CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18Migration, Refugees, and IntegrationMigration, Racism, and Human RightsMigration and Exile Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Implementing the Refugee Resettlement Process: Diverging Objectives, Interdependencies and Power Relations

Open access
Schneider, Hanna·2021·Frontiers in Political Science
DOI 10.3389/fpos.2021.629675
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Refugee resettlement is implemented by many different national and international stakeholders who operate in different locations and on the basis of sometimes diverging objectives. The implementation of the resettlement process has thus been characterized as multi-level governance, with resettlement stakeholders coordinating and negotiating the selection of refugees for resettlement. Still, literature on the implementation of refugee resettlement has remained very limited and has mainly focused on one specific stakeholder or stage of the process. In addition, a common conceptualization of the different stages is currently missing in academic literature. To address this research gap, the article proposes a common terminology of all stages of the resettlement process. Highlighting the diversity of resettlement programs, the article relies on a comparative case study of the German resettlement and humanitarian admission programs from Jordan and Turkey. By drawing on the concept of multi-level governance, the article examines diverging objectives and interdependencies between resettlement stakeholders, such as UNHCR and resettlement countries. As a result, the article argues that the increasing emphasis on national selection criteria by resettlement countries, including Germany, puts resettlement countries even more in the center of decision-making authority–in contrast to a diffusion of power that characterizes multi-level governance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpos.2021.629675

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Bamberg, 2018, The EU Resettlement Framework: From a Humanitarian Pathway to a Migration Management Tool?
  2. 2020, Aufgaben Und Schwerpunkte: Das Bundesamt Für Migration Und Flüchtlinge
  3. Baraulina, 2018, Resettlement in Germany – what Is the Programme for Particularly Vulnerable Refugees Accomplishing?
  4. Beirens, 2017, Taking Stock of Refugee Resettlement: Policy Objectives, Practical Tradeoffs, and the Evidence Base
  5. 2017, EU Resettlement for Protection. ECRE’s Analysis of the Latest Developments in the Preparation of an EU Resettlement Framework
  6. Honoré, 2003, Resettlement in the Nordic Countries
  7. Ibendahl, 2016, Aufenthaltsrecht; Rechtsstellung Der Unterschiedlichen Flüchtlingsgruppen
  8. 2020, IOM Resettlement
  9. 2021, Denmark Strips Syrian Refugees of Residency Permits and Says it Is Safe to Go Home.
  10. 2002, UNHCR Resettlement Handbook: Country Chapter.
  11. 2011, UNHCR Resettlement Handbook
  12. UNHCR Resettlement Handbook and Country Chapters
  13. UNHCR Resettlement Handbook: Country Chapter
  14. UNHCR Resettlement Handbook: Country Chapter
  15. UNHCR Resettlement Handbook: Country Chapter
  16. Deutschland zum ersten Mal weltweit zweitgrößter Geber des UNHCR.
  17. UNHCR - Global Trends 2019: Forced Displacement in 2019
  18. Welfens, 2018, Setting the Trends for Resettlement in Europe? Germany’s New Avenues for Refugee Protection
  19. Westerby, 2020, When Refugees Become Migrants: State ‘Cherry-Picking’ for Refugee Protection

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 18

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Schneider, H.
Affiliations
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
Corresponding author
Schneider, Hanna
ORCID
Schneider, Hanna
Venue
Frontiers in Political Science
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2021-05-07
Volume
3
ISSN
2673-3145 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpos.2021.629675
OpenAlex
W3159782579
Cited by
17
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3
FWCI
4.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Political Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Law › Migration, Racism, and Human Rights
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration and Exile Studies
Keywords
refugee resettlement, multi-level governance, power relations, UNHCR, decision-making power

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