In this interview, Anna Gopsill asks Oliver Bakewell and Kiya Gezahegne about their research on Ethiopia. In it, they reflect on the motivation behind including Ethiopia in the project and highlight interesting findings from the EFFEXT project research. The EFFEXT project examined the effects of externalisation of EU borders into Africa and the Middle East, the project included six countries: Senegal, Ghana, Libya, Ethiopia, Jordan, and Lebanon.
Anna: Ethiopia was included in the EFFEXT project as one of the six case countries. What was the main motivation behind including Ethiopia as a comparison country?
Kiya and Oliver: Ethiopia is both an important origin and destination for migration in the Horn of Africa. With a large and young population, chronic political and economic instability, insecurity and conflict along with deteriorating environmental conditions, it is often seen as having all the ingredients for generating huge numbers of international migrants. There are three broad directions for those migrating from Ethiopia: the eastern route towards the Gulf, the southern route towards South Africa and the norther route towards Sudan, Libya and Europe. Many of the people moving along these different routes do so irregularly, without formal documentation and visas.
Anna: When considering these different routes, which is the most commonly used?
Kiya and Oliver: It is labour migration to the Gulf that is the largest of these, and the Ethiopian government has been particularly concerned about the situation of its citizens moving to find jobs in the Middle East, including many women taking on domestic work. Its approach has been to seek bilateral labour agreements with destination countries and to screen those hoping to ensure they have the right qualifications and training. This is accompanied by growing efforts to counter irregular migration, including human smuggling and trafficking, with measures to raise awareness, to train of border officials, prosecution of smugglers and traffickers and to support their victims.
Anna: Who are the main actors involved in migration management in Ethiopia?
Kiya and Oliver: The European Union has played an active role in supporting the Ethiopian government develop these policies. Ethiopia one of the largest recipients of funding from the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa. In particular, EU has funded the Better Migration Programme to support the development of a coherent national migration policy, build the capacity of officials to implement policy, improve protection of those subject to trafficking, and awareness-raising on the dangers of irregular migration. Other initiatives have invested on employment and livelihood opportunities to reduce incentives for those who might consider irregular migration.
Anna: The research across the project has demonstrated that there are some synergies and some divisions between local/national, regional, and international migration management – especially when considering the contexts of different international organisations (such as the EU) and their involvement. Do you have any findings from your research in Ethiopia that speak to this?
Kiya and Oliver: While the Ethiopian government and EU may have different interests in promoting these initiatives to ‘manage migration’, they share a common concern with reducing irregular migration. However, our research in Ethiopia has highlighted some important gaps between these policy priorities and the practices on the ground.
For many stakeholders, including local official, local communities and people on the move, it is not clear what counts as irregular migration. At Metema, on the border with Sudan, there had long been a practice of seasonal labour migration that involves thousands of Ethiopians crossing to work on commercial farms in Eastern Sudan. Some would not even describe this as migration; they reserve that term for dangerous journeys undertaken with the help of smugglers or other intermediaries. Even if it is recognised as migration, because there are such close social, cultural and economic links with Sudan, such border crossing is seen locally as a perfectly legitimate regardless of any formal requirements for papers.
Anna: And what are the on-the-ground implications of this?
Kiya and Oliver: This has important implications, when new initiatives aim to prevent irregular migration and enforce more border controls. While central government and international actors design programmes around sharply defined categories of legal/illegal or regular/irregular migration, their implementations come unstuck in the face of the complex and fluid understanding of these terms on the ground. Moreover, given the fundamental importance of cross border movement for the livelihoods of seasonal labour migrants, any disruption of the flow may have significant negative consequences for large numbers of people.
