This paper presents a critical comparative analysis of deportation policy and its alternatives in Spain and the United Kingdom. These cases provide a strong basis for comparison: in both countries irregular migration is hyper-visible in media and policy discourse, yet they differ in their preferred alternative to deportation: regularisation in the case of Spain and voluntary return in the UK. Based on analysis of deportation policies and alternatives, alongside in-depth interviews and focus groups with 122 participants including policymakers, implementing agents, and migrants at risk, we explore how these alternatives are negotiated, enacted and experienced. We argue that while both countries pursue seemingly different alternatives to deportation, they yield similar outcomes, reproducing conditions of prolonged precarity, deportability, and semi-legality based on the legal, cultural, and economic context in which they operate. By analysing deportation alongside its alternatives, this research highlights the lived reality of irregularised migrants in prolonged legal and social limbo, as well as perspectives of those implementing detention, deportation, and alternative procedures.
Tunaboylu et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: