Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 106Migration and Exile StudiesMigration, Racism, and Human RightsBiometric Identification and Security

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Experimentation in humanitarian locations: UNHCR and biometric registration of Afghan refugees

Jacobsen, Katja Lindskov·2015·Security Dialogue
DOI 10.1177/0967010614552545
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Amid good intentions, such as providing humanitarian assistance to refugees, the use of biometric technology in humanitarian refugee management may entail various risks for the implicated refugee populations. Drawing on insights from science and technology studies, this article introduces a distinction between risks stemming from technology failure and risks stemming from successful uses of biometric technology. The article thus departs from the literature in which technology failure has been in focus by showing that analysing the effect of technology success adds an important dimension to our analysis of the range of risks that may emerge in the context of humanitarian technology uses. The usefulness of this distinction is then illustrated through an analysis of the use by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) of iris recognition in the repatriation of Afghan refugees; besides risks of failure at the implementation stage, risks also emerged once refugees had successfully registered their biometric data with UNHCR. To recognize how humanitarian refugee biometrics produces digital refugees at risk of exposure to new forms of intrusion and insecurity, we need to appreciate how successful technology can have critical implications arising from how technology is constituted in and constitutive of social phenomena.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0967010614552545

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 87

  1. Aas, 2006, The body does not lie: Identity, risk and trust in techno-culture, Crime Media Culture, 2, 143, 10.1177/1741659006065401 · DOI
  2. Agamben, 1998, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life
  3. Agier, 2011, Managing the Undesirables: Refugee Camps and Humanitarian Government
  4. Alterman, 2003, A piece of yourself: Ethical issues in biometric identification, Ethics and Information Technology, 5, 139, 10.1023/B:ETIN.0000006918.22060.1f · DOI
  5. Ansorge, 2012, Registry, print, resistance, Journal of Cultural Economy, 5, 29, 10.1080/17530350.2012.640553 · DOI
  6. Bennett, 2010, Vibrant Matter
  7. Betts, 2012, The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR): The Politics and Practice of Refugee Protection into the Twenty-First Century
  8. Biometric Technology Today, 2005, Iris recognition excels in refugee scheme, Biometric Technology Today, 13, 5, 10.1016/S0969-4765(05)70320-9 · DOI
  9. Collinson, 2013, Paradoxes of Presence
  10. Connolly, 2013, The ‘new materialism’ and the fragility of things, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 41, 399, 10.1177/0305829813486849 · DOI
  11. Coole, 2013, Agentic capacities and capacious historical materialism, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 41, 451, 10.1177/0305829813481006 · DOI
  12. Coole, 2010, Introducing the new materialisms, 1, 10.1215/9780822392996-001 · DOI
  13. Daugman, 2003, The importance of being random: Statistical principles of iris recognition, Pattern Recognition, 36, 279, 10.1016/S0031-3203(02)00030-4 · DOI
  14. Daugman, 2004, How iris recognition works, IEEE Transactions on Circuit and Systems for Video Technology, 14, 21, 10.1109/TCSVT.2003.818350 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Daugman, 2007, New methods in iris recognition, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man & Cybernetics – Part B: Cybernetics, 37, 1167, 10.1109/TSMCB.2007.903540 · DOI
  16. Dillon, 2001, Global liberal governance: Biopolitics, security and war, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 30, 41, 10.1177/03058298010300010501 · DOI
  17. European Commission Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department (ECHO), 2005, Support to humanitarian operations to provide, in accordance with UNHCR’s mandate, international protection to refugees and other persons of concern to UNHCR, ECHO/THM/BUD/2005/01000, Humanitarian Aid Decision
  18. Farraj, 2011, Refugees and the biometric future, Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 43, 891
  19. Fassin, 2005, The truth from the body: Medical certificates as ultimate evidence for asylum seekers, American Anthropologist, 107, 597, 10.1525/aa.2005.107.4.597 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Feldman, 2007, Difficult distinctions: Refugee law, humanitarian practice, and political identification in Gaza, Cultural Anthropology, 22, 129, 10.1525/can.2007.22.1.129 · DOI
