Deterrence and the criminalisation of irregular migration

This research project investigates the impact of criminalising irregular migration as a deterrence strategy in Europe.

Governments throughout Europe are putting more and more emphasis on addressing irregular migration. They often aim to prevent – or deter – migration.

An often-used, yet seldom-evaluated, deterrence measure is the criminalisation of migration. This refers to the introduction of a crime of irregular migration, to address foreigners’ irregular entry or stay.

In this project, I study the consequences of criminalising migration in two of the EU member states with the highest sanctions: Italy and France.

Migration and deterrence

Deterrence is a strategy to discourage irregular migration to a country, through potential migrants’ fear of negative consequences.

Deterrence is based on the idea of rationality and assumes that people act by calculating the costs and benefits of their actions.

The expectation is that if the sanctions for irregular migration (such as fines or prison terms) are made more severe, it will be costlier for people to move, so they refrain from doing so.

However, I argue that deterrence, in the field of migration, suffers from several shortcomings:

1. Deterrence targets the symptoms of irregular migration but is unable to address its root causes, the first of which are economic factors and conflict.
2. Deterrence causes “balloon effects” - re-directing migration flows to other entry points, rather than stopping migration altogether.
3. When policymakers use deterrence to address the concerns of the domestic public (rather than migrants’), they end up designing inconsistent policies.
4. Policymakers often overestimate migrants’ knowledge of migration policies in destination countries.

The ineffectiveness of criminalisation

Using Italy and France as case studies, and relying on previously unreleased data and interviews, I find that criminalisation has no effect on migratory flows.

In both countries, criminalisation failed to:

1. increase expulsions, and
2. deter migration.

Instead, criminalisation led to multiple negative repercussions, leading to more, rather than less, insecurity, and lengthening investigations against traffickers.

My research also reveals that migrants’ information is often overestimated. Conducting a questionnaire with over 100 migrants in Italy and France, I found that two-thirds of respondents were not aware of any of the sanctions for unauthorised migration (detention, fines, etc.).

Migrants acquired most of their information through personal networks (like family, friends, or smugglers), rather than the internet.

Importantly, the few migrants who did know about sanctions, only learned about them once they arrived in Europe.

Alternatives to deterrence

Given the counterproductive and damaging effects of criminalisation, moving away from the idea of deterrence is crucial.

Revoking the crime of migration, which as I show in the research is both ineffective and counterproductive, is the first key step.

More broadly, we need to leave the deterrence paradigm behind and focus on long-term solutions to the structural drivers of migration.

Finally, more legal pathways are needed, for both refugee and labour migration alike.

Publications

Rosina, Matilde (2022), The Criminalisation of Irregular Migration in Europe: Globalisation, Deterrence, and Vicious Cycles, Palgrave Macmillan

View on YouTube

Meet the Principal Investigator(s) for the project

Matilde Rosina - Dr Matilde Rosina is Lecturer in Global Challenges at Brunel University London and Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics. An expert on international migration trends and politics, Matilde obtained her PhD from King's College London, winning the King's Outstanding Thesis Prize. Her research has been featured in leading journals including the Journal of Common Market Studies, Policy Studies, and Mediterranean Politics. She is the author of 'The criminalisation of irregular migration in Europe' (Palgrave Macmillan, 2022).  Matilde's work lies at the intersection of international migration, public policy, and international relations. Specifically, she interested in the governance of irregular migration, with a focus on deterrence, the criminalisation of migration, and the relationship between migration, foreign policy and international relations.  Matilde was previously the Deputy Head of the Centre for Italian Politics at King's College London, of which she remains an affiliate.

Related Research Group(s)

Harm and Justice Research Group - The Harm and Justice Research Group brings together a diverse group of researchers, advocates, and practitioners from across the University who work on issues of harm and justice.

Project last modified 15/07/2024