Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s). Publication in Open Research Europe does not imply endorsement of the European Commission.
Introduction
This Open Letter concentrates on qualitative archival research as this is the main focus of the EU-funded H2020 ITHACA – Interconnected Histories and Archives for Migrant Agency - project. From January to June 2023, its team organised a series of Policy Council Events (PCEs) with the aim to enable a broad group of stakeholders to meet and exchange thoughts, views and proposals at local, national and international levels on the topic of the relationship between qualitative-archival research and policies.
Around 150 among policymakers, researchers in migration studies, sociologists, anthropologists, historians, migrant association representatives, communicators, intergovernmental organisation representatives and lawyers participated, gathering in 12 meetings in 7 of the ITHACA countries: Italy (Rome, Milan, Modena), Greece (Athens), the Netherlands (Leiden), Morocco (Rabat, Ifrane), Tunisia (Tunis, Tataouine), Azerbaijan (Baku, Ahan Village) and Jordan (Amman).
After building a stakeholder map and a recruitment phase, the project partners recruited the participants and facilitated the meetings. A common guideline was shared to make the results comparable. The guidelines were based on three main topics, corresponding to three main key findings: the first is related to the main advantages taken by QAR in supporting migration policies, the second is related to the obstacles in this type of research-policies relations, and the third is related to the factors that can facilitate more effective collaboration between the two. The open letter closes with a series of recommendations dedicated to the same stakeholder groups that contributed to the discussion on these issues.
Key-Finding 1: Qualitative-archival Research Relations with Migration Policies
Qualitative-archival research (QAR) is based on discourse. It collects data in the form of individual or collective interviews, written or visual texts (whether written, audio, video, images or multimedia), thereby “interpreting” social contexts (Bauer & Gaskell, 2000; Erdal et al., 2022).
QAR helps to build policies that are not based on abstract assumptions but are instead based on individual and collective experiences (LERU, 2009; Rodari et al., 2012), as qualitative research methods - such as interviews, focus groups, and self-narratives - offer a nuanced understanding of migration practices, motivations, and challenges (Fouskas, 2016; Scholten, 2018).
Analysing in-depth stories, experiences and testimonies from the different actors involved in the migration discourse, migrants, policymakers, and practitioners working in the field, as well as from those who design and evaluate migration policies, QAR facilitates an exploration of the values and reasons behind migration in the various different cultures and can assist in explaining the different elements of migration of varying significance to the overall concept (Reed & Rudman, 2023; Theodoros, 2016).
As well, while assisting the understanding of the experience of migration - the journey, the arrival, the practical implications, the risks faced by migrants – QAR deepens how this perspective affects decisions, also identifying how countries, politicians and administrations respond when adopting specific reception procedures.
Uses of QAR are in the assessment of migration policies, for their improvement and for guaranteeing consistency with other relevant public policies.
Being able to access qualitative research data makes it possible to implement interventions that are more fitting for the territory in which we live, going beyond the prejudices that, even with the best intentions, most of us hold. For example, if I find that I am managing the reception of a migrant, I ask myself about his or her characteristics, his or her specific features, the consequences for him or her of not having a home. (Practitioner, NGO, Modena, Italy)
Faraway from being just a tool for preservation, the findings of QAR are a social innovation tool, providing an opportunity to:
Discuss stereotypes, by exploring the multifaceted experiences of migrants;
Pose new questions to policy-decision makers and practitioners, by allowing them to ground on an in-depth knowledge;
Monitor and evaluate existing policies, by using methods that allow an extensive understanding of contexts;
Improve and create new policies, by exploring stories, perceptions, needs and attitudes of migrants coming from different cultures, commonalities and differences;
Base decisions on the complexity of the phenomenon and not on emergency situations , by using methods that allow an in-depth understanding of contexts and individual/group narratives;
Save money, by avoiding starting from scratch (situations and solutions have often already been studied and policy decisions can take advantage of existing experiences);
Network with the stakeholders involved, by sharing stories and suggestions with other practitioners, researchers and policymakers, and by facilitating access to migrant communities.
A further crucial point discussed by ITHACA stakeholders was ethics. Terms such as “transparency”, “respect”, “independence”, “ethics” and “honesty” frequently appear in their arguments when discussing how to use QAR.
The main ethical risk in the relationship between research (all research fields and methods) and policies is instrumentality. Knowledge can be used to substantiate specific political claims or ideas, or to foster populism.
The main opportunity provided by responsible QAR is that it can identify questions and views that help to dismantle stereotypes, with beneficial repercussions not only in terms of ethical issues behind the research and its use, but also in relation to the development of better practical solutions and services.
Key-Finding 2: Obstacles in research-policy relations
Across the countries involved in ITHACA, the structural obstacles identified by stakeholders which prevent policymakers from using research results include:
A further reason for the ineffective relationship between research and policies is politics.
Policy planning and decisions vary according to the political agenda of each government, and the research results - especially if they are not aligned with current government programmes - are often not taken into consideration.
From the research side, some practitioners and policymakers call for more policy-oriented research. Their findings need to be challenged, debated and tested before they can provide a reliable basis for any recommendations.
The structural and political gaps here identified are behind the insufficient utilisation of existing and potential QAR.
Key-Finding 3: Enhancing qualitative research-policy relations
What factors can facilitate more effective collaboration between research and migration policies?
