Internal (in)coherence in European migration policies

The paper argues that EU migration policy has shifted from a broad, horizontal approach to policy coherence for development toward a narrow, vertical focus on the efficiency of irregular migration management and return.

• There is a significant discrepancy between how policy-makers and academics understand 'coherence'. In the policy world, it is primarily viewed as the 'coordination' of policies (horizontal coherence) and 'cooperation' between actors (vertical coherence), whereas academic analysis often views it as a normative notion or a product of political compromise.
• EU migration policy has transitioned from a focus on horizontal coherence—linking migration with other sectors like trade and development—to a focus on vertical coherence, emphasizing alignment between the European Commission and EU Member States.
• A comparative analysis of the GAMM (2011) and the New Pact (2020) shows that the term 'coherence' has been largely superseded by technocratic terms such as 'efficiency' and 'effectiveness'. In the New Pact, 'efficiency' and its derivatives appear 112 times, compared to only once in the GAMM.
• The understanding of the migration-development nexus has narrowed over time. While the GAMM employed a broad definition recognizing the bi-directional relationship between migration and development, the New Pact primarily uses the 'narrowest' definition, treating development aid as a tool to curb irregular migration.
• The New Pact on Migration and Asylum almost entirely omits the goal of coherence between migration and development policies. Of the 25 coded instances of 'coherence' in the New Pact, none deal with the migration-development link; instead, the majority relate to asylum and return.
• The EU uses 'leverage'—including development, trade, and visa policies—to ensure third-country cooperation on the readmission of migrants. This effectively makes readmission a condition for receiving development aid or favorable visa measures.
• The framing of migrant rights has shifted from a positive facilitator of mobility in the GAMM to a restrictive context in the New Pact, which emphasizes the lack of an 'automatic right to enter' or the lack of a 'right to stay'.

APA

Godin, M., Jumbert, M. G., Lebon-McGregor, E., Schweers, J., & Tjønn, M. H. (2022). Internal (in)coherence in European migration policies. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/e01913a5-3408-4e62-b4d2-c3e2310103e1/Internal incoherence in European migration policies.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Godin, Marie, Maria Gabrielsen Jumbert, Elaine Lebon-McGregor, Julia Schweers, and Mathias Hatleskog Tjønn. Internal (in)coherence in European migration policies. Peace Research Institute Oslo, 2022. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/e01913a5-3408-4e62-b4d2-c3e2310103e1/Internal incoherence in European migration policies.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Godin |first1=Marie |last2=Jumbert |first2=Maria Gabrielsen |last3=Lebon-McGregor |first3=Elaine |last4=Schweers |first4=Julia |last5=Tjønn |first5=Mathias Hatleskog |title=Internal (in)coherence in European migration policies |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |date=February 2022 |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/e01913a5-3408-4e62-b4d2-c3e2310103e1/Internal incoherence in European migration policies.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{godin2022internal, author = {Godin, Marie and Jumbert, Maria Gabrielsen and Lebon-McGregor, Elaine and Schweers, Julia and Tjønn, Mathias Hatleskog}, title = {{Internal (in)coherence in European migration policies}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, year = {2022}, month = feb, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/e01913a5-3408-4e62-b4d2-c3e2310103e1/Internal incoherence in European migration policies.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }