | Sending and receiving countries avoid responsibilities and favour temporary contract schemes. |
| Receiving countries ( mostly resource rich) - establish immigration policies based on utilitarian rationale, selectively open entry routes and provides differential rights and entitlements. e.g complex visa categories, | Sending countries - context: failed or unequal development ( how does this tie into the colonial past of these countries, CROSSREF WITH LOFTDOTTIR, 2016). -interest : remitances, skill transfer and investment (p437, gp) |
| migrant workers trap: restrictive destination countries and culture of emigration in sending countries. e.g south east asia p438 grugel and piper | In sending countries ( domestic migration industry, p439 gp, trade unions consider them better off) Receiving countries (ignored by trade unions) |
| Global civil society - reacting rather than setting agenda on labour issues. | Changes in trade unions- organizational reforms and new development strategies, remains at the rhetorical level ( mainly policy statements and research projects) 439. Concerns on the trickle down of this progress on national and local practices. |
| Global governance of migration: Top-down or bottom-up processes. | Top-down governance: "namely the needs of states to coordinate and cooperate in specific issues-areas, are mediated by sovereignty claims and the demands of the market. As a result, the creation of effective global institutions to govern migration lags behind and the architecture of governance is confusing and unclear" ( CROSSREF with Betts/ Gamlen on their inter,national model) |
| Institutions and legal frameworks: ILO, OHCHR ( I add UNHCR), and UN Convention on the Rights of All migrant workers and their families (hereafter CRM), ILO C97 of 1949 and C143 of 1975 | Bottom-up initiatives: " build on grassroots migrant activism, transnational campaigns for global labour standards and labour rights. Increasing, these initiatives articulate an alternative vision of global governance bed on international human rights law. " ( How is this different for Gamlen's transnational model? CROSSREF) |
| Limitations of legal frameworks: UN CRM - weakest in terms of ratification (least ratified of all core human rights conventions) and implementation - knowledge of convention only spread because of civil society, thus highly invisible and not extended in public sphere in countries of origin or destination. "The concept of migrants' rights, esp. in destination countries, counts on very little public support." 441 | ILO C97 and C143 - " reflect the demands of states in earlier periods of the global economy,....[thus] ineffective in protecting migrant rights [ in this era]"441 |
¿Quieres crear tus propias Fichas gratiscon GoConqr? Más información.