Framework paper on the concepts and typologies on returns - combined with four conceptual notes

Executive Summary:

The overall aim of the GAPs project is to decentre the dominant, one-sided understanding of 'return policymaking' by bringing multiple perspectives into play and studying the complex interaction of diverse actors involved in the return processes; scrutinizing gaps and shortcomings in the governance of returns, with both its internal and external dimensions; and devoting specific attention to the study of practices. Developing a clear conceptual framework that describes how different actors identify migrant returns and how various disciplines are used to study return is a crucial step for decentring the dominant policy understanding and the focus of this paper. The paper underlines the context-specific use of the term which varies both among countries and regions. Specifically, this paper provides a conceptual framework for the clarification of whose return we are addressing – that is, whether of legal settled migrants, migrants without status, asylum seekers who have been refused, people under protection status, or people with tolerated or undefined status – and who is proposing the definitions and for what purpose. We introduce an analytical framework on the relationship between returns and coercion, while we elaborate the concept of 'coerced returns' as an overarching concept and spectrum. We thus propose a spectrum of returns based on coercion and taking the sites of return (before and after borders). We believe this approach may contribute to the scholarly calls to challenge the policy categories/dichotomies by illustrating how voluntary and forced mobilities are a continuum, not a dichotomy. The paper thematically links and complements the spectrum with the typology of return mechanisms taking into account both formal policies and informal practices in the governance of returns.  Hence, we undertake several refinements to the concepts, labels, categories and typologies about return, specifically in relation to the actors, sites and levels of coercion. The conceptual discussion in GAPs builds on the rich body of work on migrant returns in several disciplines. this framework paper also adds the literature review pieces on return-related concepts used, principles underlined, highlights from the main debates in the disciplines of History, Economy, International Law and Anthropology.

Please find the entire DOI report by clicking the button below:

WP1/Concepts & DatasetInside GAPsBonn International Centre for Conflict Studies (BICC), Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada, Germany