The European debate on migration policy increasingly revolves around competing theoretical and policy frameworks. On one side, initiatives have emerged that advocate large-scale regularisation 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 legalisation process for migrants currently living in Spain without a residence permit. On the other side, alternative models emphasise integration as a fundamental condition for the long-term stability of 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 provides a comparative analysis of these two paradigms and examines their implications for contemporary European migration governance.
In recent years the platform “Regularización Ya” has become a prominent actor in the Spanish public debate on migration policy. The initiative, supported by migrant organisations and advocacy groups, has promoted a popular legislative proposal aimed at granting legal residence status to several hundred thousand migrants currently living in Spain without a valid residence permit.
According to the platform itself, the purpose of this proposal is to address the structural vulnerability associated with irregular migration status and to facilitate social inclusion and access to fundamental rights. The activities and campaigns 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 actions (https://regularizacionya.com/noticias/).
Within this framework, administrative regularisation is presented primarily as a policy instrument aimed at reducing social marginalisation and integrating migrants who are already participating in the host country’s economic life. The mere presence within the territory and the de facto participation in economic and social activities are therefore considered sufficient grounds to justify the granting of a residence permit.
However, the regularisation pathway proposed within the Spanish debate does not appear to be systematically linked to 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, regularisation is conceived mainly as an administrative response 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 within the broader framework of European migration governance. When a Member State of the European Union grants a residence permit to a third-country national, that permit generally allows the holder to move within the Schengen Area for short stays, and under certain legal conditions may facilitate residence in other EU Member States over time.
As a result, large-scale regularisation programmes implemented by a single EU country may produce effects that extend beyond the national territory in which they are adopted. Such policies can potentially influence migration dynamics throughout the European space of free movement.
From this perspective, regularisation policies that are not accompanied by structured integration requirements may have implications not only for the internal social balance of the state adopting them but also for the wider European migration governance system. The issue therefore transcends the national context and becomes part of a broader debate on the long-term sustainability of migration policies across Europe.
In contrast to this approach, other policy models emphasise the central role of integration in shaping sustainable migration governance. Within this context emerges the paradigm “Integration or ReImmigration”, which proposes that the stability of residence should be closely linked to a migrant’s ability to integrate into the social, linguistic and legal environment of the host society.
Under this model, integration is not merely a political objective but a structural principle of migration governance. Participation in the labour market, knowledge of the host country’s language, and respect for the legal order are considered essential factors when evaluating the possibility of long-term and stable residence.
The comparison between these two paradigms highlights a fundamental divergence in how contemporary migration policies conceptualise the relationship between migration management and social integration. While the model promoted by the “Regularización Ya” platform emphasises administrative regularisation as a primary tool of inclusion, the paradigm of “Integration or ReImmigration” places greater emphasis on integration as a prerequisite for stable residence.
This comparative perspective illustrates how migration governance in contemporary societies involves not only administrative and legal considerations but also broader questions regarding social cohesion, institutional sustainability and the long-term balance between openness and integration within democratic states.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Attorney at Law – Registered Lobbyist in the European Union Transparency Register
ID 280782895721-36
ORCID
https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento