This study evaluates effects of the “development-security nexus”, a widespread framework merging development and security policy, on international protection and migrants’ human rights, via its relationship to US border externalisation in Latin America. Externalisation refers to the creation of US infrastructure controlling migration downstream, effectively pushing its border south. This process has involved militarisation, detention, and surveillance; is linked to human rights violations and unequal inter- and intrastate relations; and structural undermining of the international protection system. Meanwhile, externalisation and enforcement has been fused with aid, migrant protection, and development policy. This study aims to determine if there is a relationship between development-security discourse and the role of externalisation in shrinking the space for international protection in the US-Latin American context, with reference to years 2008-2023. Secondarily, it assesses effects of development-security discourse and externalisation on conceptions of migration governance in the state and development sector. To do so it analyses US government documents, and interviews with migration governance practitioners. Three processes are uncovered that mark the “developmentalisation” of externalisation. The first is the presentation of enforcement as a development aim. The second is a “humanitarian border governance” concept that combines security and protection, the effects of which are highly contested. The third is the presentation of migration control as a development aim. This study contends that the security-development link has thus reframed how migration policy is understood; flattening contradictions between protection and control, embedding US security interests within development thinking, and contributing to narrowing access to international protection.
This study evaluates effects of the “development-security nexus”, a widespread framework merging development and security policy, on international protection and migrants’ human rights, via its relationship to US border externalisation in Latin America. Externalisation refers to the creation of US infrastructure controlling migration downstream, effectively pushing its border south. This process has involved militarisation, detention, and surveillance; is linked to human rights violations and unequal inter- and intrastate relations; and structural undermining of the international protection system. Meanwhile, externalisation and enforcement has been fused with aid, migrant protection, and development policy. This study aims to determine if there is a relationship between development-security discourse and the role of externalisation in shrinking the space for international protection in the US-Latin American context, with reference to years 2008-2023. Secondarily, it assesses effects of development-security discourse and externalisation on conceptions of migration governance in the state and development sector. To do so it analyses US government documents, and interviews with migration governance practitioners. Three processes are uncovered that mark the “developmentalisation” of externalisation. The first is the presentation of enforcement as a development aim. The second is a “humanitarian border governance” concept that combines security and protection, the effects of which are highly contested. The third is the presentation of migration control as a development aim. This study contends that the security-development link has thus reframed how migration policy is understood; flattening contradictions between protection and control, embedding US security interests within development thinking, and contributing to narrowing access to international protection.
The development-security nexus and its contribution to shrinking space for international protection: a review of the interaction of development policy discourse with US border externalisation in Latin America
AKEHURST, NATHAN GALAHAD
2022/2023
Abstract
This study evaluates effects of the “development-security nexus”, a widespread framework merging development and security policy, on international protection and migrants’ human rights, via its relationship to US border externalisation in Latin America. Externalisation refers to the creation of US infrastructure controlling migration downstream, effectively pushing its border south. This process has involved militarisation, detention, and surveillance; is linked to human rights violations and unequal inter- and intrastate relations; and structural undermining of the international protection system. Meanwhile, externalisation and enforcement has been fused with aid, migrant protection, and development policy. This study aims to determine if there is a relationship between development-security discourse and the role of externalisation in shrinking the space for international protection in the US-Latin American context, with reference to years 2008-2023. Secondarily, it assesses effects of development-security discourse and externalisation on conceptions of migration governance in the state and development sector. To do so it analyses US government documents, and interviews with migration governance practitioners. Three processes are uncovered that mark the “developmentalisation” of externalisation. The first is the presentation of enforcement as a development aim. The second is a “humanitarian border governance” concept that combines security and protection, the effects of which are highly contested. The third is the presentation of migration control as a development aim. This study contends that the security-development link has thus reframed how migration policy is understood; flattening contradictions between protection and control, embedding US security interests within development thinking, and contributing to narrowing access to international protection.È consentito all'utente scaricare e condividere i documenti disponibili a testo pieno in UNITESI UNIPV nel rispetto della licenza Creative Commons del tipo CC BY NC ND.
Per maggiori informazioni e per verifiche sull'eventuale disponibilità del file scrivere a: unitesi@unipv.it.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14239/2956