Abstract
In the absence of a binding and coherent international migration regime, the global governance of migration relies on normative narratives produced by UN agencies and other intergovernmental forums, in line with the discursive legitimacy traditionally associated with international organizations. Such narratives impact migrants, asylum-seekers, and refugees because they support certain policy frameworks among member states. Yet, global migration governance remains fragmented, especially as far as the long-standing divide between the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is concerned. This article contributes to this discussion by applying corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis to the narratives produced by these two organizations. The article identifies some of the dominant worldviews in the narratives of IOM and UNHCR. Results show that IOM and UNHCR have distinct worldviews, associated with different textual patterns, and that, while IOM’s textual productions seem to influence UNHCR’s discourses, the opposite is less true. This would support the view that IOM is currently the leading actor in terms of framing migration, thereby exerting a strong influence on global migration governance.
See all documents refering Cortext Manager
