![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The thematic and geographical expansion of EU migration policies has gone along with an increasing mobilisation of pertinent international organisations such as the IOM and UNHCR. Combining insights from the external governance approach with IR debates on international institutional complexity, this article examines the dynamics behind this ‘multilevelling’ of EU external policies. Three strategies of institutional interplay are distinguished: counterweight, whereby international organisations act as independent complement or corrector to EU policy; subcontracting, referring to the outsourcing of EU project implementation to international organisations; and rule transmission, a process in which international organisations engage in transferring EU rules to third countries. Whereas greater organisational authority and autonomy have allowed the UNHCR to keep an independent voice as counterweight to EU action, both the UNHCR and IOM have become increasingly involved in the implementation of the EU's ‘global approach’ to migration via subcontracting and rule transmission. In sum, these processes shed a new light on the role of the EU within the international migration regime complex.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Of these, 63% went into external borders and the ‘return fund’ which supports the expulsion of irregular migrants (see Commission Citation2013).
2. See the speeches by Antonio Guterres at http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/search?page=home&skip=90&cid=49aea93a4c&scid=49aea93a2f&comid=42b2f01a4.
3. Data on www.iom.int.
4. European Commission Press Release 8 November 2011, “The European Commission and the International Organization for Migration Streamline their Cooperation.” http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-11-1313_en.htm.