Humanities and Social Sciences

Central Eastern European Migration Review

Content

Central Eastern European Migration Review | 2020 | vol. 9 | No 1 |

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This Guest Editorial introduces a special issue entitled Brexit and Beyond: Transforming Mobility and Immobility. The unfolding story of Brexit provided the backdrop to a series of events, organised in 2018 and 2019, which were the result of a collaboration between migration researchers in Warsaw and the UK, funded by the Noble Foundation’s Programme on Modern Poland. The largest event – held in association with IMISCOE – was an international conference, arising from which we invited authors to contribute papers to this special issue on the implications of Brexit for the mobility and immobility of EU citizens, particularly – but not exclusively – from Central and Eastern Europe, living in the UK. As we outline in this Editorial, collectively, the papers comprising the special issue address three key themes: everyday implications and ‘living with Brexit’; renegotiating the ‘intentional unpredictability’ status and settling down; and planning the future and the return to countries of origin. In addition, we include an interview with Professor Nira Yuval-Davis, based on the substance of her closing plenary at the conference – racialisation and bordering. Her insightful analysis remains salient to the current situation – in June 2020, as the UK enters the final months of the Brexit transition period – in the unexpected midst of a global pandemic and an imminent recession.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Majella Kilkey
Aneta Piekut
Louise Ryan
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In the summer of 2019 as the UK was in the midst of heated Brexit debates and Theresa May’s minority government clung on to power, Professor Louise Ryan interviewed Professor Nira Yuval-Davis about her recent book Bordering (Yuval-Davis, Wemyss and Cassidy 2019). Although things have changed in some significant ways since that interview, for example Boris Johnson has now replaced Theresa May as Prime Minister, and won a landslide election victory in December, 2019, and the controversial Brexit Bill was passed by the British Parliament, many of the issues about borders and bordering remain extremely relevant today. The current pandemic has not only revealed Britain’s dependence on migrant workers, especially in health and social care, but also exposed health inequalities among migrants and ethnic minorities. As the post-Brexit immigration landscape begins to emerge, the analysis of Nira Yuval Davis remains as pertinent as ever.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Nira Yuval-Davis
Louise Ryan
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article focuses on the emotionality of belonging among European Union (EU) citizens in the context of the United Kingdom’s (UK) 2016 referendum and its result in favour of the UK leaving the EU, commonly referred to as Brexit. Drawing from testimonies of EU27 citizens in the UK (mainly mid- to long-term residents) published in a book and on blog and Twitter accounts by the not-for-profit and non-political initiative, the ‘In Limbo Project’, it explores a range of emotions which characterise the affective impact of Brexit and how they underpin two key processes disrupting the sense of belonging of EU citizens: the acquisition of ‘migrantness’ and the non-recognition of the contributions and efforts made to belong. The resulting narratives are characterised by senses of ‘unbelonging’, where processes of social bonding and membership are disrupted and ‘undone’. These processes are characterised by a lack of intersubjective recognition in the private, legal and communal spheres, with ambivalent impacts on EU citizens’ longer-term plans to stay or to leave and wider implications for community relations in a post-Brexit society.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Rosa Mas Giralt
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The UK’s decision to leave the EU illustrates some of the tensions embedded in European integration, enabling us to examine how nationalism and cosmopolitanism operate simultaneously, thus reinforcing each other. Furthermore, the prolonged Brexit negotiations have created a climate of protracted insecurity where the only certainty is uncertainty. This is particularly reflected in the migratory experiences of European citizens currently residing in the UK. Academic research has begun exploring the affective impact of Brexit; however, little is known about how processes of connection and disconnection operate simultaneously, nor which coping strategies European migrants have employed to navigate this state of in-betweenness. Using the anthropological notion of liminality as a lens, we draw on participant observation and semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences of Brexit and the coping practices of a range of (new) Bulgarian and (old) Italian European migrants. We argue that Brexit results in a loss of frames of reference for European migrants in the UK – which can be both liberating and unsettling, depending on migrants’ positioning as unequal EU subjects as well as their views on the nature of their future re-incorporation in post-Brexit Britain.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Elena Genova
Elisabetta Zontini
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper explores how people live together in different places in the context of Brexit. This issue seems more relevant than ever due to the continued attention being paid to immigration, identity and nation and raising questions about conviviality – understood in this paper as a process of living and interacting together in shared spaces. Building on my earlier research in 2012/13 and drawing on qualitative interviews conducted with Polish migrant women after the EU referendum in 2016, this paper explores the complexity of my participants’ everyday interactions with the local population in Manchester in the context of Brexit, viewed by many as a disruptive event impacting on social relations. The paper shows that conviviality is a highly dynamic process influenced by spatio-temporal characteristics, revealing not only tensions but also various forms of conviviality, in some cases sustained over time. It illustrates that, while Brexit poses challenges to conviviality, there are instances of thriving and sustained conviviality that endures despite exclusionary anti-immigration rhetoric. The paper also reflects on the possibilities of maintaining social connections and belonging in the context of Brexit, whereby some migrants become more rooted in their local areas and are likely to be settled on a more permanent basis, contrary to earlier assumptions that post-accession migrants are temporary.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Alina Rzepnikowska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper explores the ways in which young people aged 12 to 18 who were born in Central and Eastern European EU countries but now live in the United Kingdom construct their future imaginaries in the context of Brexit. It reports on findings from a large-scale survey, focus groups and family case studies to bring an original perspective on young migrants’ plans for the future, including mobility and citizenship plans, and concerns over how Britain’s decision to leave the European Union might impact them. While most of the young people planned to stay in Britain for the immediate future, it was clear that Brexit had triggered changes to their long-term plans. These concerns were linked to uncertainties over access to education and the labour market for EU nationals post-Brexit, the precarity of their legal status and their overall concerns over an increase in racism and xenophobia. While our young research participants expressed a strong sense of European identity, their imaginaries rarely featured ‘going back’ to their country of birth and instead included narratives of moving on to more attractive, often unfamiliar, destinations. The reasons and dynamics behind these plans are discussed by drawing on theories of transnational belonging.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Daniela Sime
Marta Moskal
Naomi Tyrrell
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The fate of European citizens living in the United Kingdom was a key issue linked with Britain’s departure from the European Union. Official statistics show that some outflow has taken place, but it was no Brexodus. This article investigates Brexit’s impact within a theoretical (push–pull) framework using a survey of long-term Polish migrants in the UK (CAPI, N = 472, conducted in 2018). Our results show that the perception of Brexit as a factor discouraging migrants from staying in the UK was limited. Still, those with experience of living in other countries, those remitting to Poland, and those on welfare benefits, were more likely to find Brexit discouraging. However, many claimed that the referendum nudged them towards extending their stay instead of shortening it. In general, when asked about what encourages/discourages them from staying in the UK, the respondents mainly chose factors related to the job market. Therefore, we argue, in line with Kilkey and Ryan (2020), that the referendum was an unsettling event – but, considering the strong economic incentives for Polish migrants to stay in the UK, we can expect Brexit to have a limited influence on any further outflows of migrants, as long as Britain’s economic situation does not deteriorate.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Barbara Jancewicz
Weronika Kloc-Nowak
Dominika Pszczółkowska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to assess the extent to which the 2016 Brexit referendum impacted on the decisions of young Polish and Lithuanian migrants to stay in the UK or return to the country of origin. We analyse information from 76 in-depth semi-structured interviews with Lithuanians and Poles living in the UK, as well as those who have returned to Lithuania and Poland since June 2016. We find that, for our interviewees, the referendum had little impact on the decision to stay in the UK or return to the country of origin, giving way, instead, to work, family and lifestyle considerations. Only for a select few did it act as a trigger, either adding to other reasons which eventually prompted the return to Lithuania or Poland, or motivating people to secure their rights in the UK and delay plans to leave the country. We conclude by discussing our results together with existing research on transnationalism and life-course migration theory: regardless of interviewees’ decisions to stay or return, these were never final, stressing the fluid nature of migration and the desire of our interviewees to maintain ties across multiple places.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Luka Klimavičiūtė
Violetta Parutis
Dovilė Jonavičienė
Mateusz Karolak
Iga Wermińska-Wiśnicka

