i
Radboud University
The longest
“undefended”
border in the world
Master Thesis
Maxim Ruhr
S4512413
School of Management
Radboud University Nijmegen
Human Geography: Europe,
Borders, Identities and
Governance
April 2017
By Maxim Ruhr
“Être votre voisin, c'est comme dormir avec un éléphant;
quelque douce et placide que soit la bête,
on subit chacun de ses mouvements et de ses grognements”.
“Living next to you is in some ways like sleeping with an elephant.
No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast,
if I can call it that, one is affected by every twitch and grunt.”
Former Prime Minister of Canada - Pierre Trudeau, Addressing the Press Club in Washington D.C., 25 March 1969
The longest
“undefended”
border in the
world
Master Thesis Human Geography: Europe, Borders, Identities
and Governance
School of Management
Radboud University Nijmegen
Student Number: S4512413
Supervisors: Professor Henk van Houtum, Professor Victor
Konrad & PhD Melissa Kelly
Preface
Last year I wrote my bachelor thesis on the possibility to abolish the worldwide visa system and therefore I researched the ‘American Visa’ system specifically. I have always had an interest in North America, and with my bachelor’s thesis research this interest has only grown. Last year, I researched how the US has changed since 9/11 and the impact of the US’s hegemonic power in the world. I discovered that living in a visa free world right now would be hard to accomplish especially in the US - but the EU has also managed to tear down her borders and created the free movement of people. Why is this movement possible in the EU, but not in other parts of the world?
In my last bachelor thesis I wrote about the US immigration policy and how there is much focus on the southern US border with Mexico. Much research has been done on this border but beside the term longest undefended border in the world, you don’t hear much about the northern US border with Canada. Not much research has been done on the US-Canada border and I haven’t read much about it until Professor Victor Konrad came to visit the Radboud University in Nijmegen.
As a European, you might see the US and Canada just as Germany and the Netherlands, where people can cross the border, back and forth easily without any hassle or problems, but as soon as I read and heard more about this longest undefended border in the world, I started to understand the problems it is facing. It is also a bizarre border that has been drawn without any thought; it goes right through first nation territories and lakes, which sometimes leaves an American enclave like Point Roberts within Canada, completely cut off from the mainland.
I want to thank Professor Henk van Houtum, Professor Victor Konrad and PhD Melissa Kelly for guiding me through this process. They helped to turn my passion from my bachelor thesis and North America, into a research proposal and master thesis.
One special thanks to Professor Victor Konrad and PhD Melissa Kelly and the Carleton University in Ottawa for inviting me to do research on the US-Canada border at their university in Ottawa, Canada.
Maxim Ruhr
Abstract
In the winter semester of 2015, Professor Victor Konrad, a Professor from the Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, visited the Radboud University and gave a guest lecture on the effects of 9/11 on the border between the US and Canada. This guest lecture certainly got my attention – inspiring me, last year, I wrote my bachelor thesis on the possibility to abolish the worldwide visa system. I focused my research on the American visa policy and noticed that many things have changed since 9/11 in the US and due to the US’s hegemonic power in the world. This change has also been felt by the Canadians; before 9/11 the US-Canada border has always been referred to as the longest undefended border in the world, but since 9/11 this reality has changed. The US-Canada border is becoming more and more the longest “defended” border in the world. Much research has been done on the effects of the US-Mexico border, but much less research has been done on the US-Canada border. Before 9/11 people could cross the border by only showing a student ID, or any form of ID that contained your name, enabling you to cross the border easily and relatively hassle-free. However, since the events of 9/11, the border crossing process became harsher, the US locking all of her external borders including the border with Canada. Now, showing a student ID is not enough to cross the border; people now need an enhanced passport or driver’s license in order to cross. In fact, since the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative all travellers travelling to the US need an enhanced passport to enter the US (Moens & Gabler,
2012).This means Americans also need a passport to leave their country if they wish to re-enter the US which complicates matters, as only 40 per cent of the Americans have a passport - leaving 60 per cent of the Americans without a passport, locked in and unable to leave the US. In Canada 60 per cent of Canadians have a passport, leaving 40 per cent ‘country locked; unable to enter the US or leave Canada without a passport. This trend has a significant impact on the Canadian tourism sector. Before 9/11 and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative many Americans visited Canada during the holidays, but now only 40 per cent of the American tourists are able to enter Canada. In addition, the increased hassle at the border means that more and more people look for alternative trips within their own country (Moens & Gabler, 2012).
