The Discursive (Re)Constructions of Refugees and Migration: In Danish Development Strategies from 2012 to 2021
Authors
Jalving, Jonas Aagaard ; Mucha, Hannibal ; Zganec, Marko
Term
4. semester
Education
Publication year
2025
Submitted on
2025-05-27
Pages
114
Abstract
This thesis examines how three Danish development strategies — The Right to a Better Life (2012), The World 2030 (2017), and The World We Share (2021) — talk about 'refugees' and 'migration,' and what political effects this language can have. It combines Carol Bacchi’s WPR approach, which asks how a problem is defined, what assumptions sit behind it, and what is left unsaid, with Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis of texts, which looks at wording, framing, and silences. The strategies were purposefully chosen because they span a decade when migration in Europe shifted from episodic crises to an everyday policy priority, while the language of Denmark’s own aid documents has received little attention. The findings show a clear move from marginalisation to securitisation — that is, treating migration as a security matter. In 2012, refugee movements are treated as a side effect of fragility, with solutions placed in general poverty reduction and asylum largely absent. By 2017, migration is named a core 'threat,' and humanitarian rhetoric is woven into a security lexicon that justifies using aid to counter irregular migration. In 2021, 'displacement and irregular migration' are elevated to a flagship challenge alongside climate change, migration control becomes a benchmark for development success, and cooperation is conditioned on partner states’ willingness to contain mobility. Across the decade, refugees are increasingly positioned as passive recipients to be protected in their regions of origin, while Denmark is cast as both benevolent investor and gatekeeper. This language normalises the externalisation of protection beyond Europe and legitimises aid conditionalities that reward or penalise states for readmission and border policing. By foregrounding discourse as a site of power, the thesis shows how development texts do ideological work: they turn humanitarian themes into common-sense arguments for containment, narrowing the imaginable policy space. Beyond Denmark, the study contributes to scholarship on the migration–development nexus by showing how small-state strategy documents help normalise a broader European turn toward 'humanitarian border control.'
Denne afhandling undersøger, hvordan tre danske udviklingsstrategier – The Right to a Better Life (2012), The World 2030 (2017) og The World We Share (2021) – omtaler og fremstiller 'flygtninge' og 'migration', og hvilke politiske effekter dette sprog kan have. Analysen kombinerer Carol Bacchis WPR-tilgang, som spørger hvordan et problem bliver defineret, hvilke antagelser der ligger bag, og hvad der udelades, med Norman Faircloughs kritiske diskursanalyse af tekster, der ser på ordvalg, rammer og tavsheder. Strategierne er valgt, fordi de dækker et årti, hvor migration i Europa bevægede sig fra enkeltstående kriser til en fast dagsorden, mens det sproglige grundlag i Danmarks egne bistandstekster er relativt lidt undersøgt. Resultaterne viser en klar bevægelse fra marginalisering til sikkerhedsgørelse – altså at gøre migration til et sikkerhedsanliggende. I 2012 behandles flygtningestrømme som en følge af skrøbelighed, og løsninger søges i generel fattigdomsbekæmpelse, mens asyl stort set ikke nævnes. I 2017 omtales migration som en central 'trussel', hvor humanitær retorik flettes ind i et sikkerhedssprog, der begrunder brug af bistand til at modvirke irregulær migration. I 2021 løftes 'fordrivelse og irregulær migration' op som en flagskibsudfordring på linje med klima, migrationskontrol gøres til en målestok for udviklingssucces, og samarbejde betinges af partnerlandes villighed til at begrænse mobilitet. På tværs af perioden fremstilles flygtninge i stigende grad som passive modtagere, der bør beskyttes i deres nærområder, mens Danmark præsenteres som både velvillig investor og portvagt. Dette sprog normaliserer, at beskyttelse flyttes uden for Europa, og legitimerer betingelser i bistanden, der belønner eller straffer stater for hjemtagelse og grænsepoliti. Ved at sætte sprog som magtarena i centrum viser afhandlingen, hvordan udviklingstekster udfører ideologisk arbejde: de omdanner humanitære motiver til selvfølgelige argumenter for indhegning og indsnævrer dermed det politisk tænkelige. Udover Danmark bidrager studiet til forskningen i samspillet mellem migration og udvikling ved at vise, hvordan små staters strategidokumenter kan være med til at normalisere en bredere europæisk vending mod 'humanitær grænsekontrol'.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords
Refugees ; Migrations ; Development ; Discourse ; Strategies