Short abstract:

This is a paper about the practices that go into defying what counts as migration-related deaths in the mediterranean. More precisely, the paper situates itself in Tunisia to look at how deaths remain uncounted, or leak away, all the way through the process of becoming official statistics.

Long abstract:

This is a paper about the practices that go into defying what counts as migration-related deaths in the mediterranean and which deaths are lost, or leaked away, in the process of becoming official statistics. The article stitches together STS arguments on humanitarian forensics and quantification with stories gathered during visits to the Oases of El Hamma, Tamaghza and to the coastal town of Zarzis in Tunisia. In El Hamma, soil degradation, unplanned tourism, mining and washing of phosphate, as well as extractive agriculture, are leading people to abandon small agricultural plots and seek to migrate into Europe. Many die during these journeys. But many are not even allowed to try, after getting cancer or falling prey to denutrition due to chemical dumping and soil erosion. The same goes to Tamaghza: the effort of small farmers to recover seed quality is inspiring. But it is also inspired by their fear of the increasing number of cancer victims and other diseases that are being found in local hospitals. Zarzis is a site of ostensive migrant death. Bodies literally are washed ashore. Yet, not all bodies seem to make into the statistics after being examined by local legists. Activists denounce that some bodies are hidden away and even buried in garbage dumping sites. This paper takes a situated look at these different ways in which attempts to quantify the death of migrants seem to require complexification. The argument is part of an international collaboration, now pivoting around the Health, Care and the Body Programme at the University of Amsterdam, to rethink the roie of Vital Elements in colonial and post-colonial relations.

Long abstract:

Detention and deportation constitute a cornerstone of EU policies (cassarino.2010,al.2020).Tunisia is among the first countries targeted by the EU and it is member states through externalization policies aimed at metaphorically shifting their borders outside EU territory, following the entry into force of the Schengen agreement (Cuttita,2019). regarding returns and forced returns ,Italy stands out with seven readmission agreement since 1998,with the most recent one concluded in July 2023.consequently ,Tunisia has become the first countries for deportees from Italy (FTDES).this situation has led to violation of human rights,as many scholars,and activists report troubling conditions in détention center and the tragic experience of immigrants.they are often subjected to extensive use of psychiatric medication to keep them" calm" and quiet before deportation (inkyfada,AltreEconomia,FTDES...)it should be Noted that the actual number of deportees as well as migrants is not accurately known and cannot be calculated in a scientific and reliable manner, especially given the lack of transparency,most the deportation operations occur through Enfidha airport rather than Tunis Carthage, keeping them away from the scrutiny of civil society the latter become more and more targeted by the authority.therefore our research focus on this specific category of people,our goal is to comprehend the challenges these individuals face after deportation and identity the key actors who played a role in their journey to overcome theses challenges .this align with soulroutes project , which mainly interested to grassroots solidarity and multifarious set of actors and practices that support migrants in different border zones such as Tunisa .

Short abstract:

In this presentation, I argue for historical interventions in critically analyzing techniques and technologies in border control. Imaginaries and practices of "smartness" and technological governance of borders have longer historical trajectories, which we need to grapple with in the present.

Long abstract:

This paper engages with the relevance of historical perspectives for imagining and building alternative digital futures in migration and border control. Putting current efforts of digitalization of borders into historical perspective, this paper unpacks how techniques of knowledge-production co-produce projects of differentiation and mobility control. Such techniques, constitutive of border regimes, are historical and become rematerialized in digital contexts.

Empirically, I draw on two case studies to demonstrate genealogies of media technological bordering: (1) the example of Ellis Island immigration station and its techno-solutionist modes of decision-making, emerging from contexts of eugenics and scientistic ideals of the Progressive Era; and (2) the history and present of kinship testing by border authorities (such as genetic or blood testing) in the UK and the USA, envisioned and enacted as seemingly neutral and objective techniques of filtering bodies.

Based on the examples, I argue that it matters to understand how border regimes and media technologies are historically entangled. Techno-solutionist ideas of “smartness”, and subsequent practices of digital knowledge-production, are not built on a history-free clean slate, yet emerge from complex symbolical and material recursions of technologies, practices and ideas. The current moment where large-scale digitalization coincides with increasing border build-up is no less historically contingent than earlier iterations of technological innovation, failure or resistance. Any new imaginaries of how migration control is technologically built, practiced and imagined need to grapple with these histories.

Short abstract:

This paper explores how neo/technocolonial rationalities underpinning calculatory ‘truth-making' spaces within migration governance/protection systems produce paradoxically hyper/invisible refugee bodies, as well as how these legacies become contested through alternative systems of recognition.

Long abstract:

Rohingya refugees find themselves enmeshed in a plurality of migration governance practices involving spaces of calculatory ‘truth-making' through which their bodies become epistemically (un)made, often under the banner of ostensible protection/care. This paper seeks to unveil the neo/technocolonial (Madianou, 2019) rationalities underpinning the emergence of these technologies of objectification, exploring ways in which these genealogies become embodied and contested by Rohingya refugees in their everyday worlds. Drawing on a meta-ethnographic study of Rohingya seeking refuge in the global South, my ongoing fieldwork with resettled Rohingya in the global North, as well as reflection on prior quantitative work with resettled refugees as a public health researcher in the U.S., I examine how residual colonial preoccupations with rendering displaced and othered bodies knowable, legible, and thus governable inform 1) systems of quantifying and monitoring flows of displaced Rohingya bodies through refugee registration and recognition and 2) systems of quantifying and tracing health risk and burden within resettled refugee communities. I consider how entanglements of these datafied practices of governance with hegemonic humanitarian and biomedical discourses on displaced, racialised bodies, still haunted by colonial ‘debris’, paradoxically produce bodies that are both legible/hypervisible (materially, administratively) to some actors and illegible/invisible (socially, epistemically) to others. Finally, I explore ways in which Rohingya refugees are subverting these legacies through the pursuit of their own alternative, datafied systems of identifying, recognising, and tracking members of the diaspora, with the hope of re-imagining a more caring/restorative future for themselves.

Short abstract:

Refugee matching, inspired by market design, uses algorithms to place refugees. This paper explores refugee matching as ongoing collective experiments, highlighting material arrangements and theoretical influences. Migration remains a political matter despite matchmaking's coordination benefits.

Long abstract:

Algorithm development is emerging as an innovative approach to the multifaceted challenges of migration, with refugee matching systems emerging as a widely revered solution. Inspired by ‘market design’ principles, the designers of these systems use algorithms to match refugees to cities where they are most likely to thrive and be accepted by host communities. Drawing on actor-network theory, this paper examines refugee matching ‘in the making’. By taking stock of the processes involved in the design and implementation of several of these systems in Europe and the US, it aims to outline regugee matching as ongoing collective experiments. Firstly, it describes the material arrangements that are put in place to make refugee matching systems work in particular ways. Particular attention is paid to the investment in calculative equipment establishing relationships between supply and demand, and the establishment of a central clearing house for satisfactory matches. Secondly, drawing on the performativity thesis, it underlines the transformative potential of theoretical ideas in shaping matching dynamics – not limited to economics, but including a wide range of social science disciplines such as migration studies. Thirdly, calculating migration should be understood as a political matter. It shows that, while matchmaking serves as a powerful tool for coordination, controversies are likely to persist about the ways in which relocation should be organised, or they will be redirected to other types of interventions that favour (hardline) political measures. Therefore, the way in which migration cannot readily be absorbed by ‘market designs’ warrants close and critical reflection.

Short abstract:

This paper analyzes how "calculation" is justified through different regimes of worth. It explores how calculating mobilities is (e)valued and justified in varying ways, endowed with different meanings and rationales of control, and enacted through different material devices and practices.

Long abstract:

The calculation of migrant mobilities, understood as transforming mobile people into abstract, analyzable, and manageable populations, is a key element of “border management” approaches. This paper analyzes how calculation becomes justified through different regimes of worth. Drawing on Valuation Studies, the paper asks how the calculation of mobilites is (e)valued and justified in varying ways, endowed with different meanings and rationales of control, and thus enacted through different material devices and practices. To this end, it delves into the multiple regimes of worth, which must confer social and moral legitimacy to contemporary techniques and devices of calculation. These regimes will reveal not only differing conceptualizations and principles underpinning the concept of “calculation”, but also how border governance employs diverse ways of describing, valuing, and counting “mobilities”. Empirically, the paper suggests drawing on a critical discourse analysis of the Border Management Today journal, a global industry/private-led outlet that has issued publications between 2018 and 2023. The goal of the analysis is to enhance our understanding of contemporary calculatory concepts, practices, and devices in migration governance—not as an expression of a single universal rationale of bordering but by exposing the multiplicity of underlying values, ideologies, and justificatory principles. In a broader sense, the paper intends to contribute to a critical engagement with emerging value regimes, shifting discursive hegemonies, and the changing actor networks in “border management”.