I want to participate in the debate on the US Canada border and see if it is possible to create a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada. My main research questions are: “Is a
Schengen agreement possible between the US and Canada and how could a Schengen agreement be a solution for the hardening of the US Canada border?”
In the EU we have a Schengen agreement among fairly equal developed countries, so I am curious as to why such an agreement doesn’t exist between the US and Canada. I believe it would be a good solution for the current border situation and the problems it is facing, especially after 9/11. Before 9/11 there were few border controls, in fact some say it used to be like a Schengen agreement although within Schengen there are zero border controls while before 9/11 there were always border controls but they were very relaxed and less threatening.
Peter Andreas (2003) wrote on the future border trajectories of the US-Canada border, one of these border trajectories was to Schengenize North America, just like the EU, wherein people can move freely within North America without any border control. His paper together with the guest lecture by Victor Konrad where the spark that ignited my research on the US-Canada border and whether or not a Schengen agreement is possible between both.
In order to answer my main research question, one must first understand the current border situation between the US and Canada, how this border situation has changed in the last 15 years, and then begin to analyse and understand whether a Schengen agreement could be possible between the US and Canada. To understand the changing border situation I read several papers and books on the US Canada border and interviewed 25 Canadians who all live in the borderlands of the US-Canada border including experts and policymakers on the US-Canada border.
There is a big contrast at the US-Canada border between the twentieth century and the twentieth-first century. Border crossing has changed from spontaneity into corridors and gateways at the border (Konrad, 2015).
In the twentieth century the border has often been seen as the longest undefended border in the world. The relationship between the US and Canada was very good and there was plenty of back and forth movement across the border from both sides. The border was a symbol of integration and coordination between the US and Canada (Konrad, 2015). The people living in the US/CA borderlands knew each other well, this made border crossing quick, and they crossed the border routinely and would reach far behind the permeable border (Widdis, 1997, 1999, 2011).
After the first half of the twentieth century, Canadians and Americans became more mobile and they bought properties across the border for seasonal recreation; hundreds of thousands of Americans crossed the border every year to spend summer and weekend holidays in Canada. They were welcomed into Canada by customs and immigration officers, as they came with the benefit of tourist/visitor income for Canada. In addition, an even larger group of Canadians travelled to the US and especially the southern US states, soon to be called “snow bird” migrants, the millions of Canadians travelled to the US to escape the cold Canadian winter (Tremblay, 2006), (Simpson, 2000).
According to Victor Konrad (2015), the border was if anything a formality - the question was not if you could cross - but when you would cross. People would take the closest border crossing, it was convenient and the border officers were familiar with them. Border crossing was very spontaneous from decision to action and with an almost absolute guarantee of success.
The 25 interviewees also describe the big contrast between the twentieth century and the twentieth-first century. As described before, people could just cross the border by only showing an ID, including a student ID. They would simply cross the border to drink
something or visit friends; it was very spontaneous and little to no planning on where to cross the border or at what time.
In the twentieth-first century the events of 9/11 changed everything, the border got harder and more secure (Ackleson, 2009). As described before, people now need an enhanced passport to enter the US, which has drastic implications for both Americans and especially Canadians. There is a perception among both Canadians and Americans, living near and at a great distance from the border, that the border is more difficult to cross then in the past. This perception is supported and reinforced by the media and recently the US calls for fencing the border (Konrad & Nicol, 2008).
People no longer take the closest border crossing; the place of destination now lies on the other side of a more imposing border (Konrad, 2010), (Konrad & Nicol, 2008). Trips need to be planned in greater detail to pick the right time to cross the border, where to cross, and how to avoid delays at peak hours. The trips across the border have become more
multipurpose, combining shopping, business, family across the border or a sporting event. The trips have become longer and require sometimes overnight stays and require more
coordination (Konrad, 2010), (Konrad, 2015).
“Uncertainty is the rule”, they said people cannot live with uncertainty, there are no quick trips anymore and spontaneous travel is not an option. Uncertainty is a major consideration for all border crossers, and this uncertainty is the main component of the heightened mental threshold. People don’t want to be bothered by uncertainty and a long wait at the border (Konrad, 2015).
The security response after 9/11 was the equivalent of the world’s most powerful country imposing a trade embargo on itself. These increased border security measures both at the US-Mexico border and the US-Canada border had big economic effects (Andreas, 2003). The twentieth century is an era of mobility: the relaxed, permeable or spontaneous border and the twentieth-first century is an era of immobility: the enhanced, thickened and
militarized border (Konrad, 2015).
To tackle the effects of 9/11 and the new border requirements, the US and Canada have launched several border reforms in the last decade. They were not all very successful but right now the ‘Beyond the Border’ plan is ongoing. With this plan both governments push for harmonization of national regulatory policies and focus on supporting continental perimeter security and improving the efficiency of border management (Moens & Gabler, 2012).
According to Moens & Gabler (2012), the ‘Beyond the Border’ plan puts Canada and the US on a crossroad, either they will continue with incremental and uncoordinated programs as they have often done since 9/11 and that will probably create some improvements but not lower the overall costs of the border or they will begin to create a new border regime. In order to create a new border regime we need to hold governments accountable in terms of costs and savings, the concepts are in place, the actual performance is the next step.
Despite several border reforms the border is still an issue and has big economic and social impacts on both sides of the border.
In order to answer the question whether or not a Schengen agreement would be possible between the US and Canada, I reviewed papers like Peter Andreas’s (2003) and I
interviewed 25 Canadians who live in the borderlands of the US-Canada border including experts and policymakers on the US-Canada border.
Peter Andreas (2003) thinks that a ‘Schengenized’ North America is not possible because it requires a process of formal institutionalization and policy harmonization, which he thinks is difficult to imagine in the present context. Only sustained shocks, such as multiple large scale terrorist incidents, would create the political will necessary to push in this direction. Mexico is the biggest proponent for this approach to North America and Canada being the most resistant. He rather thinks that something in between a fortress America and fortress North America will be created; it won’t be America alone but also not a full institutionalized project.
I asked the 25 interviewees 12 questions including: “Q11. Do you think a Schengen
agreement between the US and Canada would be possible?” This question was my main
focus since it directly answers my main research question. I analysed the data that I obtained from the interviews through the thematic analysis.
According to all interviewees a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada would be possible on paper/in-theory. The business industry would welcome it since it will make cross border business so much cheaper, easier and faster. But, in reality, it wouldn’t work
according to the interviewees (experts, policymakers and students) that I interviewed in Canada; and they have several reasons why it wouldn’t work.
will, mostly in the US. Their opinion was that both future presidents were unlikely to support such an agreement, for example, Clinton needs to defend jobs while Trump openly talks about dividing and building walls, in fact he quoted as saying “Canadians are Mexicans in sweaters.”
There is an asymmetry between Canada and the US, the relationship is good but Canada is the light weight with less budget and the US is a hegemony not willing to give up some power. According to the policymakers, both countries need to agree to a super national parliament in order to let Schengen work and both countries and especially the US wouldn’t agree with such an agreement. In return, Canada doesn’t want to give up their sovereignty and wants to control their own immigration policy.
Even though Canada and the US have a similar level of development and standards of living, there are still big differences in social economic choices. Canada does not want to have guns entering their country and wants to protect their healthcare system and they fear they will be swamped by the US and become Americans. For the majority of Canadians, the commercial benefits don’t outweigh the cultural and political costs.
According to all interviewees, Schengen is a European construct that works due to special conditions within in the EU. Europe has a history of wars, and by working together they want to prevent that, the EU wants to share a lot internally while North America doesn’t want to. Europe is not as big as North America, it makes more sense to tear down multiple borders in a smaller region, as the social/economic situations are much closer within the EU than in North America and the power is more equally distributed within the EU than in North America with the US as hegemony. Schengen is not finished yet; first they would like to see what will happen with Schengen in the EU before the debate in North America should start.
But – “people are afraid of open borders we don’t know what the consequences are for open borders” a student said. “People are afraid that criminals would cross or that someone would steal their job” another student said. With the current rise in terrorist attacks, people feel safer knowing that there are extra measures to prevent terrorism a student said. But another student said that terrorism happens so rarely.
For interviewees, in the end, political will and emotions are more important than economic benefits that come with free movement. The securitization trend is ongoing and if something happens in the world (terrorism) it might become stricter. Policymakers and experts want a system that is less intrusive but more expedient and efficient and able to deal with security challenges; according to them, preclearance and trusted travellers and traders programs will be the future of the US Canada border.
When asked if they would cross more if there was free movement between the US and Canada interviewees responses were positive. The main change they all said would be the disappearance of the unpredictability and the return of spontaneous trips, people would plan more spontaneous trips in the US if there was free movement.