Editorial office

RADA PROGRAMOWA:


Marek Okólski (Uniwersytet Warszawski, Szkoła Wyższa Psychologii Społecznej)
Olga Chudinovskikh (Moscow State Lomonosow University, Higher School of Economics)
Barbara Dietz (Institute for East and Southeast European Studies in Regensburg, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA))
Boris Divinský (Bratislava)
Dušan Drbohlav (Charles University in Prague)
Elżbieta Goździak (Georgetown University, Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza)
Agnes Hars (KOPINT-TARKI Economic Research Institute Ltd)
Romuald Jończy (Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu)
Paweł Kaczmarczyk (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Olga Kupets (National University of ‘Kyiv-Mohyla Academy’)
Solange Maslowski (Charles University in Prague)
Ewa Morawska (University of Essex)
Mirjana Morokvasic (University Paris X-Nanterre, Institute for Social Sciences of Politics in Paris)
Jan Pakulski (University of Tasmania, Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia)
Dorota Praszałowicz (Uniwersytet Jagielloński)
Krystyna Romaniszyn (Uniwersytet Jagielloński)
John Salt (University College London)
Dumitru Sandu (University of Bucharest)
Krystyna Slany (Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza)
Dariusz Stola (Polska Akademia Nauk, Collegium Civitas)
Cezary Żołędowski (Uniwersytet Warszawski)

