English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In 2006, the United Nations, for the first time in its history, held a high-level multilateral dialogue on international migration and development. With migration trends and issues increasingly common in international discussions – including on remittances, brain drain, feminization of migration, irregular migration, and violations of migrants’ human rights – sustained pressure had been exerted on the UN to convene a major forum. To some, the Dialogue was a way to address the lack of support by labour-receiving countries for the UN International Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.1 In Dauvergne’s words, for those countries, national migration law has been “transformed into the new last bastion of sovereignty” (Dauvergne 2004: 588). Various governments, of major labour-sending countries in particular, lobbied the UN for years to convene a keynote meeting. There were delays as the organization gave priority to other issues and conferences (MFA 2007), but eventually a 2003 agreement of the General Assembly led to the Dialogue on 14–15 September 2006 at the UN headquarters in New York City. The objective was to address how to increase development benefits of international migration and reduce negative impacts.

hexagon series on human and environmental security and peace

The Global Forum on Migration and Development: ‘All Talk and No Action’ or ‘A Chance to Frame the Issues in a Way that Allows You to Move Forward Together’?