CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 401Migration, Refugees, and IntegrationMigration and Exile StudiesMigration, Racism, and Human Rights

Forced to leave? The discursive and analytical significance of describing migration as forced and voluntary

Open access
Erdal, Marta Bivand, Oeppen, Ceri·2018·Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
DOI 10.1080/1369183x.2017.1384149
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article examines voluntariness in migration decisions by promoting the acknowledgement of forced and voluntary migration as a continuum of experience, not a dichotomy. Studies on conflict-related migration and migration, in general, remain poorly connected, despite calls for interaction. This reflects the forced–voluntary dichotomy's stickiness within and beyond academia, which is closely connected to the political implications of unsettling it and potentially undermining migrants’ protection rights. We delve into notions of the ‘voluntariness’ of migration and argue for the analytical need to relate evaluations of voluntariness to available alternatives. Drawing on qualitative research with people from Afghanistan and Pakistan coming to Europe, we hone in on three particular renderings of migration: migrants’ own experiences, scholarly qualitative observations and labelling by immigration authorities. Analysing migration as stages in a process: leaving – journey (and transit) – arrival and settlement – return or onward migration, we highlight the specific effects of migration being described as being forced or voluntary. Labelling as ‘forced’ (or not) matters to migrants and states when asylum status is on the line. For migration scholars, it remains challenging to decouple these descriptions from state systems of migration management; though doing so enhances our understanding of the role voluntariness plays in migration decisions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/1369183x.2017.1384149

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Erdal and Oeppen (2018) discuss the difficulty of describing migration as either forced or voluntary and suggest examining voluntariness as a continuum of experience.

    “In a similar vein, Erdal and Oeppen (2018) discuss the difficulty of describing migration as either forced or voluntary, and suggest examining voluntariness as a continuum of experience.”

    From Trapped by climate change? (In)voluntary immobility in Bangladesh (2025) · cites this paper as Erdal and Oeppen 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Erdal, M. B., & Oeppen, C.
Affiliations
  • Peace Research Institute Oslo (NO)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Erdal, Marta Bivand
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2017-10-18
Volume
44
Issue
6
Pages
981-998
ISSN
  • 1369-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-9451
DOI
10.1080/1369183x.2017.1384149
OpenAlex
W2766275414
Cited by
401
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1
FWCI
56.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Norges Forskningsråd
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration and Exile Studies
  • Social Sciences › Health › Migration, Racism, and Human Rights
Keywords
forced migration, voluntary migration, asylum status, migration management, Afghan migrants, Pakistani migrants, migration to Europe, return migration, onward migration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review