  21. Floridi, 2005, The ontological interpretation of informational privacy, Ethics and Information Technology, 7, 185, 10.1007/s10676-006-0001-7 · DOI
  22. Franke, 2009, Refugee registration as foreclosure of the freedom to move, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 27, 352, 10.1068/d6807 · DOI
  23. Gelb, 2013, Identification for development: The biometrics revolution, 10.2139/ssrn.2226594 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Gilroy, 2012, New Notre Dame research raises questions about iris recognition systems, Notre Dame News
  25. Government Accountability Office, 2008, Defense management: DOD can establish more guidance for biometrics collection and explore broader data sharing
  26. Gulmire, 2012, Iris recognition using independent component analysis, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, 2, 433
  27. Hao, 2008, A fast search algorithm for a large fuzzy database, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 3, 203, 10.1109/TIFS.2008.920726 · DOI
  28. Hildebrandt, 2007, Profiling into the future: An assessment of profiling technologies in the context of ambient intelligence, 1
  29. Hildebrandt, 2008, Defining profiling: A new type of knowledge, 17, 10.1007/978-1-4020-6914-7_2 · DOI
  30. Hosein, 2011, Why we Work on Refugee Privacy
  31. Hosein, 2013, Aiding Surveillance: An Exploration of how Development and Humanitarian Aid Initiatives are Enabling Surveillance in Developing Countries
  32. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), 2013, World Disasters Report: Focus on Technology and the Future of Humanitarian Action
  33. IRIN, 2003, Pakistan: UNHCR returnee iris testing tops 200,000
  34. Jabri, 2006, War, security and the liberal state, Security Dialogue, 37, 47, 10.1177/0967010606064136 · DOI
  35. Jacobsen, 2012, Unique identification: Inclusion and surveillance in the Indian biometric assemblage, Security Dialogue, 43, 457, 10.1177/0967010612458336 · DOI
  36. Jacobsen, 2010, Making design safe: A hidden history of humanitarian experimentation, Citizenship Studies, 14, 89, 10.1080/13621020903466399 · DOI
  37. Jacobsen, 2011, Rethinking the ‘Bio’ of Biopolitical Security Through Humanitarian Experimentation
  38. Jasanoff, 1996, Beyond epistemology: Relativism and engagement in the politics of science, Social Studies of Science, 26, 393, 10.1177/030631296026002008 · DOI
  39. Jasanoff, 2004, The idiom of co-production, 1, 10.4324/9780203413845-6 · DOI
  40. Kaiser, 2003, The application of geographic information systems and global positioning systems in humanitarian emergencies, Disasters, 27, 127, 10.1111/1467-7717.00224 · DOI
  41. Khan, 2003, UN sees results with eye tests to keep track of Afghan refugees, Afghanistan News
  42. Khaw, 2002, Iris Recognition Technology for Improved Authentication. Version 1.3
  43. Latour, 2008, When things strike back, British Journal of Sociology, 51, 107
  44. Long, 2002, UN finds novel way to keep an eye on Afghans
  45. Lyon, 2003, Surveillance as Social Sorting: Privacy, Risk, and Digital Discrimination
  46. Malkki, 1995, Refugees and exile: From ‘refugee studies’ to the national order of things, Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 495, 10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.002431 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Malkki, 1996, Speechless emissaries: Refugees, humanitarianism, and dehistoricization, Cultural Anthropology, 11, 377, 10.1525/can.1996.11.3.02a00050 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, 2005, The Regions of Origin Initiative
  49. Mordini, 2008, Body, biometrics & identity, Biosocieties, 22, 488
  50. Muller, 2004, (Dis)qualified bodies: Securitization, citizenship and ‘identity management’, Citizenship Studies, 8, 279, 10.1080/1362102042000257005 · DOI
  51. National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), 2006, The National Biometric Challenge
  52. Nelson, 2011, America Identified: Biometric Technology and Society
  53. Newton, 2006, Meta-analysis of third-party evaluations of iris recognition. Systems, man and cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 39, 4, 10.1109/TSMCA.2008.2008210 · DOI
  54. Nichols, 2013, UN deployment of surveillance drone in Congo delayed to December
  55. Petryna, 2009, When Experiments Travel: Clinical Trials and the Global Search for Human Subjects
  56. Pugliese, 2010, Biometrics: Bodies, Technologies, Biopolitics
  57. Rouvroy, 2008, Privacy, data protection, and the unprecedented challenges of ambient intelligence, Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology, 2, 1, 10.2202/1941-6008.1001 · DOI
