Specific Dilemmas of Global Governance

View Segments Segment :

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Embed
  • Link
  • Help
  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Embed
  • Link
  • Help
Successfully saved clip
Find all your clips in My Lists
Failed to save clip
  • Transcript
  • Transcript

    Auto-Scroll: ONOFF 
    • 00:00


    • 00:09

      ANDREW GEDDES: I'm Andrew Geddes.And I'm professor of politics at the University of Sheffieldwhere I teach and research the politics of global migration.In this case study, what we're going to focus onis global migration governance, whichis a huge question for all of us whostudy international migration.What we're going to ask are a series of questions.First of all, what is global migration governance?

    • 00:32

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Secondly, what is out there?What do we have in terms of organizations?Thirdly, we'll see that there isn'tan overarching global migration organization.And we'll ask, well, why has it beendifficult to establish one?And even, is it possible to establish one?And finally, thinking differently--is fragmentation a bad thing?By this, I mean that we don't have

    • 00:53

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: an overarching framework for the global governance of migration.But there are organizations out thereand institutions with responsibilityfor aspects of migration.Maybe we should capitalize on the potentialof these organizations, rather thanengage in what might be fruitlessand time consuming quests for some kind of global migrationor world migration organization.

    • 01:21

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: The first thing we need to focus onis the meaning of global governance,of global migration governance.What would it involve?Well, put simply, it would mean that there'dbe rules, norms, principles above the nation state.So these would require agreement by stateson what those rules, norms, and principles shouldbe-- what kind of institutions and organizations

    • 01:43

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: should be put in place, perhaps, with the capacityto enforce these rules, norms, and principles.These are enormously big and important questions--coming to some kind of agreement on basic structures,as well as the principles that should inform those structures.One thing we can also do by looking at global migrationgovernance is make a distinction between more formal and more

    • 02:06

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: informal systems.So states may be reluctant to agree formal rules.And why would that be?Well, because they might be concerned about beingbound by these rules.But what they may agree to is more informal structureswhere they can talk to each other about global migration,about how to learn from each other, share ideas.

    • 02:28

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: So in terms of migration governance and thinkingabout migration governance above the state,we could think about more formal rules and structures.We could also think about more informal processesof cooperation, sharing of ideas and information.So put another way, states may bereluctant to create new rules.But they're more than happy to talk to each other.

    • 02:49

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Now, that doesn't mean that the whole worldis talking to each other.So to provide one example, the United Kingdom, the UnitedStates, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand--they share similar kinds of interests and concernsand see themselves as like-minded on issuesof immigration.And they talk to each other regularly,share ideas, share information.

    • 03:09

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: We can call that a more informal structure.They've not created formal rules.They've not ceded their sovereigntyto these international organizations.But what they do is talk to each other.The second thing to think about is, well, what do we have?

    • 03:31

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: What's out there?What organizations are there?Now, one of the things to immediately bear in mindis we're talking about rules, norms, principlesabove the nation state.So that doesn't necessarily mean only a global level,a global migration organization.There are other forms of corporationthat can be included in that definition too.

    • 03:53

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: So let's think about what's out there.And first of all, think about the international level.Well, at international level-- I thinkthere are two key organizations on which we could focus.They both play different roles and, perhaps, mightindicate to some extent a fragmentationof the international migration governance system.So these two examples, first of all,

    • 04:13

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: are the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees, which is within the UN system, the UnitedNations system.And what is it responsible for?Well, it's responsible for protection.It's fundamentally devoted to ensuring that people whoare suffering persecution-- maybefor their political belief, or belonging

    • 04:33

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: to a particular ethnic group, or expressinga particular religious identity thatmay open them to persecution-- that they are protected.That is what the UNHCR is doing within the UN systemwith a strong focus on human rights.Now, we can contrast that with the International Organizationfor Migration, which has more than 150 countries as members.

    • 04:55

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: And what it does is deliver servicesin the area of migration management for its memberstates.This can involve practical assistanceas well as providing research, ideas, and informationthat help countries understand more about the migrationchallenges that they face.Now, the thing about the IOM is it is not within the UN system.

    • 05:17

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: So if we think international level-- well,within the UN system, we have UNHCR dealingwith issues of protection.But there is no single UN migration organization or worldmigration organization.And in fact, it could be that oneis very unlikely to develop.And that's something we need to think about.

    • 05:38

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Also at international level, we have the IOM offeringmigration management services, but outside of the UN system.So there is international cooperation.There is governance beyond the nation state at global level.But it's not in one comprehensive organization.There is no single overarching framework.

    • 05:58

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: But what else is there out there?Now, one thing that we can see if we look across the globeare extensive bilateral ties between countries.So for instance, what we can see across the globeare agreements on labor recruitment between countries.So one country may agree with another countryto provide channels or pathways for labor migrants.

