An international lecture series by the Department of Political Science, University of Vienna

Summer Term 2018

Christian Göbel (Universität Wien, Sinologie): Soziale Unruhen in China aus der Perspektive sozialer Medien.

Moderation: Ilker Ataç (IPW Uni Wien)

Discussant: Ulrich Brand (IPW Uni Wien)

6.6.2018 - 18:30-20:00, Konferenzraum IPW (A222), NIG 2.Stock, Universitätsstraße 7, A-1010 Wien

Samuel D. Schmid (European University Institute): Open Borders vs. Inclusive Citizenship? The Relationship of Entry and Memebership in Governing Immigration.

Moderation: Jeremias Stadlmair (IPW Uni Wien)

14.6.2018 - 18:30-20:00, Hörsaal 2 IPW (A218), NIG 2.Stock, Universitätsstraße 7, A-1010 Wien


Do inclusive societies need closed borders? This problem has bothered political theorists for decades. The conventional view holds that in liberal democracies immigration restrictions are necessary for inclusive citizenship. By contrast, theorists arguing for a combination of inclusive citizenship policies with open borders assume that the two are compatible. This leads to an empirical puzzle: Is there a trade-off between the openness of borders and the inclusiveness of citizenship? Or, more generally, how are entry regimes and membership regimes related? There are three intuitive answers to this question. The first is that there is indeed a trade-off between the two, because it would be impossible for a state to admit unlimited amounts of immigrants and simultaneously grant them expansive rights and indiscriminately hand out passports. The second answer is that entry regimes and membership regimes are driven by the same political factors. Especially the power of right-wing parties should determine variation in entry and membership policies. The third answer is that entry regimes mainly respond to fast-paced market forces, while membership regimes are determined by path-dependent and slow-paced trajectories of national identities. Therefore, it can be assumed that they follow divergent logics and should not be correlated. Employing panel regressions to analyze 23 liberal democracies from 1980 to 2014, the empirical analysis lends support to the third answer. Contrary to the widespread trade-off assumption, entry regimes and membership regimes do not appear to be systematically correlated. However, the investigation also brings to light a limited and conditional positive relationship between the two: If strong far-right parties and center-right governments team up and succeed in restricting immigration policies, citizenship policies are likely to follow the same restrictive trajectory.

Claudia Tazreiter (UNSW Sydney): Crisis Politics and Borders. Exploring Visual Culture and Affect through the Case Study of Australian Responses to Refugees.

Moderation: Helena Hattmannsdorfer (IPW Uni Wien)

10.4.2018 - 17:00-19:00, Konferenzraum IPW (A222), NIG 2.Stock, Universitätsstraße 7, A-1010 Wien

Winter Term 2017

Marc Helbling (University Bamberg): Measuring Immigration Policies and their Effects

24.10.2017 - 18:30-20:00, Hörsaal II, NIG

Matteo Gianni: The Refugee Crisis as the Crisis of what Democratic Integration of Democratic Integration in Western Societies should be about?

25.11.2017 - 10:45-12:00, Hörsaal II, NIG

Dieter Rucht: Zur Analyse aktueller rechtspopulistischer Bewegungen

29.11. 2017 - 16:45-18:15, Hörsaal 33, Hauptgebäude Uni Wien

Zeynep Kasli: EU-ization of Turkey's Migration and Border Regime

11.1.2018 -18:30, Aula am Campus, Altes AKH

7.6. (cancelled) Luin Goldring (York University): “Negotiating Non-Citizenship and Legal Status Trajectories in Toronto"

Abstract: Recognized immigrants and de-facto residents share certain exclusions (e.g. racism and racialization) as well as distinct challenges linked to immigration status. De-facto residents include temporary residents, who are not typically entitled to full settlement services, and those without authorized status. For this precarious status population, struggles to stay put involve claims of control over im/mobility and presence, claims to membership based on residence, and claims of access to public services and entitlements. Contemporary immigration policies institutionalize a variety of legal status situations and likely trajectories characterized by several dimensions of precarity. These include temporariness (temporary work and residence permits), limited or no access to public services, status revocability, and deportability. This paper examines the chutes and ladders of precarious legal status trajectories, focusing on the conditionality of presence and access. Part of the analysis examines the work undertaken by precarious noncitizens to remain in Canada and to gain (more) secure status, extend presence, and improve access to services. Another part focuses on the role of certain actors and institutions in shaping experiences and trajectories. The analysis is based on data gathered through a mixed-methods survey conducted in the Greater Toronto Area and may focus on a particular legal status trajectory. The paper aims to contribute to conceptual and empirical work on the assemblage of non-citizenship in Canada, and to comparative discussions. (Event PDF)

Winter Term 2016

  • Florian Trauner (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) –Dublin is dead, long live Dublin! - Der Streit um einen Paradigmenwechsel in der EU-Asylpolitik
  • Olaf Kleist (Universität Osnabrück) –  Ehrenamtliche Flüchtlingsarbeit in Deutschland: Eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme

Summer Term 2016

  • Monika Mokre (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften) - Solidarität jenseits von Staatsbürger_innenschaft. Überlegungen zur politischen Gestaltung von Migrationsgesellschaften.
  • Vanja-Ivan Savić (University of Zagreb) - Why is Religion so special for the Law? Is it really?
  • Siti Syamsiyatun (Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Jalan Adisucipto) -Politics and Religion in Indonesia