There is a growing awareness in the scholarly and policymaking community that migration is closely interlocked with several other major policy issues such as trade, investment, human rights, the environment and, not least, processes of economic globalization. The cross-cutting nature of migration has important implications for the management of migration. As states have recognized, the effective management of migration can no longer be achieved by states in isolation. It requires close inter-state cooperation. This growing concern with cooperative migration management is reflected in the increasing number of state-sponsored global and regional initiatives on migration. It has been estimated that more than 30 regional arrangements exist that deal with migration issues. More than 210 governments participate in non-binding forms of multilateral migration management, so-called Regional Consultative Processes, some of which are inter-regional such as the Swiss-sponsored Berne Initiative. In the light of this broader policy context, the research project will address three questions: first, under which conditions do states engage in international cooperation in the area of migration? ; second, under which conditions does this cooperation take the form of sovereignty transfer? ; and, third, what is the relationship between domestic public opinion, both elite and popular, and international cooperation?

This research project will attempt to develop a framework for understanding different patterns of international governance of migration by examining major cases of binding/non-binding, successful and unsuccessful, inter-state cooperation. These include: the European Union’s (EU) common migration policy [including the EU’s Schengen agreement, the provisions governing enlargement], the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) & post-9/11 border cooperation within North America, and the Australia-New Zealand common travel arrangements and non-binding regional consultative processes. Although there is an established literature on some of these efforts, our approach is innovative in four respects.

First, it compares regional blocs rather than analyzing them in isolation.

Second, it approaches them through the literature on international cooperation; we draw on this large and diverse literature to explore both the domestic and international political conditions that permit international cooperation.

Third, and flowing directly from this point, the project considers the relationship between domestic policy and politics – particularly citizenship and integration policy, the media, and interest group lobbying – and international cooperation.

Finally, whereas much of the literature on international cooperation considers trade policy, the project will focus on migration (labour migrants and business people, and family unification) policy (including the migratory component of trade policy).