Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.advisorVitikainen, Annamari
dc.contributor.authorEgan, Magnus Skytterholm
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-09T10:08:53Z
dc.date.available2021-10-09T10:08:53Z
dc.date.issued2021-10-20
dc.description.abstractThe last few decades have seen an increasing use of merit-based immigration systems, whereby migrants are treated differently on the basis of their skills, education, and wealth. In this thesis I argue that there are justice-based reasons to be sceptical of such policies. While I agree that there are good grounds for states to control their own borders, related to self-determination and the welfare of their citizens, I argue that there are also contribution- and benefit-based reasons for states to take global inequality of opportunity and structural injustice into account when deciding on their admissions policies and treatment of migrants. The core of the thesis is made up of three articles. The first argues that states have an obligation to consider global equality of opportunity in relation to immigration requirements and proposes a fairer migration model that takes equality of opportunity into account. The second argues that skills-based restrictions can have adverse effects on the citizens in states employing such policies. The third article shows how a lack of opportunities to migrate, and unequal treatment of migrants, is a structural injustice, and how individuals have a responsibility to remedy such an injustice. I finally argue that the value of these arguments does not merely consist in clarifying the implications of normative ideals for admissions policies and treatment of migrants, but that they can help us to reimagine the current global migration structure, and thereby make us better equipped to change it.en_US
dc.description.abstractDe siste tiårene har stadig flere land tatt i bruk ferdighetsbaserte innvandringskriterier. Slike kriterier forskjellsbehandler migranter på bakgrunn av deres ferdigheter, utdanning og velstand. I denne avhandlingen argumenterer jeg for at slike kriterier kan være urettferdige. Samtidig som jeg er enig i at det er gode grunner til at stater skal kunne kontrollere innvandring, for å opprettholde sin selvbestemmelse og beskytte velferden til sine innbyggere, argumenterer jeg for at stater også bør ta hensyn til globale forskjeller i folks muligheter og strukturell urettferdighet når de bestemmer seg for hvilke innvandrere de slipper inn og hvordan de behandles. Kjernen av avhandlingen består av tre artikler. I den første artikkelen argumenterer jeg for at stater har en forpliktelse til å vurdere hvordan deres innvandringspolitikk påvirker globale forskjeller i folks muligheter, og foreslår innvandringskriterier som tar hensyn til dette. I den andre artikkelen viser jeg hvordan ferdighetsbasert innvandring også kan ha negative følger for borgerne i land som bruker slike kriterier. I den tredje artikkelen hevder jeg at manglende muligheter til å migrere, og ulik behandling av migranter, er en strukturell urettferdighet, og argumenterer for at individer også har et ansvar til å bekjempe slik urettferdighet. Avslutningsvis konkluderer jeg med at verdien av disse artiklene ikke kun består i at det klargjør hvilke moralske forpliktelser vi har i innvandringspolitikken, men at det også hjelper oss å gjenfortolke det internasjonale migrasjonssystemet, og dermed gjør oss bedre i stand til å endre det.en_US
dc.description.doctoraltypeph.d.en_US
dc.description.popularabstractThe last few decades have seen an increasing use of merit-based immigration, whereby migrants are treated differently based on their skills, education, and wealth. Faced with the contested political nature of immigration in many countries, and the vastly unequal treatment migrants receive, there is a need to discuss whether such policies are fair. While I find that there are good grounds for states to control their own borders, related to self-determination and the welfare of their citizens, I argue that states should also take global inequality of opportunity and structural injustice into account when deciding on their treatment of migrants. Amongst other things, I conclude that (1) there are good justice-based reasons to be wary of skills-based migration, (2) that particularly countries in the Global North ought to take migrants’ needs and opportunities into account when deciding on who to admit, and (3) that individuals have responsibilities towards alleviating migration injustice.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/22734
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherUiT Norges arktiske universiteten_US
dc.publisherUiT The Arctic University of Norwayen_US
dc.relation.haspart<p>Paper I: Egan, M. (2018). Towards fairer borders: Alleviating global inequality of opportunity. <i>Etikk i praksis, 2</i>, 11-26. Also available in Munin at <a href=https://hdl.handle.net/10037/14778>https://hdl.handle.net/10037/14778</a>. <p>Paper II: Egan, M.S. (2020). Statements on race and class: the fairness of skills-based immigration criteria. <i>Ethics & Global Politics, 13</i>(2), 108-122. Also available in Munin at <a href=https://hdl.handle.net/10037/21285>https://hdl.handle.net/10037/21285</a>. <p>Paper III: Egan, M.S. Structural injustice and labour migration – From individual responsibility to collective action. (In press). Now published in <i>Theoria, 2021</i>, <a href=https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12335>https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12335</a>.en_US
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2021 The Author(s)
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Humanities: 000::Philosophical disciplines: 160::Other philosophical disciplines: 169en_US
dc.subjectPhilosophy of migrationen_US
dc.titleWho merits admittance? The fairness of skills-based migration criteriaen_US
dc.typeDoctoral thesisen_US
dc.typeDoktorgradsavhandlingen_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
Med mindre det står noe annet, er denne innførselens lisens beskrevet som Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)