Framing migration – analysis of two policies implemented by the Australian Government
(2017) UTVK03 20171Sociology
- Abstract
- The migration debate is discussed globally in today’s society, and countries have chosen to deal with placement of migration in different ways. Australia has demonstrated a unique way of handling migrants through their two policies. One of them places and processes migrants on the islands of Manus and Nauru in the last decade instead of conducting this vetting process on their own soil. This offshore detention center policy was initiated under the Pacific Solution legislation in 2001 and it has been active ever since in similar forms. Simultaneously, Australia has implemented a STEM migration policy to attract highly skilled migrants.
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to research how the two policies - Pacific Solution... (More) - The migration debate is discussed globally in today’s society, and countries have chosen to deal with placement of migration in different ways. Australia has demonstrated a unique way of handling migrants through their two policies. One of them places and processes migrants on the islands of Manus and Nauru in the last decade instead of conducting this vetting process on their own soil. This offshore detention center policy was initiated under the Pacific Solution legislation in 2001 and it has been active ever since in similar forms. Simultaneously, Australia has implemented a STEM migration policy to attract highly skilled migrants.
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to research how the two policies - Pacific Solution legislation and STEM migration Act, that seem to have seemingly paradoxical purposes, are being framed. It is the alignment and misalignment of the framing of migration, migrants and the migration effects for Australia through these two policies that are the main focus of the thesis.
The thesis will utilize different theories and concepts such as Campbell’s (2002) social movements theory and framing put forth by Dobbin et al. (2007) and Beland (2005). I will also apply the concept of brain gain and Bandura’s (1999) theory of moral disengagement to explain framing of the policies.
The main findings of the thesis are that both policies align in their purpose of managing migration, however their main misalignment is in the way they define migration, migrants and migration effects for Australia. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8917976
- author
- Nofar, Behnam LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- UTVK03 20171
- year
- 2017
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Australia, STEM, offshore detention centres, asylum seekers, skilled migration, Pacific Solution, migrants
- language
- English
- id
- 8917976
- date added to LUP
- 2017-06-28 13:29:11
- date last changed
- 2017-09-28 11:26:08
@misc{8917976,
abstract = {{The migration debate is discussed globally in today’s society, and countries have chosen to deal with placement of migration in different ways. Australia has demonstrated a unique way of handling migrants through their two policies. One of them places and processes migrants on the islands of Manus and Nauru in the last decade instead of conducting this vetting process on their own soil. This offshore detention center policy was initiated under the Pacific Solution legislation in 2001 and it has been active ever since in similar forms. Simultaneously, Australia has implemented a STEM migration policy to attract highly skilled migrants.
The purpose of this qualitative case study is to research how the two policies - Pacific Solution legislation and STEM migration Act, that seem to have seemingly paradoxical purposes, are being framed. It is the alignment and misalignment of the framing of migration, migrants and the migration effects for Australia through these two policies that are the main focus of the thesis.
The thesis will utilize different theories and concepts such as Campbell’s (2002) social movements theory and framing put forth by Dobbin et al. (2007) and Beland (2005). I will also apply the concept of brain gain and Bandura’s (1999) theory of moral disengagement to explain framing of the policies.
The main findings of the thesis are that both policies align in their purpose of managing migration, however their main misalignment is in the way they define migration, migrants and migration effects for Australia.}},
author = {{Nofar, Behnam}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Framing migration – analysis of two policies implemented by the Australian Government}},
year = {{2017}},
}