Verena Stern
Bielefeld University, Faculty of Sociology, Graduate Student
- I am a doctoral researcher at Bielefeld University. Previously, I was a research fellow in Edmonton, Canada and Minneapolis, USA. I studied Political Science at the University of Vienna, where I was a researcher on the project “Taking Sides: Protest against the Deportation of Asylum Seekers” and ... moreI am a doctoral researcher at Bielefeld University. Previously, I was a research fellow in Edmonton, Canada and Minneapolis, USA. I studied Political Science at the University of Vienna, where I was a researcher on the project “Taking Sides: Protest against the Deportation of Asylum Seekers” and have worked as a lecturer. My research interests include protest and social movements, asylum and migration, and the far-right.edit
This chapter explores patterns of success and failure of anti-deportation protests. Based on 15 qualitative case studies from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, the authors identify four relevant mechanisms that may explain successful... more
This chapter explores patterns of success and failure of anti-deportation protests. Based on 15 qualitative case studies from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, the authors identify four relevant mechanisms that may explain successful protest outcomes: public preferences with regard to the issue of asylum and deportation, political access to decision-making authorities, judicial means, and disruption by protest actors and/or people to be deported. These mechanisms do not exist exogenously, but need to be activated. All of them involve different degrees of risk and unintended consequences. To what degree they can be successfully activated also depends on the context of the case and reflects political opportunity structures. Furthermore, the reconstruction of the cases initially understood as unsuccessful has led the authors to problematize the criterion of success. They therefore propose a chronological perspective for the evaluation of success that goes beyond the specific deportation event and highlights the role of support that is continued in the post-deportation phase and often leads to the person’s return to the country from which he or she has been deported.
Research Interests:
With regard to mobilization in the field of migration and refugees, Austria is characterized by a strict migration regime on the one hand, and the performance of a rather moderate protest culture and low civic engagement in politics... more
With regard to mobilization in the field of migration and refugees, Austria is characterized by a strict migration regime on the one hand, and the performance of a rather moderate protest culture and low civic engagement in politics (besides electoral politics) on the other. Increasingly restrictive asylum policies date back to the 1990s, in conjunction with Austria’s altered understanding of itself as a country of destination instead of only being a country of transit. Although the idea of a merely temporary stay for migrants is deeply inscribed in the Austrian migration system, individual possibilities for gaining the right to stay have emerged for asylum seekers who have already received a negative decision. Simultaneously, the policy fields of migration and asylum have become polarized and politicized with negative overtones, especially by the Austrian Freedom Party–with a majority of the Austrian population supporting stricter immigration policies. All these aspects in the area of asylum and deportation as well as the general political culture in Austria represent institutional and discursive opportunity structures for protest, both for and against asylum seekers. Asylum protests can either occur in support of or in opposition to asylum seekers and concern the deportation, right to stay, and reception of asylum seekers. These three fields–deportation, reception, and stay–are linked to each other in the asylum process but have not been jointly examined to date. This chapter explores this constellation, thereby providing a picture of the contextual framework of protest both for and against asylum seekers in Austria.
Research Interests:
The issue of immigration played a variable role in the 2017 national elections in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic. In Germany, most parties’ campaigns - including that of the SPD and CDU - focused on other topics. Yet, their... more
The issue of immigration played a variable role in the 2017 national elections in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic. In Germany, most parties’ campaigns - including that of the SPD and CDU - focused on other topics. Yet, their stances on immigration and asylum largely influenced voters’ decisions. The latter also applies to the elections in Austria and the Czech Republic where the winning and future governing parties ran fierce anti-immigration campaigns.
The outcome of the elections in Austria and the Czech Republic strengthens EU member states calling for a more restrictive immigration policy and even a total closing of the borders. Concerning specific immigration policies, the future Austrian government will probably closely cooperate with the Visegrád Group (Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Slovakia) at the EU level. However, due to many different interests, it is very unlikely that Austria will officially accede to the so called V4.
Overall, the outcome of the elections in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic will not fundamentally change the course of European migration policy but rather intensify the current tendency of externalization, aiming to prevent migrants from reaching European soil. This policy includes border protection, closer cooperation with neighboring states as well as plans for “hotspots” in order to detain and vet asylum seekers outside of Europe. Moreover, this means increasing deportations and presumably a redefinition of the concepts of asylum and sanctuary with the purpose of denying more people the right to enter the European Union.
The paper is part of a series of reports on current debates on migration in European countries.
The outcome of the elections in Austria and the Czech Republic strengthens EU member states calling for a more restrictive immigration policy and even a total closing of the borders. Concerning specific immigration policies, the future Austrian government will probably closely cooperate with the Visegrád Group (Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Slovakia) at the EU level. However, due to many different interests, it is very unlikely that Austria will officially accede to the so called V4.
Overall, the outcome of the elections in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic will not fundamentally change the course of European migration policy but rather intensify the current tendency of externalization, aiming to prevent migrants from reaching European soil. This policy includes border protection, closer cooperation with neighboring states as well as plans for “hotspots” in order to detain and vet asylum seekers outside of Europe. Moreover, this means increasing deportations and presumably a redefinition of the concepts of asylum and sanctuary with the purpose of denying more people the right to enter the European Union.
The paper is part of a series of reports on current debates on migration in European countries.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Today, protest and counter-protest, rule and resistance can only be thought of in the context of a digitized society, its particular opportunities, dynamics and challenges.How do we understand protest in the digital context? How do... more
Today, protest and counter-protest, rule and resistance can only be thought of in the context of a digitized society, its particular opportunities, dynamics and challenges.How do we understand protest in the digital context? How do organization and mobilization differ and complement one another online and offline? Does the structure of digital platforms have benefits for particularly reactionary movements? How can digital spaces strengthen emancipatory policy approaches? What methodological and empirical challenges are associated with research into movements and protest on the Internet?
The conference languages are German and English. Abstracts for individual contributions (max. 250 words) or panel proposals with up to four paper abstracts must be submitted by 26 July 2019 at: konferenz2019@protestinstitut.eu.
15./16. November 2019, Weizenbaum-Institut, Berlin
The conference languages are German and English. Abstracts for individual contributions (max. 250 words) or panel proposals with up to four paper abstracts must be submitted by 26 July 2019 at: konferenz2019@protestinstitut.eu.
15./16. November 2019, Weizenbaum-Institut, Berlin