Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

This presentation will be based on my doctoral research which I will defend this summer. My research starts with a look at the global governance mechanisms in place for migration then focuses on Asian migration governance. I conclude that Asian migration governance is also a regime complex instead of a regime with many layers visible but no one institution with the authority on rules and regulations. I then focus on two labor sending countries: Nepal and the Philippines, as they are at very different stages of migration governance. I study their domestic migration policy sub-sector and map them using Social Network Analysis based on primary data, in addition to qualitative analysis of extensive interviews of policy makers in both countries.

Mobility within and outside of Asia has grown dramatically over several decades and new systems of migration and regional governance is emerging. Currently Asia hosts 71 million international migrants. In 2015, intra-regional migration in Asia accounted for 60% of its international migration stock. At the international level, Asia as a region may have one of the lowest ratifications on all UN covenants and conventions related to migration. By refusing to become parties to such conventions, they are not parties to established international norms and principles. At the regional level, it is also a region that does not have an established regional human rights body as other regions such as Africa, the European Union and the Americas have. It has made some progress in that regard with the formation of two sub-regional human rights bodies, for ASEAN states and for Arab states. There are also several sub-regional and intra-regional regional consultative processes (RCPs) on migration such as the Bali Process, the Colombo Process and the Abu Dhabi Process.

This scenario makes Asian migration governance of interest as on the one hand, Asian countries have refused to be a part of international migration conventions or to create a regional legal body, but on the other hand, they have made several efforts towards cooperation at a regional or sub-regional level in trying to create new norms and principles that are more applicable to their situation, but that can also be agreed on given the current differences. So we can say that Asia does not have a single migration regime but the Asian migration system can be seen as a regime complex instead. 

To understand this phenomenon better I focus on two labor sending countries: Nepal and the Philippines with extensive interviews and survey data from the migration policy subsector in both countries. I interviewed all governmental and non-governmental actors in the sector and asked them to rank different relationships through a survey. I used Social Network Analysis to then map the migration policy network at the domestic level to understand the most important actors in both countries.