Debates on migration policy in Europe increasingly revolve around competing theoretical and policy frameworks. On one side, initiatives have emerged that advocate for large-scale regularization of undocumented migrants as a tool for social inclusion. One of the most visible examples of this approach is the Spanish platform “Regularización Ya,” which promotes a broad legalization process for undocumented migrants living in Spain. On the other side, alternative policy models emphasize integration as a fundamental condition for long-term residence. Within this perspective, the paradigm “Integration or ReImmigration” proposes a framework in which the right to remain in a host country is closely linked to measurable processes of social, linguistic, and economic integration. This article offers a comparative analysis of these two paradigms and examines their implications for contemporary European migration governance.
In recent years, the platform “Regularización Ya” has gained significant attention in Spain as a movement advocating for the large-scale regularization of undocumented migrants. The initiative, promoted by migrant organizations and advocacy groups, has supported a popular legislative proposal aimed at granting legal residence status to hundreds of thousands of undocumented migrants currently living in Spain.
According to the platform itself, the objective of the proposal is to address the structural vulnerability experienced by migrants living without legal status and to facilitate their social inclusion and access to basic rights. The campaigns and activities of the movement are documented on the official website of the initiative, particularly in the section dedicated to news and updates on its political and social mobilization efforts (https://regularizacionya.com/noticias/).
Within this framework, regularization is understood primarily as an instrument of social inclusion. The presence of migrants within the territory and their de facto participation in the host society are viewed as sufficient grounds for granting a legal residence permit. In this perspective, regularization policies are presented as pragmatic tools capable of reducing social marginalization, combating informal labor, and integrating already existing economic activity into the formal economy.
However, the regularization pathway proposed in the Spanish debate does not appear to be structurally conditioned upon verified processes of integration, such as stable employment, language proficiency, or other indicators of long-term participation in the social and institutional life of the host country. In this sense, regularization is conceived primarily as an administrative solution to irregular status rather than as a policy instrument tied to measurable integration outcomes.
From a medium- and long-term perspective, this approach raises important questions in the broader context of European migration governance. When a European Union member state grants a residence permit to a third-country national, that permit generally allows the holder to move freely within the Schengen Area for short stays and, under certain legal conditions, to establish residence in other EU member states over time.
As a result, large-scale regularization programs implemented by a single EU country may have effects that extend beyond the national territory where they are adopted. Such policies can potentially influence migration dynamics across the entire European space of free movement. Consequently, regularization initiatives that are not accompanied by structured integration criteria may raise concerns regarding social cohesion and the long-term sustainability of migration governance not only within the state implementing the policy but also within the broader European framework.
In contrast, alternative theoretical approaches emphasize the central role of integration in determining the stability of migrant residence. Within this perspective, the paradigm “Integration or ReImmigration” proposes a model in which the right to remain in the host country is closely linked to the migrant’s ability to integrate into the social, linguistic, and legal environment of the receiving society.
According to this framework, integration is not merely a political objective but a structural principle of migration governance. Factors such as participation in the labor market, knowledge of the host country’s language, and respect for the legal order are considered essential elements for evaluating whether a migrant’s residence should evolve into a stable and long-term status.
The comparison between these two paradigms highlights a fundamental divergence in the way contemporary migration policies conceptualize the relationship between migration management and social integration. While the model promoted by the “Regularización Ya” platform emphasizes administrative regularization as a primary instrument of inclusion, the paradigm of “Integration or ReImmigration” places the emphasis on integration as a prerequisite for stable residence.
This comparative perspective illustrates how migration governance in contemporary societies increasingly involves not only administrative and legal considerations but also broader questions concerning social cohesion, institutional sustainability, and the long-term balance between openness and integration within democratic states.
Fabio Loscerbo, Attorney at Law
Registered Lobbyist – European Union Transparency Register
ID 280782895721-36
ORCID
https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento