The evolution of the Italian reception system for asylum seekers into a "non-place" for "non-subjects"

Journal title MONDI MIGRANTI
Author/s Ivana Acocella
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1
Language English Pages 25 P. 201-225 File size 241 KB
DOI 10.3280/MM2022-001011
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The article provides a critical analysis of the evolution of the Italian migrant reception system following the 2014 "refugee crisis". The aim is to demonstrate how the touted goal of discouraging so-called "bogus asylum seekers" or "fraudulent economic migrants" has been used to institutionalize the Emergency Reception Centres (CAS) as the ordinary place to host asylum seekers, while the ordinary reception system has been greatly weakened. Furthermore, this process to institutionalize the CASs has been accompanied by the progressive distancing of the regulations for these facilities from the decentralized and dispersed model sought in the ordinary reception system. The reflection is based on a comparative analysis of the tendering procedures to allocate the emergency reception services drawn up by the Prefectures of Florence, Siena and Arezzo between 2015 and 2019. This analysis is divided into three phases. The first refers to the years 2015-2017, when the CAS system was mainly regulated by ministerial circulars. The second phase analyses the period following the issuing of the Ministerial Decree of 7 March 2017 which introduced specific and more detailed regulations for these facilities for the first time. The final phase concentrates on the entry into force of Law no. 132/2018, which transformed the SPRAR system into SIPROIMI, and the Ministerial Decree of 20 November 2018 which modified the CAS system again.

Keywords: Italian Reception System; asylum seeker; bureaucratic identity; segregation; control devices; safety-oriented approach.

  1. Accardo J. (2018). Dal 2016 ad oggi: in breve la straordinarietà della Legge Minniti-Orlando, una corsa verso tempi oscuri. In: Avallone G., ed., Il sistema di accoglienza in Italia. Esperienze, resistenze (pp. 125-139). Napoli-Salerno: Orthotes.
  2. Accorinti M., and Spinelli E. (2019). L’attività degli operatori sociali tra aiuto e controllo nel nuovo sistema di accoglienza. Rivista delle Politiche Sociali, 2-3: 103-120.
  3. ActionAid (2019). The security of exclusion. Centers of Italy. Second report 2019.
  4. Agamben G. (2009). What is an Apparatus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  5. Agamben G. (1995). Homo sacer. Il potere sovrano e la nuda vita. Torino: Einaudi.
  6. Agier M. (2011). Managing the Undesirables: Refugee Camps and Humanitarian Government. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  7. Agier M. (2009). Le Camp comme Limite et come Espace Politique. In: Makaremi C. and Kobelinsky C., eds., Enformés dehors. Enquêtes sur le Confinement des Etrangers (pp. 27-40). Paris: Terra.
  8. Agier M., Bouagga Y., Galisson M., Hanappe C., Pette M., and Wanesson P. (2018). La Jungle de Calais. Les Migrants, la Frontière et le Camp. Paris: Puf.
  9. Ambrosini M. (2020). Sociologia delle migrazioni. Bologna: il Mulino (I^ ediz. del 2005).
  10. Ambrosini M., and Van Der Leun J. (2015). Implementing Human Rights: Civil Society and Migration Policies. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 13, 2: 103-115; DOI: 10.1080/15562948.2015.1017632
  11. ANCI Toscana (2017). Report on the Reception System for Asylum Seekers and Beneficiaries of International or Humanitarian Protection in Tuscany.
  12. Biffi D. (2017). Fra controllo e abbandono: etnografia di un centro di accoglienza. In: Marchetti C., and Pinelli B., eds., Confini d’Europa. Modelli di controllo e inclusioni informali (pp. 135-162). Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  13. Bloch A., and Schuster L. (2005). At the Extremes of Exclusion: Deportation, Detention and Dispersal. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28, 3: 491-512; DOI: 10.1080/0141987042000337858.
  14. Campesi G. (2018). Between Containment, Confinement and Dispersal: The Evolution of the Italian Reception System before and After the “Refugee Crisis”. Journal of Modern Italian Studies, 23, 4: 490-506; DOI: 10.1080/1354571X.2018.1501995.
  15. Campomori F. (2018). Criticità e contraddizioni delle politiche di ricezione dei richiedenti asilo in Italia. Politiche Sociali, 3: 429-436; DOI: 10.7389/91920
  16. Coutin S.B. (2014). Deportation Studies: Origins, Themes and Directions. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45, 4: 671-681;
  17. Cuttitta P. (2018). Delocalization, Humanitarianism, and Human Rights: The Mediterranean Border between Exclusion and Inclusion. Antipode, 50, 3: 783-803.
  18. Dines N., Montagna N., and Vacchelli E. (2018). Beyond Crisis Talk: Interrogating Migration and Crises in Europe. Sociology, 52, 3, 439-447; DOI: 10.1177/0038038518767372
  19. Favilli C. (2019). Il Re è morto, lunga vita al Re! Brevi note sull’abrogazione del permesso di soggiorno per motivi umanitari. Rivista di Diritto Internazionale, 1: 164-172.
  20. Fassin D. (2013). The Precarious Truth of Asylum. Public Culture, 25, 1, 39-63; DOI: 10.1215/08992363-1890459
  21. Fassin D. (2010). La raison humanitaire: Une histoire morale du temps présent. Paris: Éd. de l’EHESS.
  22. Fassin D. (2005). Compassion and Repression: the Moral Economy of Immigration Policies in France. Cultural Anthropology, 20, 3: 362-387.
  23. Gargiulo E. (2020). Apparenze Precarie. La residenza tra inclusione ed esclusione. Milano: Utet.
  24. Glick Schiller N., and Salazar N.B. (2013). Regimes of Mobility aacross the Globe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39, 2: 183-200;
  25. Harrell-Bond B.E. (2002). Can Humanitarian Work with Refugees be Humane?. Human Rights Quarterly, 24, 1: 51-85;
  26. Hynes P. (2011). The Dispersal and Social Exclusion of Asylum Seekers: Between Liminality and Belonging. London: Policy Press.
  27. In Migrazione SCS (2018b). Analysis of the new ministerial guidelines for the management of reception centers. Second report 2018-2019.
  28. Jacobson D., and Goodwin-White J. (2018). The Future of Postnational Citizenship: Human Rights and Borders in a Re-Nationalizing World. Mondi Migranti, 2: 7-26; DOI: 10.3280/MM2018-002001
  29. Lintner C., Elsen S.U., and Folie U. (2019). “Trying to make it a home”. An analysis of the opportunities asylum seekers have in order to develop long-lasting emplacement processes in South Tyrol, Italy. Mondi Migranti, 2: 129-147; DOI: 10.3280/MM2019-002007
  30. Malkki L.H. (1995). Refugees and Exile: from ‘Refugee Studies’ to the National Order of Things. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24: 495-523;
  31. Manocchi M. (2014). Richiedenti asilo e rifugiati: processi di etichetta mento e pratiche di resistenza. Rassegna italiana di sociologia, LV, 2: 385-409; DOI: 10.1423/77309
  32. Marchetti C. (2016). Le sfide dell’accoglienza. Passato e presente dei sistemi istituzionali di accoglienza per richiedenti asilo e rifugiati in Italia. Meridiana, 17, 86: 121-143; DOI: 10.1400/247423
  33. Marchetti C. (2006). Un mondo di rifugiati. Migrazioni forzate e campi profughi. Bologna: EMI.
  34. Mellino M.A. (2018). Governare la crisi dei rifugiati. L’emergere in Europa di una nuova “economia politica morale” di gestione delle migrazioni. Mondi Migranti, 2: 39-60; DOI: 10.3280/MM2018-002003
  35. Menghi M. (2018). Intorno alla frontiera: politiche di contenimento e pratiche di mobilità sul confine di Ventimiglia. Mondi Migranti, 2: 193-220; DOI: 10.3280/MM2018-002010
  36. Ministry of the Interior (2019). Dossier Viminale Ferragosto 2019.
  37. Ministry of the Interior (2017). Report on the Functioning of the Reception System – Year 2017.
  38. Pastore F. (2015). The Forced, the Voluntary and the Free. Migrants’ Categorisation and the Tormented Evolution of the European Migration and Asylum Regime. Studi di Emigrazione, 52, 200: 569-586.
  39. Pinelli B. (2017). Borders, Politics and Subjects. Introductory Notes on Refugee Research in Europe. Etnografia e Ricerca Qualitativa, 1: 6-24; DOI: 10.3240/86885
  40. Pinelli B. (2014). Campi di accoglienza per richiedenti asilo. In: Riccio B., ed., Antropologia e Migrazioni (pp. 69-79). Roma: Cisu.
  41. Radice L. (2008). Il cammino dell’integrazione. In: Ambrosini M., and Marchetti C., eds., Cittadini possibili. Un nuovo approccio all’accoglienza e all’integrazione dei rifugiati (pp. 53-88). FrancoAngeli: Milano.
  42. Ramsay G. (2017). Impossible Refuge: The Control and Constraint of Refugee Futures. New York: Routledge.
  43. Sorgoni B. (2017). Narrazioni, rituali burocratici, violenza istituzionale. In: Pinelli B., and Ciabarri L., eds., Dopo l’approdo. Un racconto per immagini e parole sui richiedenti asilo in Italia (pp. 157-183). Firenze: Editpress.
  44. SPRAR (2017). Operating Manual for the Activation and Management of Integrated Reception Services for Asylum Seekers and Refugees. Rome: Central Service and Ministry of the Interior.
  45. Sciurba A. (2017). Categorizing migrants by undermining the right to asylum. The implementation of the “hotspot approach” in Sicily. Etnografia e ricerca etnografica, 1: 97-119; DOI: 10.3240/86889
  46. Tarsia T. (2020). La conoscenza tacita degli operatori Sprar: quando i problemi generano saperi. Mondi Migranti, 2: 183-202; DOI: 10.3280/MM2020-002010
  47. Tazzioli M. (2018). Containment through Mobility: Migrants’ Spatial Disobediences and the Reshaping of Control through the Hotspot System. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44, 16: 2764-2779; DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2017.1401514
  48. Tazzioli M., and Garelli G. (2018). Containment beyond Detention: The Hotspot System and Disrupted Migration Movements across Europe. Society and Space: 1-19; DOI: 10.1177/0263775818759335
  49. Turner S. (2015). What Is a Refugee Camp? Explorations of the Limits and Effects of the Camp. Journal of Refugee Studies, 29,
  50. Tuscany Regional Observatory on Migration (2019a). Notes 1. The Numbers on the Foreign Presence in Tuscany.
  51. Tuscany Regional Observatory on Migration (2019a). Notes 4. The Reception System in Tuscany.
  52. Whyte Z. (2011). Enter in the Myopticon. Uncertain Surveillance in the Danish Asylum System. Anthropology Today, 27, 3: 18-21;
  53. Wihtol de Wenden C. (2017). Actual Patterns of Migration Flows: The Challenge of Migration and Asylum in Contemporary Europe. In: Grimmel A., and Giang S.M., eds., Solidarity in the European Union. A Fundamental Value in Crisis (pp: 67-80), Switzerland: Springer.
  54. Zetter R. (2007). More Labels, Fewer Refugees: Remaking the Refugee Label in an Era of Globalization. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20, 2: 172-192;
  55. Zetter R. (1991). Labelling Refugees: Forming and Transforming a Bureaucratic Identity. Journal of Refugee Studies, 4, 1: 39-62;

Ivana Acocella, The evolution of the Italian reception system for asylum seekers into a "non-place" for "non-subjects" in "MONDI MIGRANTI" 1/2022, pp 201-225, DOI: 10.3280/MM2022-001011