Three factors emerge.
The first is the “Coverage”: migration is a vast and multidimensional issue which varies according to the political, economic, cultural, and societal conditions of the host and origin countries, the individual motivations to migrate and the meaning given by governments to the freedom of movement involved in migration flows. The use of QAR in migration policies crucially depends on the geographical dimension in which it operates. The dialogue held by policymakers and practitioners/migrants with researchers in small towns might be more direct and frequent than the dialogue that takes place internationally. However, to design effective policies, QAR offers contextual and comparative tools for thoroughly investigating the local features and extending them to national and international levels, covering the global-local nexus. From the methodological perspective, one example is given by the manner in which ITHACA’s PCEs were conceived and implemented: they started at local level and expanded their findings to national and international levels. In this way, commonalities and differences emerged and gave rise to practical recommendations.
The second factor is the “Timeline”: in order to enhance the research-policy relationship, there is a need for synchronicity, establishing a common programme from the outset. This would help both researchers and policymakers to gain a clearer understanding of the field and to make more informed decisions.
As migration is a long-term phenomenon, research should be addressed as an integral part of the political life of a city, region and state.
An economist and ex-minister for education in Italy explained:
If politics is short-term, emotional, incapable of planning, it is also incapable of posing long-term questions to research. Politics is no longer based on values and interests, but on emotional states. Research must study, analyse, communicate migrations, demonstrating that policies should not be decided on the basis of dramatic events or extemporaneous reactions, but that we must look at them from a long-term perspective.
The third factor is “Togetherness”: when research is to be used as a tool for collaboration, there is a need for research and politics to come together more often and more regularly, to ascertain the common aspects, the development steps and the ultimate goal. A policy maker, who took part of the international meeting that closed the round of the ITHACA policy councils in Ifrane (Morocco), affirmed:
In this context, the degree of liberty of expression and democratic participation of citizens and civil society organisations differs substantially between European and other MENA countries involved in the policy councils, resulting in the limited possibility of constructing a real dialogue between researchers, migrants, practitioners and policymakers.
The need for platforms to facilitate regular consultations, joint working groups, and knowledge-exchange was mentioned at several meetings.
By establishing open communication channels, stakeholders can benefit from each other's expertise, insights, and perspectives, leading to more informed decision-making, policy formulation and evaluation.
Finally, in QAR, policymakers and academics should always involve migrants and migrant communities in a collaborative effort, ensuring their voices are heard and integrated into policy discussions, services planning and decisions.
Recommendations for Policymakers, Practitioners, Researchers
Consider qualitative and archival research for a more substantive and nuanced understanding of the complexities of policy implementation and an opportunity to formulate the “correct” questions in your daily work.
Identify the power relations in the context in which you study/operate.
Before participating in research or using research resources, reflect on your role (policymakers might see research in instrumental terms, while researchers might investigate the intrinsic value of policy).
Clarify the underlying problem, where it comes from and how it is seen locally, nationally, and internationally, according to your objectives.
Understand the (local, national, international) policy-making process in order to provide relevant and timely advice.
Keep in mind your stakeholder map (including universities, research centres, foundations, CSOs, NGOs, journalists and communicators), in order to exploit the targeted results.
Use the research results to deconstruct mainstream narratives.
Think in an interdisciplinary manner: historians, sociologists, anthropologists, archivists, ICT researchers should work together with migrants, practitioners, policymakers and other interested parties.
Declare the analytical perspective you apply when reading through the narrations collected.
Be specific: the more prevalent a specific topic is, the greater the likelihood of piquing the interest of the government or other organisations.
Maintain a critical approach, independently from the source.
Ethics and consent statement
Ethics and consent statement were not required.
Data availability
No data are associated with this article.
Acknowledgments
This document is a result of the collaboration of more than 150 stakeholders, who gathered in seven of the countries participating in ITHACA. Together with the project partners who made possible the policy councils, they are acknowledged as being the authors by this open letter editors.
Faculty Opinions recommendedReferences
- Bauer M, Gaskell G (eds.):
Qualitative researching with text, image and sound. A practical handbook. Sage, London, 2000. Reference Source
- Erdal MB, Fitzmaurice M, Ivanova M, et al.:
Documentation of qualitative data collection, MIGNEX Handbook Chapter 11 (v1). Oslo: Peace Research Institute Oslo, 2022. Reference Source
- Fouskas T:
Representing the unrepresented? Operation and representativeness of migrant integration councils in Greece.
Social Cohesion and Development.
2016; 8(2): 127–150. Publisher Full Text
- LERU: How research can inform policy. 2009. Reference Source
- Reed MS, Rudman H:
Re-thinking research impact: voice, context and power at the interface of science, policy and practice.
Sustain Sci.
2023; 18: 967–981. Publisher Full Text
- Rodari P, Bultitude K, Desborough K:
Science communication between researchers and policymakers. Reflections from a European project.
JCOM.
2012; 11(03): C07. Publisher Full Text
- Scholten P:
Research-policy relations and migration studies. In Zapata-Barrero R. and Yalaz E. (eds), Qualitative Research in European Migration Studies. Springer, 2018. Publisher Full Text
- Theodoros I:
Qualitative methods in migration studies: a critical realist perspective. Routledge, New York, 2016. Reference Source