REDAKCJA:

Aleksandra Grzymała-Kazłowska (Uniwersytet Warszawski) - redaktor naczelny
Piotr Koryś (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Yana Leontiyeva (Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic)
Magdalena Lesińska (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Stefan Markowski (University of New South Wales in Australia)
Justyna Nakonieczna (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Joanna Nestorowicz (Uniwersytet Warszawski)
Aneta Piekut (University of Sheffield)
Paolo Ruspini (International Migration University of Lugano)
Brygida Solga (Politechnika Opolska)
Paweł Strzelecki (Szkoła Główna Handlowa)
Anne White (University of Bath)
Renata Stefańska (Uniwersytet Warszawski) - sekretarz Redakcji

 

Contact

Ośrodek Badań nad Migracjami Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
ul. Banacha 2b
02-097 Warszawa
tel.: 22 659 74 11

Instructions for authors

  • Article in English (British English) or Polish should be submitted as MS Word file (*.doc or *.docx) or Rich Text Format (*.rtf) by e-mail to: ceemr@uw.edu.pl.
  • Documents to be submitted:
  • Documents to be submittedafter review:
  1. Separate file including: first name, last name, e-mail, author’s affiliation and the title of article.
  2. The main file with the article including: a) title of the article, b) abstract of 150 up to 250 words, c) 3 up to 5 keywords. Figures and Tables should be removed from this file. Please indicate in the text where they should be placed in the final version of the publication. All information that might reveal the author’s identity should be also removed from this file.
  3. Separate file (Word format) including Figures (if necessary)
  4. Separate file (Word format) including Tables (if necessary)
  5. Separate file (preferably in Excel format) including source Tables and Figures (if necessary)

Apart from documents listed above you should deliver.

-         file with the main text indicating changes that were made (track changes version)

-         files with replies to reviewers

  • The maximum length for articles is 10 000 words and for book reviews 2 000 words.
  • Text format:

-         Font – Times New Roman, 11 points, only in the descriptions to tables, graphics
and figures (source, notes) – 9 points.

-         Line spacing – 1.5 lines (in the footnotes – single).

-         Margins (top, bottom, left and right) – 2.5 cm.

-         The text should be justified, i.e. aligned to the right and left side. Exceptions are headings which should be aligned to the left.

-         Each paragraph should begin indented (1.25 cm tab), except for paragraphs following subheadings, tables, figures, illustrations and enumerations.

  • Use up to 2 levels of sub-titles following the below formats (do not number the headings):

Heading – first level

Heading – second level

  • Usesingle quotation marks to signal verbatim quotes or to introduce words and phrases that are not themselves quotes but to which you wish to d raw attention as lexical items.
  • Short quotes of up to 50 words should be run into the surroundi, ng text. They are set off by opening and closing quotation marks only.
  • Extended (block) quotations of more than 50 words should be indented and separated from the surrounding text by paragraph spacing before and after. No quotation marks are required.
  • Italicise titles of books, titles of journals and foreign words.
  • All numbers should appear as figures.
  • Do not use commas to indicate thousands. Instead, insert spaces, e.g. 4 000 000. Serial numbers should not be grouped in thousands, e.g. p. 1498.
  • Percentages should be written ‘per cent’, not ‘%’.
  • Tables, figures and other illustrations should be numbered consecutively and titled, and under them the source should be given. All explanations to tables, figures or illustrations should come as a footnote above the table source. Each table, figure and illustration should be referred to in the text.
  • Figures should be submitted in separate files in MS Excel, in the main text there should be only marked the place where the figures should be included.
  • Footnotes should be numbered with Arabic numerals and be placed in the end of the text. Number of footnotes should be kept to a minimum. Footnote marks should be placed after punctuation (after the full stop or comma).
  • Reference to literature in the main text should be placed in brackets: author’s name and year of publication, and where necessary (e.g. when quoting specific words of the author) the page number after the colon, e.g.:

(Jaźwińska, Okólski 2001)

(Jaźwińska, Okólski 2001: 102)

  • When the author’s name is cited in the main text, then in brackets indicate only year of publication and page number if necessary, e.g.:

Kaczmarczyk (2004: 27) distinguishes…

  • When there are 3 or more authors, the first reference in the text should include names of all authors; next one should give the name of the first author only and the abbreviation: ‘et al.’, e.g.:

first reference: (Górny, Grabowska-Lusińska, Lesińska, Okólski 2010)

subsequent reference: (Górny et al.)

When the names of several authors of the cited work are a part of the sentence, the name of only the first author should be given followed by the abbreviation ‘et al.’, and then by information about a year of publication given in parenthesis, e.g.:

Górny et al. (2010)…

  • Bibliography should be placed at the end of the text. Its items should be listed in the alphabetical order and include only publications quoted in the text. At the same time, all the items referenced in the main text should be included in the bibliography. Italics should only be used in titles of books and titles of journals.

-         Book:

  • One author:

Dąbrowski P. (2011). Cudzoziemiec niepożądany w polskim prawie
o cudzoziemcach
. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

  • If more than one work of the given author is quoted, his/her publications should be listed according to the year of publication in a chronological, order (from oldest to newest), e.g.:

Grzymała-Kazłowska A. (2007). Konstruowanie…

Grzymała-Kazłowska A. (ed.) (2008). Między wielością a jednością

  • If several works of the given author have been published in the same year, they should be listed in alphabetical order according to the first letter of the article’s title. Moreover, a small letter (i.e. ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’ etc.) should be added after the year of publication in correspondence with the order of appearance of these works in the bibliography.

Pędziwiatr K. (2011a). Muslims in…

Pędziwiatr K. (2011b). “The Established…

  • Two or more authors:

Grabowska-Lusińska I., Okólski M. (2009). Emigracja ostatnia? Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.

  • If several works of the given author, being co-authored by other authors, are quoted, they should be listed in an alphabetical order, according the name of the second author. Works of the given teams of authors should be listed in a chronological order (from oldest to newest), e.g.:  

Fihel A., Kaczmarczyk P., Okólski M. (2007). Rozszerzenie…

Fihel A., Okólski M. (2008). Bilans demograficzny…

Fihel A., Okólski M. (2009). Dimensions and…

  • Edited book:

Jaźwińska E., Okólski M. (eds) (2001). Ludzie na huśtawce. Migracje między peryferiami Polski i Zachodu. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.

  • Book in a series:

Okólski M. (ed.) (2012). European Immigrations: Trends, Structures and Policy Implications. IMISCOE Research Series. Amsterdam: AmsterdamUniversity Press.

  • Book in print:

Kaczmarczyk P., Lesińska M. (eds) (in print). Krajobrazy migracyjne Polski. Warsaw: Ośrodek Badań nad Migracjami UW.

-         Book chapter:

Kaczmarczyk P. (2001). „Polski Berlin?” - uwagi na temat najnowszych migracji Polaków do stolicy Niemiec, in: E. Jaźwinska, M. Okólski (eds), Ludzie na huśtawce. Migracje między peryferiami Polski i Zachodu, pp. 241-271. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.

-         Working Paper:

Fihel A. (ed.) (2011). Recent Trends in International Migration in Poland. The 2011 SOPEMI report. CMR Working Papers 52, 110. Warszawa: Ośrodek Badań nad Migracjami UW.

-         Journal article:

  • One author:

Stola D. (1998). Migrations in Central and Eastern Europe. International Migration Review 32(124): 1069-1072.

  • Article in print:

Piekut A., Rees P., Valentine G., Kupiszewski M. (in print). Multidimensional diversity in two European cities: thinking beyond ethnicity. Environment and Planning A.

-         Conference paper:

  • Toruńczyk-Ruiz S. (2012). Neighbour relations and attitudes towards diversity in socially mixed areas: the case of Warsaw, paper delivered at the conference titled ‘Living with Difference’, Leeds, 12-13 September 2012.

-         Newspaper article:

  • Iglicka K. (2010). Poles are not trying to escape UK. The Guardian, 23 January, www.guardian.co.uk.

-         Works from the Internet:

Górny A. (2005). New phenomena and old legislation: regulations regarding the acquisition of citizenship in Poland. Online: http://aa.ecn.cz/img_upload/f76c21488a048c95bc0a5f12deece153/AGorny_Polish_citizenship.pdf (accessed: 21 January 2013).

  • Initial letters of two name of the author should be always separated by space, e.g.:

Castles S., Miller M. J. (2012). Migracje we…

 

 

 

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more