Inside the Global Compact for Migration.

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) has been a landmark agreement for international migration. The previously fragmented scene on migration management came together in 2018 in one comprehensive policy to coordinate international efforts and regulate migration in all its dimensions. Despite its successful adoption, the agreement did not come without controversies; some countries feared that the Compact could pose a threat to national sovereignty. On the other hand, the preparatory process of the Compact has been unprecedented in terms of inclusion and data gathering. Consequently, the nature of the process behind the policy seems unclear: was the Global Compact shaped by conflicting interests and national priorities or by logical problem-solution deduction? In this regard, the rational and political research tradition of public policy provides useful insights for the understanding and explaining complex policy-making dynamics. As a result, and following their explanatory potential for the case, the theories policy transfer and policy networks have been selected as representative of the above-mentioned perspectives to explain the policy development of the GCM. In order to do so, the following analysis will be of a congruence type, using the selected theories as the independent variables and investigate their effect on the dependent variable – in this case, the development of the GCM. Policy change, policy elements and relevant actors have been assessed and identified through the comparison and attentive reviewing of the relevant documents characterizing the preparatory process. For this reason, interviews with experts involved in the process have also been conducted. The analysis highlighted the complementary nature of the two theories, the former explaining the content of the policy, while the latter providing insights on process dynamics. Therefore, the content of the GCM can be understood in terms of the rational premise of policy formulation, attaching optimal means to ends, whereas the decision-making process – that is, deciding among alternatives – can be explained in terms of the combination between a specific power strucutre and type of interaction among relevant actors. This sheds light onto the overlapping (rather than contrasting) nature of the public policy perspectives and provides a valid starting point for future research. On a more practical note, the research provided insights on the State-led character of policy-making processes that characterize the UN as an intergovenrmental organization.