    • 06:21

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: We can call these bilateral relationships.And they will be informed by rules, norms, and principles,but at a much more restricted level.But this could also be seen as a formof international cooperation.And we need to bear it in mind.And we can also think about the regional level.And the regional level is really important.

    • 06:41

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Some people would argue that, actually, cooperationat regional level is much more likely than cooperationat global or international level.Why?Because countries that are neighbors or maybe close to each other geographicallymay be more likely to see these things in similar ways,perhaps be interdependent, or see themselvesas sharing common interests, and on that basis being

    • 07:03

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: more able to work together.And at the regional level, we can seequite significant developments.The most obvious one would be the European Union.Although, we shouldn't get sidetrackedby imagining that the European Union providessome kind of template for regional organizationsin the rest of the world.The European Union emerged after the Second World Warfor particular historical circumstances.

    • 07:25

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: And those may not be easily transportable to other regionsof the world.But what we do see in the European Unionis a very advanced free movement framework.Citizens of 28 countries can move freely.In effect, that's open borders within the European Union.What the European Union also has iswhat it calls a common migration asylum policy.

    • 07:46

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Now, those policies relate to peoplemoving from outside of the EuropeanUnion towards EU member states.It doesn't mean that the countries themselves,the members of the European Union,have no say on admissions to their territory.They do.And they maintain that.And they jealously guard that prerogative.But what it does mean is they cooperate with other EU member

    • 08:06

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: states on issues such as border control, border security,and on asylum.So the regional level in Europe has become highly significant.But we should not imagine that itis a template that can just be movedto other parts of the world.Now, if we look other regions and we move across the Atlanticand look at North America, we can see the North American Free

    • 08:28

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Trade area-- the United States, Canada, and Mexico.But what we see immediately is there are no migrationprovisions there.There are no common institutions.It is a much weaker form of cooperation.That's because they can't really agree amongst each otherto cede sovereignty.The United States, for instance, jealouslyguards its sovereignty.

    • 08:49

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: It's impossible to imagine that the US Congress would agreeto measures in the area of migrationwhich would significantly constrain the powerand authority of the United Statesto determine migration policy.If we move south, we see another regional organization--Mercosur, the common market of the south.And there we see fairly significant developments

    • 09:10

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: in the area of free movement and alsoambitious political statements.Although, if we contrast Mercosur with the EuropeanUnion, we see that Mercosur does not have the institutionsthat the EU has-- the Commission, the Parliament.Doesn't have those same kind of institutional structures.So what's the broader point here?Well, the broader point is that rules, norms, and principles

    • 09:33

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: can exist above the nation state.They may be bilateral ties, which maybe relatively easy to reach.They may be at regional level.But we see very different forms of regional organization.And then at the global level, we see a fragmentation,to some extent, with the role of the International Organizationfor Migration and the UNHCR and no overarching international or

    • 09:58

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: global migration organization.So why has it been difficult to reach agreement?Why is there no world migration organization?Many people might think this is a desirable thingand that we should be seeing somethingthat might be able to protect the rights of migrants,

    • 10:21

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: ensure more effective mechanisms so that peoplecould move more freely around the world, perhaps.People would have different views on what a world migrationorganization should do.And that maybe hints at the basic problem.Because in the international system,there are very divergent views about what a world migrationorganization should do.And fundamentally, if such an organization was to emerge,

    • 10:44

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: then national governments would have to authorize it.They'd have to agree a treaty, sign a treaty,then authorize institutions at global level to interveneor interfere in their own migration policies.And as things stand, that looks very unlikely.So take, for example, the United Nations Conventionon the Protection of the Rights of Migrant

    • 11:04

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: Workers and Their Families.This is a very significant United Nations convention,which is very ambitious in what itoffers in terms of protecting the rights of migrants.And yet, if we look who has signed it,we see that the countries that have signed ittend to be sending countries.And perhaps, they would be interested in measuresthat protect the rights of their nationals who emigrate.

    • 11:26

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: On the other hand, we see a fairly significant listof countries that have not signed the UN convention.And in effect, that's the world's major destinationcountries.No EU member state has signed it.The United States hasn't signed it.So what we see there is a basic divergencein the international system between countriesthat are primarily sending countries,countries that are primarily destination countries.

    • 11:48

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: This raises a really important questionwe need to think about.If we think that there should be some kind of global migrationorganization, then on what basis could such an organizationbe founded?How do you bring together countriesthat may see themselves as having very different positionsand interests on these issues to form such an organization?

    • 12:09

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: I think the UN Convention on the Protection of Rights of MigrantWorkers and Their Family Members isvery important in illustrating to us both the importanceof these issues, the importance of protections,but also the limits on these international developments.

    • 12:31

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: And let's also think differently about these questions.Because what we could do is thinkabout the absence of global migration organizationsand what could be done to establish one.But that might be a very long, difficult,and ultimately fruitless path.Because it may be very difficult in the endto actually reach agreement.So thinking differently might involve

    • 12:51

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: thinking about whether fragmentation is necessarilya bad thing.Perhaps what we can see is potential in the organizationsthat exist which might allow for more effective governancebeyond the state, but not to the extent of creating a worldmigration organization.So how could this work?Well, for instance, it could be that

    • 13:11

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: in relation to particular forms of migration, such as refugees,asylum, migration, or trafficking, you could haveagreements which are, perhaps, more functional, more focusedon particular issues where states agreeon, say, the harm caused by traffickingand the need for a more effectiveinternational response.And what these kind of organizations can also do

    • 13:34

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: is create scope for what was referredto earlier as more informal governance, moreinformal cooperation, bringing together people-- whichmay not just be governments.It might also be civil society organizations--to take part in a broader debate about migrationand, perhaps, have some impact on changing understandingsof issues or, perhaps, highlighting

    • 13:55

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: the potential challenges down the linethat governments need to be thinking about.So the point here is to think aboutthe creative or constructive potential of actually existinginstitutions and organizations whichmay deal with particular forms of migration,might have a particular regional focus,or might be trying to make links between migration

    • 14:17

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: and key global challenges like climate change.And maybe what we do see is the creative or constructivepotential of organizations and institutionsthat are out there to develop responsesto many of the key challenges that the world facesand that it will face in the future.So the question we need to ask ourselvesis, should we be investing time in pursuing

    • 14:38

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: some kind of global or world migration organization?And clearly, some people might thinkthat that is the way to go, that that wouldbe an important thing to do.Or perhaps, on the other hand, fragmentationis not necessarily a bad thing if itmeans that there is the potential in organizationsto deal with challenges that currently existand challenges that may emerge in the future.

    • 14:59

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: And fundamentally, it may well bethat the amount of effort that would be expended pursuinga global migration organization mightbe a distraction from the need to think now about protection,migrants' rights, the needs of sending and destinationcountries, and important challenges for the future,such as the effects of environmental and climate

    • 15:19

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: change.These are the kind of questions thatare necessarily central to any discussion of global migrationgovernance.Because fundamentally, global migration governanceis about responding to the challenges that we face nowand the challenges that we might face in the futureand is fundamentally also a question about the values

    • 15:40

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: that we have, the way we understand migration,and the way in which it should be managed, regulated,or perhaps, become more open.So to sum up, what we've looked at in this case studyis four questions.The first of which was, what is global migration governance?

    • 16:03

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: It's important to have some basic definition understanding.Beyond that, we thought, well, what do we have?And here we talked about the international, but alsothe regional, the bilateral, thinkingabout a variety of forms of governanceabove or beyond the state.The third thing we talked about is, well,why has it been so difficult to establish formsof international cooperation?And we looked at the role that state interests

    • 16:25

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: can play in that.And we took the case of the UN Convention on Migrant Workersto see the basic differences between sending and destinationcountries.And what we did, finally, was tryto think a little differently.If the system is fragmented, maybe that'snot a bad thing if it creates some creative or constructivepotential.Maybe it's better to work with what we have than

    • 16:46

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: to pursue more ambitious plans for global migrationorganizations that might be very difficult to realize.Now, perhaps you might think differently about that.You might think that it is a worthwhile endeavorto pursue more ambitious global-level organizationto deal with the important questions around migration.But it is important, also, to think about what's out there,

    • 17:06

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: what we have, and what the potential mightbe to deal at a regional level or with particular issues,such as refugee protection or trafficking.I've got four questions now to give you.The first of which is, is a world migration organization

    • 17:29

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: desirable?Some kind of global migration organization--would it be desirable?Second, is a world migration organization even feasible?So I want you to think about that.Third, if it were to be feasible, what would you do?What steps would you take to make it feasible-- a worldmigration organization?

    • 17:51

      ANDREW GEDDES [continued]: And fourth, thinking at the regional leveland thinking about what's going on in Europe, is the EUa template for migration governance above the state?Should other regions be looking to Europeand thinking this is the way to go?[MUSIC PLAYING]

Specific Dilemmas of Global Governance

View Segments Segment :


Professor Andrew Geddes defines global governance and outlines the challenges to creating international policy. He weighs the benefits of letting non-government agencies handle issues as opposed to exerting years-long efforts to establish an international accord.

SAGE Video Cases
Specific Dilemmas of Global Governance

Professor Andrew Geddes defines global governance and outlines the challenges to creating international policy. He weighs the benefits of letting non-government agencies handle issues as opposed to exerting years-long efforts to establish an international accord.

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website

Back to Top