  58. Sandvik, 2011, Blurring boundaries: Refugee resettlement in Kampala – between the formal, the informal, and the illegal, Polar: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 34, 11, 10.1111/j.1555-2934.2011.01136.x · DOI
  59. Sasse, 2007, Red-eye blink, bendy shuffle, and the yuck factor, Security and Privacy, 5, 78, 10.1109/MSP.2007.69 · DOI
  60. Savage, 2007, Corruption perceptions and risks in humanitarian assistance: An Afghanistan case study
  61. Savithiri, 2011, Performance analysis on half iris feature extraction using GW, LBP and HOG, International Journal of Computer Applications, 22, 27, 10.5120/2555-3505 · DOI
  62. Shah, 2006, The Body Hunters: Testing New Drugs on the World’s Poorest Patients
  63. Smith, 2007, Analysis of Pigmentation and Wavefront CodingTM Acquisition in Iris Recognition
  64. Spenser, 2012, New study shows iris recognition is not infallible
  65. Suganami, 2013, Causation-in-the-world: A contribution to meta-theory of IR, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 41, 623, 10.1177/0305829813484185 · DOI
  66. Thieme, 2005, Independent testing of iris recognition technology (IBG)
  67. Ticktin, 2006, Where ethics and politics meet: The violence of humanitarianism in France, American Ethnologist, 33, 33, 10.1525/ae.2006.33.1.33 · DOI
  68. UNHCR, 2002, Afghan ‘recyclers’ under scrutiny of new technology
  69. UNHCR, 2002, Afghanistan: New technology to help deter ‘recycling’
  70. UNHCR, 2003, Iris testing of returning Afghans passes 200,000 mark
  71. UNHCR, 2003, Afghanistan: Iris-testing proves successful, UNHCR Briefing Note
  72. UNHCR, 2003, UNHCR gears up for 2003 Afghan repatriation
  73. UNHCR, 2003, Pakistan
  74. UNHCR, 2003, Return: Information update
  75. UNHCR, 2006, Repatriation from Pakistan: A circular for Afghan refugees from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
  76. UNHCR, 2006, First Afghan families leave Pakistan as repatriation season resumes
  77. UNHCR, 2006, Fingerprints mark new direction in refugee registration
  78. UNHCR, 2007, Agreement between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the UNHCR Governing the Repatriation of Afghan citizens living in Pakistan
  79. UNHCR, 2008, The Use of Cash Grants in UNHCR Voluntary Repatriation Operations. Report of a ‘Lessons Learned’ Workshop
  80. UNHCR, 2012, Modern technology helps meet the needs of refugees in South Sudan
  81. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA), 2013, Humanitarianism in the Network Age
  82. US Department of State, 2004, The United States Refugee Admissions Program: Reforms for a new era of refugee resettlement
  83. Van der Ploeg, 1999, The illegal body: ‘EURODAC’ and the politics of biometric identification, Ethics and Information Technology, 1, 295, 10.1023/A:1010064613240 · DOI
  84. Van der Ploeg, 2005, The Machine-Readable Body: Essays on Biometrics and the Informatization of the Body
  85. Wajcman, 1995, Feminist theories of technology, 189
  86. Woodward, 2003, Biometrics: Identity Assurance in the Information Age
  87. Zhu, 2000, Biometric personal identification based on iris patterns, 801

Cited by

See all 106

Metadata

Authors
Jacobsen, K. L.
Affiliations
Metropolitan University College (DK)
Corresponding author
Jacobsen, Katja Lindskov
ORCID
Jacobsen, Katja Lindskov
Venue
Security Dialogue
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2015-04-01
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
144-164
ISSN
  • 0967-0106 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3640
DOI
10.1177/0967010614552545
OpenAlex
W2335507650
Cited by
106
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
18.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Security Dialogue (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • European Commission
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration and Exile Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Migration, Racism, and Human Rights
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Biometric Identification and Security
Keywords
biometric registration, humanitarian technology, refugees, UNHCR, iris recognition, Afghan refugees, repatriation, technology failure, privacy risks, refugee management, science and technology studies

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Experimentation in humanitarian locations: UNHCR and biometric registration of Afghan refugees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0967010614552545
The paper
Jacobsen, K. L. (2015). Experimentation in humanitarian locations: UNHCR and biometric registration of Afghan refugees. Security Dialogue. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010614552545

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.