par Van Neste-Gottignies, Amandine 
;Di Jorio, Irene
Référence ECREA 2022 9th European Communication Conference (19-22 octobre 2022: Aarhus)
Publication Non publié, 2022-10-22
;Di Jorio, Irene Référence ECREA 2022 9th European Communication Conference (19-22 octobre 2022: Aarhus)
Publication Non publié, 2022-10-22
Communication à un colloque
| Résumé : | Developed in the 1970s in Western European countries, assisted voluntary return (AVR) and reintegration (AVRR) programmes for (rejected) asylum seekers and undocumented migrants have played an increasingly important role in migration management (Lietaert, 2016) and border control (Walker, 2019). AVR(R) have received, over the years, significant funding from the European Union. These programmes are implemented on the ground by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), humanitarian actors (Van Dessel & Pécoud, 2020) and “community-based” agents as return migrants (Maâ, 2020). The extensive scientific literature on voluntary return programmes (Andrijasevic & Walters, 2010; Cleton & Schweitzer, 2021; Gibney, 2008; Van Neste-Gottignies & Mistiaen, 2019; Webber, 2011) focuses on one main question: how “voluntary” are these returns? In fact, although these operations take place without any physical constraint, these “practices follow a coercive logic geared towards compulsory return under the ostensible guise of cooperation” (Cleton & Chauvin, 2020, p. 298). AVR(R) are generally presented as a more “human” and cost-effective way than forced return. When force and coercion prove insufficient (either for economic or “public image” reasons), persuasion becomes necessary in order to obtain “freely consented submission” (Joule, 1986; Joule & Beauvois, 1998) from migrants. Relying on Belgian and European sources (good practice guides, legal and policy documents, fundraising documents, campaign materials, etc.), this paper analyses “information” campaigns surrounding voluntary return in light of the history of persuasive communication. These sources do not mention the terms of “propaganda” or “persuasion” and maintain that “information” (“timely, up-to-date and reliable information”) is the main tool to encourage migrants to return home “voluntarily”. What are the contents and vectors of these “information” campaigns? How to persuade people who have decided to leave their home country (generally for compelling economic or political reasons) to return “voluntarily”? What techniques and methods are used? On what kind of expertise and past practices are they based? By exploring the long-term trends of these methods and expertise, historical perspective sheds light on continuities between “new” communication strategies and long-standing propaganda and “psychological warfare” techniques used in the past. |
