Publications

Return migration is one of the complex categories of migration, which becomes even more complicated in the context of refugees’ return to their country of origin. A plethora of terms is used to describe the return of refugees/asylum seekers, having strong political and policy relevance. To unpack the features and drivers of conceptual complexity, I propose three interrelated arguments. The first is that labelling – the choice of one concept over another – in return migration often depends on who uses the term (e.g. scholars, policymakers, practitioners, migrants) and in which part of the world. The second argument is that return, similar to binaries in other areas of migration, is often associated with binaries, such as voluntary and forced return. Despite policy categories that reiterate the ‘voluntary’ character of return, the actual practices rarely confirm that return is voluntary and often remain in grey areas, as the emerging literature on bordering practices shows. The third argument is that there are multiple levels at which labelling and binaries are constructed in relation to each other. The identifiable scales include the academic level, the policy level and the migrants themselves.