Search results

This paper reports on the results of a research project aimed at estimating the costs of border crossing transit time and uncertainty for the U.S. and Canadian economies. The cost estimates are based on a review of prior reports, some 20 site visits to seven key crossings, and 173 interviews of knowledgeable organizations/persons. The key finding is that border transit time and uncertainty are costing some U.S.$4.01 billion, or 1.05% of total 2001 merchandise trade, and 1.58% of truck-based trade levels. The primary implication of the research is that it provides a baseline estimate of costs that can be used in cost-benefit analysis of alternative border management strategies.

The Polish–Slovak borderland is a mountainous area with extraordinary natural conditions for tourism development. The main aim of this chapter is to analyze theoretical aspects of a relationship between transport and tourism and to assess selected changes in cross-border transport that have influenced tourism in Polish–Slovak tourism regions. We have tried to answer the questions on changes in transport infrastructure (based on the analysis of the cross-border projects) and public transport (based on the analysis of timetables of the cross-border public transport connections) in the borderland during the last 30 years and to answer the question whether these changes are in accordance with the sustainable development goals. The Polish–Slovak border is seen as a barrier to transport. The increasing cross-border movement of people and goods through Polish–Slovak border after 1989 required the opening of new border crossings and the construction of new cross-border transport infrastructure. Investments to the road infrastructure have led to using of individual automobile transport. Public transport is currently of marginal importance in cross-border transport. The three cross-border rail lines are in poor technical condition, and plans for their modernization are uncertain. Bus transport has been limited on two tourist-oriented lines in the central part of the borderland. In terms of the structure of the use of means of transport, therefore, no change in trends should be expected and most of the incoming people will continue to cross the Polish–Slovak border by their own means of communication. What is worrying, in the future, in the absence of modernization of the railway infrastructure and no organizational measures, there will be a further decline in the importance of public transport in relation to individual road transport.

Purpose – Examined here are some of the tenets of social capital in the context of the migrants’ crossing the U.S.–Mexico border without official authorization. Using this context helps identify how social capital development is weakened by the structural and gendered dimensions of migration, contributing to the rise in undocumented border crosser deaths since 1993.

Approach – A selection of published works provide an overview of social capital, and in particular, how the framework has been used to further our understanding of the process of migration and immigrant settlement in new destinations. The principles of social capital are then examined in light of women's border crossing experiences and used to argue that migrants from emerging migrant-sending states in southern and central Mexico have had less time to accumulate resource-enhancing migration-related social capital. The narratives of repatriated women collected during research on the border in 2006–2007 are used to illustrate how controlling environments undermine the acquisition of social capital at a critical time.

Findings – The selection of narratives of women who were repatriated after attempting to cross into the United States without authorization illustrate the perilous interplay of hardening border enforcement and multiplying illicit border smuggling organizations. The outcome is the downward leveling of social capital on the border that potentially poses greater life-threatening risks for migrants.

Originality/value – This study provides a theoretical understanding that can be used to explain rising levels of violence along the U.S.–Mexico border that increasingly engulf migrants fleeing poverty in Mexico.

Border security is a crucial part of the country’s broader homeland security efforts. It is a multifaceted and complex issue which attempts to accomplish two seemingly contradictory objectives – the prevention of people and goods from entering the country, while at the same time, facilitating lawful travel and trade. Although it is primarily a federal responsibility, securing the border crosses over multiple homeland security domains, as well jurisdictions. In recent years, numerous strategies and structures have been implemented to foster a whole-of-government approach to border security. This chapter presents border security in the larger context of homeland security. It examines the strategies and coordinating structures developed to create a secured border and an overview of the interaction of law enforcement agencies at the various jurisdictional levels. Although these structures create a robust network of mutually supportive agencies to effectuate border security, a major strategic challenge to securing the nation’s borders still persists.

In this chapter, the author dwells on the effects of documenting and the failure to document, border lives and deaths. Despite their apparent differences, both practices function as forms of erasure. While the Australian government has historically been keen to document the number of asylum seeker arrivals in this country, it has shown no interest in the numbers and names of those who have died in attempting to arrive here. In contrast, those who manage to cross the border, are subject to intense classificatory and numbering regimes. The latter manifests in bureaucratic control and excessive intervention, while the former reveals governmental denial of complicity in these deaths by not acknowledging them. Both practices share a refusal to encounter the other on ethical terms, reflecting the politics of numbers (Andreas & Greenhill, 2010) at and within the border. This also reveals a paradox, between being represented and not being represented. In the lacuna of details about border deaths, human rights organisations, researchers and advocacy groups have sought both to honour these deaths and to ensure that the scale of border violence is marked by statistical records on the numbers of border deaths. While it might seem that being ‘counted’ – or in Butler’s (2003, p. 41) terms – ‘represented’ is better than not being counted/represented at all, representation is never straightforward (Szörényi, 2009b, p. 185): being counted is often barely a form of representation, with such ‘numbering’ practices contributing to the effacement, rather than the recognition of refugees’ humanity.

This essay brings structural intimacies – theorised as the meeting of social structural patterns with interpersonal lives – to the border to consider transnational LGBTQ kinships. Specifically, the paper considers ‘the border’ and its state-driven bio-regulations as a reproductive technology that produces LGBTQ, racial/ethnic and social class inequities through the consolidation of heteronormative, bio-genetic kinship institutions and ideations of family. Structural intimacies harnesses intimacy as both subject and as an analytic lens for queering reproductive sociology that insists on re-conceptualizing institutions central to our lives. Structural intimacies move our analytic gaze from how the border structures sexuality, and vice versa, to consider the border as at once a structural and an affective domain. Structural intimacies is a conceptual tool useful for cross-disciplinary inquiry into the social and structural contexts in which reproductive technologies render meaning, as well as produce families, and to illustrate the analytic necessity of storying both content and method as integral to queer/ing scholarship. Straddling the most proximal forms of daily care and labor patterning everyday intimacies with the policies and practices of the state, the concept of structural intimacies reveals moments of encounter between state institutions with the most intimate components of a person's life and identity, in this case amplified by the bio-politics of the border.

Since 1986, when the immigration Reform and Control Act was passed, migration to the United States has grown steadily. This includes immigrants, nonimmigrants, undocumented immigrants, and border crossers. Immigration averaged nearly one million annually from 1990 to 2002, with family unification accounting for over 70 percent of the new immigrants. The number of nonimmigrants topped 30 million by 2002, most of whom were tourists. Estimates for undocumented aliens topped 400,000 by the turn of the 21st century, in spite of large increases in funding from the Immigration and Naturalization Service and substantial new positions along the Mexican-United States border. The exact number of border crossers is not known, but the federal government has noted that well over 200 million crossings (mostly along the Mexican border) are recorded each year. In response to tighter controls on migrants after 9/11 the numbers coming to the United States dropped in 2003. However, they increased again in 2004. It appears that the figures will increase in the future.

Alliances often turn into acquisitions (i.e., one alliance partner is acquired by the other). In these transitional governance trajectories, geography-related factors can play a crucial role. Factors like location and distance can notably influence the decision to acquire the alliance partner, as well as the performance implications of such a transition. However, existing studies on transitional governance tend to underemphasize the geographic dimension of the phenomenon. In this chapter, we take a first step toward connecting the field of transitional governance and the discipline of economic geography, which does emphasize location and distance as critical determinants of economic activities. We discuss how economic geography can inform the field of transitional governance and propose some promising avenues for future studies linking organization, place, and space in transitional governance trajectories.