Effectiveness

• Author: Eisele, Katharina
• Pages: 195-198

Part III: The External Di mension of the EU Return Dire ctive

195

8. Effectiveness

This Section seeks to explore t he extent to which an assessment o f the effectiveness of the EU’s

read mission policy is p ossible. It does no t seek to as sess the effectiveness of the EU’s r eadmission

policy. The European Commission has emphasised the return rate as the primary indicator of policy

effectiveness. A n alternative emphasis cou ld, for example, be t he susta inability of r eturns.432 It is

contended that a quantitative assessment of “effectiveness” is an un reliable ind icator in the absence

of a q ualitative ass essment and other indicators pertaining to t he removed person.

In res ponse to the un settled scholarly debate over th e effectiveness of migr ation policies, Czaika

and de Haas dev eloped a conceptu al framework to enhance the accura cy of assessing the

effectivenes s o f m igratio n policy. 433 The scholars sought to a ddress conceptual am bigu ities in

empir ical a naly ses o f the effectiv eness of m igrat ion po licies by ident ifying and dis aggr egat ing the

var ious facets and le vels t hat contribute to a migra tion policy field.

In t erms o f asses sing “effect iveness” of m igration policies , Czaika a nd de Haa s have dist inguished

between “effectiveness ” (that is, a desired effect) and “an effect” (that is, a n actua l result) and have

caut ioned that a correlation between a policy and an outcome does n ot necessarily mean that a

caus al link exists be tween th at policy and a n outco me (as well as the conver se - that a negative

correlation may not be conclusive of an ineffective policy). 434

The scholar s identify discu rs ive, 435 imp lemen tat ion436 a nd efficacy 437 gaps that can lead to

conclusions that a migration policy has been ineffective. A policy m ay be inefficient rather than

ineffective.438 Qu antitative assessments are prone to t he assumpt ion that o fficial policy h as been

implemented. 439 There is a need for quantitative as sessments to be seen in the context of a

qualitative as sessment because it is “essential to a ssess which of the ga ps appear to be th e most

impor tant in explaining p olicy ineffectiveness”.440 The authors noted that “the effects of migration

policies o n immig rat ion a re r elat ively sma ll co mpared t o other s ocial, econ omic, and po litical

determinants, which may confound the effectiveness of intended migration policy”.441 Accordingly ,

the effects of a migrat ion policy may be s ubsumed or coun tered by those s ocial, economic and

polit ical factor s.

A reliance on the return rate as the prim ary indicator of policy effectivenes s does not su fficiently

accou nt for such dis cursiv e, implemen tation and efficacy gaps nor is it contextualised against a

qualitative assessment.

432 European Parliamentary Research Service (2019), op. cit., p.4 0.

433 Czaika, M., an d de Haas, H. (2 013), ‘The Effective ness of Migr ation Poli cies’, Popul ation and Develop ment Review, Vo l. 39

No. 3, pp.4 87-508 at pp.490-491 . See al so De Haas, H., and Czaika, M. (2013 ), ‘Measuri ng M igr atio n Polic ies: Some

Conceptual and Methodological Reflections’, Migration and Citizenship, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.40 -47.

434 Czaika, M., and de Haas, H. ( 2013), op. c it., at pp.490 -491.

435 A discursive gap is a “discrepancy between discourses and actual migration policies in the form of laws, regulations,

and measu res o n paper”, I bid, p.49 4.

436 An i mplementat ion gap is “the di screpancy betwe en polic ies on paper and their actual imple mentati on”, Ibid, p.49 6.

437 An efficacy gap is “the degree to which the implemented laws, regulations, and measures have the intended effect on

the volume, timing, direction, and composition of migration flows”, Ibid, p.497.

438 Ibid, p.497.

439 Ibid.

440 Ibid, p.4 98.

441 Ibid, p.503.