Chapter 6: Regulatory preferencing: a comparative study
The simple hypothesis that increasing regulation of the migrant labour market improves the quality of the market experience for its most vulnerable stakeholders, has been challenged in Chapter 2. To understand why this correlation does not naturally hold, the following argument focuses on preferential private property arrangements as forces which disembed migrant labour markets and undermine their sustainability. In particular, we examine how law, its shadow, or its selective absence promote and perpetuate private property relationships determined to disempower migrant labour force, so that its commodification enables agents, employers and the state to profit at the expense of realistic and fair labour pricing. The empirical core of this chapter is a brief and targeted account of the migrant labour market (MLM), in certain receiving countries, and the regional regimes (the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)) which may exert some regulatory influence over identified nation state regulation. The comparative endeavour engages state-to-state practice, nation state to regional regulatory approaches, and specifies the dynamics of migration/employment frameworks through a staged migrant labour process.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.