At this very moment it seems impossible to live in a world with open borders. More and more countries are closing their borders and building fences at their border, restrictions have only become tougher. Now that Donald Trump is the new US president, an open US-Canada border is far from near. President Trump is not a proponent for open opens borders; he already started the built of a border wall on the US-Mexico border. His relation with the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will determine whether or not a Schengen agreement is possible.
Contents
1. Introduction...2
1.1 Project case...2
1.2 Scientific relevance & societal relevance...3
1.3 Research objective...6 1.4 Research question...6 1.5 Methods...7 1.5.1 Research strategy...7 1.5.2 Data collection...9 1.5.3 Interview guide...11 1.5.4 Data Analysis...12 1.6 Hypothesis...14 1.7 Guide...15 2. Theoretical framework...16
2.1 The open border debate...16
2.2 The Schengen agreement...20
2.3 The US-Canada border...27
2.3.1 The Twentieth-century border between the US and Canada...29
2.3.2 The Twentieth-first century border between the US and Canada...30
2.4 US border controls after 9/11...33
2.5 Border reforms since 9/11...34
2.6 Possible future trajectories...38
3. Analysis/Results...41
3.1 Further supplementing my theoretical analysis...41
3.2 Describing results for each interview question...44
3.3 Sub conclusion research...67
4. Conclusion...71
4.1 A Schengen agreement between the US and Canada?...71
4.2 Reflection...77
Appendix...87
Appendix 1: Common codes in the expert interviews...87
Appendix 2: Interview report experts...102
Appendix 3: Common codes in the policymaker interviews...114
Appendix 4: Interview report policymakers...126
Appendix 5: Common codes in the student interviews...136
1. Introduction
1.1 Project case
This master’s thesis will focus its research on the border between the United States of America (US) and Canada. The US-Canada border is an underexposed topic but it has huge consequences for people living there. A lot of researchers are doing research on the US-Mexico border, but there is already a lot of research about that topic, this master thesis tries to do something different.
In the winter semester of 2015, Professor Victor Konrad, Carleton University in Ottawa, visited the Radboud university and gave a guest lecture on the effects of 9/11 on the border between the US and Canada. After this lecture, I made an appointment with Professor Victor Konrad in order to further define this master thesis topic. He said that the border between Canada and the US has always been a calm border that did not have huge impacts on the daily lives of people. People could cross the border by just showing a student ID or any form of ID (including ID not recognized federally, for example a student library card). In his
opinion, you could cross the border easily and fast, but ever since the events of 9/11 the border got harsher, and the US locked all of her external borders including the border
between the US and Canada. What was seen as the longest undefended border in the world is now becoming more or less the longest defended border. Just a library ID is not enough anymore, people now need to show a decent ID or passport that shows who they are, and this information gets checked and put in a database, which causes long line-ups on both sides of the border. This all has many effects on the flows of people and goods, which has social and economic impacts. Victor Konrad advised me to first pick a region and then a topic on which I want to focus in my research.
This master’s thesis research will focus its research on the border region between Ontario, Canada and New York, US. The most Canadian border crossings are among the Ontario region Most of the people in Canada live along the border since this is relative the warmest area and the densest area is the Ontario region, this probably means that these people get affected by the border the most. The longest queue is standing at the Detroit crossing in Michigan, US (BIG, 2015).
This master’s thesis will mainly research the flows of people, but will also examine the economic effects and the governance aspect of this border region. Why is there no such thing as a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada, like we have in the EU? The US and Canada both would likely benefit enormously from such an agreement. The
perceived risk of Canadians moving to the US when border control disappears is unlikely, they will probably only cross more often. This master’s thesis will try to answer these questions.
The US is getting more suspicious towards her external borders and we can also see this happening at the external borders of the EU, which makes this topic even more interesting, it is becoming a “trend” among more regions. Although the US shouldn’t fear Canada, she is still locking down that border. This master’s thesis will research what the effects are for people living in these borderlands but it will also research if it is possible to create a
Schengen agreement between the US and Canada, and will this agreement be the solution for the current border situation. What are other possible solutions for this current border situation wherein border restrictions are part of the everyday life?
1.2 Scientific relevance & societal relevance
There are several reasons why this border area is an interesting border to study; some reasons have been described earlier. To date, not much research has been done on the border between Canada and the US, in comparison to the border between Mexico and the US, where much more research has been conducted.
The US is not the only country who is getting suspicious towards her external borders, the same “trend” is occurring at the external borders of the EU. In order to prevent the open borders from closing, the EU is hardening her external borders in order to keep “undesirable” people out. It is therefore of value and interesting to research this global “trend” of inclusion and exclusion at the external borders of both the EU and US border.
Previous research by Victor Konrad (2008) has been done in the Cascadia region
(Vancouver/Seattle), but less research has been done on the Ontario region, the densest region of Canada with its capital Ottawa and the biggest city of Canada, Toronto. This region is the political and economic heart of Canada.
Canada is the most important export market for the United States, and vice versa, both countries have a huge economic interest in each other (Border Policy, 2009). In the statistics of Border Policy (2009) $19,051 million of goods were exported from the US to Canada by truck or train, 68 per cent of these goods passed by five major ports across the border (Champlain, Buffalo, Detroit, Sweetgrass and Blaine). Detroit only is responsible for a large portion - 36 per cent of the goods - which are exported by land via train or trucks.
Manufactured goods account for over 70 per cent of two-way trade at Detroit.
There are 77 ports of entry (POE) among the US – Canada border where automobile traffic is heavily concentrated. Each day there is an average of 62,092 vehicles that cross the border at these 77 POEs. At the Buffalo, New York crossing, 16,509 vehicles cross the border and at the Detroit, Michigan crossing, 15,436 vehicles per day. This is a significant number of people who are affected by the increased border security, these border checks lead up to long queues and a waste of time, this affects the economy and social life of people (Border Policy, 2009). This is the reason why I want to focus my research on the Ontario region where the most people cross the border at Detroit and Buffalo; this makes it more relevant, because more people are affected.
Peter Andreas (2003) argues that the US-Canada and the US-Mexico borders are the busiest land crossings in the world. Creating a North American community would further deepen an already well-advanced continental integration process, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). But this North American community was the first causalities of the events of 9/11. Borders became a popular focus, instead of dismantled to increase the integration process. Border controls got re-tooled and redesigned as part of the “war on terrorism”.
Mark Brown (2015) conducted research on the thickness of the US Canada border and the costs of crossing the border by truck in the pre- and post- 9/11 eras. At the micro level there is proof that border costs are reflected in prices. After 2001, fixed costs per shipment rose more rapidly on exports. Much of this rise can be seen in 2004, coinciding with the
implementation of new border regulations imposed by the US. There is less evidence that prices rose in reaction to delays at the border in the direct aftermath of 9/11. From 2004 onward, line haul costs (costs that vary with distance) on exports rose at a slower pace than those on imports and domestic trade, and this happened at a time of declining demand for the export leg and increasing demand for the import leg of the cross border trip. Between 1994 and 2000, it cost on average 16.3 per cent more to ship abroad than to ship the same
goods at the same distance domestically. The premium on cross border shipments stayed almost the same until 2000, after which it rose to 25.1 per cent in 2005 and straight relatively high after 2005. Between 2005 and 2009 these extra costs switched, in 2005 the premium on the export was 30 per cent, while the premium on the import was 20.3 per cent. By 2009, the premium on the export had fallen to 17.1 per cent and risen on the import leg to 25.6 per cent, thus importing goods has become more costly between 2005 and 2009. The premium on cross border trade over 1994 to 2000 averaged 0.33 per cent, but almost doubled to 0.62 per cent between 2005 and 2009. This tariff seems relatively small but it effects will be magnified for goods such as auto parts that pass over the border several times as they move through the various stages of the production chain along the US Canada border, as on each side of the border there are different car factory departments. Cross border shipping has become more costly since 2000 (Brown, 2015).
According to Moens & Gabler (2012), after ten years of post-9/11 border innovations, the costs associated with border crossing have not significantly decreased while government spending on border security has markedly increased. These costs can be seen on trade, tourism/travel and government programs, these costs together are annually C$19.1 billion in 2010 or nearly 1.5 per cent of Canada’s GDP. If they want to create performance based and cost effective border management policies, they should outline the costs associated with the border.
The ideal freight-inspection regime delivers heightened security, while imposing little or no added burden (in terms of delay or cost). Post 9/11 security is not yet close to the ideal, with negative economic affects for the integrated Canada- US economy. (Border Policy, 2009) A good flow of border crossings is important for both Canada and the US since both
economies are highly integrated, any inefficiencies associated with cross border commerce hinder the integrated economy of the US and Canada and reduce their global
competitiveness (Border Policy, 2009).
In figure 1 you can see a drop in the number of travellers who travelled from Canada to the US after the events of 9/11 in the Cascade Gateway
(Vancouver area). Normally the amount of travellers that crossed the border followed roughly the line of the exchange rate between the US dollar and the Canadian
dollar, but after 9/11 the amount of travellers dropped drastically. According to Border Policy (2009) the discomfort of people with the new inspection processes at the border is the likely cause of low travel volumes. A library pass or any other card that contains your name is no longer enough to cross the border. Since the events of 9/11 it is mandatory to have
government issued ID or passport to cross the border. They state: “that the travel-related inspection processes established in the aftermath of 9/11 have disrupted the social/economic fabric of borderlands” (Border Policy, 2009).
Inspection processes continue to impact the amount of cross border passenger travel at the largest POEs (Buffalo, Detroit, Blaine and Port Huron). Programs that are created to tackle
this program such as NEXUS are only partially successful. Nexus is a card which allows you to go on the fast track, to cross the border faster, good for frequent crossers (Border Policy, 2009). So we can see that the border situation after 9/11 has both a social and economic impact on the borderlands between the US and Canada.
According to Hart (2010) preclearance of people and goods before they arrive at the physical border offers one of the best ways to address cross-border obstacles while ensuring public safety. It is already a success where it has been applied, it is a cost effective way to provide air travellers with an economic efficient way to clear customs and immigration before entering the US from Canada. EU members are satisfied that they have succeeded in guarding their security while promoting an integrated single market by relying on a perimeter approach to preclearance. Both countries rely on preclearance as the basis of trusted traveller and shipper programmes. This program has been successful but Hart (2010) says that Canada and the US should now design a program that relies on preclearance as a cost-effective way to ensure both a secure and an economically efficient border for most travellers and shippers crossing by land. “Getting there will only require a determined effort to get beyond
conventional wisdom and bureaucratic silos” (Hart, 2010).
With the global economic recession, reducing border costs and facilitating the movement of low risk goods and people should contribute to faster economic recovery. This can be accomplished by expanding participation and creating a program together.
But how will this preclearance work out on spontaneous border crossings; let’s say to visit family across the border? Like with ESTA, the preclearance system that the US uses for Visa waiver countries to enter the US, must be filled in at least 72 hours before the actual flight to the US. Then there is the question if you get accepted or not. When you want to cross the border spontaneously this preclearance system won’t work.
The US and Canada should work together side by side on both the management and the delivery of border management without social or economic costs for the citizens of the borderlands. Why does a border like that between the Netherlands and Germany not work between Canada and the US? Both countries would benefit from an open border between the US and Canada not only on economic terms but also on social terms.
Canada has taken many measures since the events of 9/11 to demonstrate its resolve against terrorism and heightened commitment to border security. Measures included new legislation, more security at airports and border crossings and tightening of its visa regime. To counter the image that Canada is lax on immigration control, the government has launched a permanent fraud resistant resident card for new immigrants, increased its
capacity on detention and deportation activity and does more front end security screening for refugee claimants (Andreas, 2003).
For domestic political reasons, the Canadian government is careful to underscore that these measures do not mean Canada is simply adopting US policies or due to pressures from Washington. But the political motives are obvious: either take strong measures to enhance security or risk a unilateral hardening of the border. After 9/11 the US Secretary of State Colin Powell said: “Some nations need to be more vigilant against terrorism at their borders if they want their relationship with the US to remain the same.” Canadians saw this as a “thinly veiled threat” and are cautious with creating a security perimeter. Creating a security
perimeter will affect the smooth flowing ports of entry along the border, which then will affect government and business communities; their economic survival very much depends on smooth flowing ports of entry along the border (Andreas, 2003).
1.3 Research objective
With this research I want to understand why a country imposes restrictions, what the effects are from these imposed restrictions and what the opinions are of Canadians who live in these borderlands. Do they feel affected at all? I also want to research if there is a solution or a change possible for this current border situation, as both countries could benefit from less border restrictions. Schengen was very beneficial for the European Union countries. Canada and the US seem to get along well and have a history of good friendship. .
I want to research if it is possible to create a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada. To clarify, I do not want them to be part of the EU Schengen agreement but create a Schengen style agreement between both the US and Canada. If it is possible to create a Schengen agreement, would it also be a suitable solution for the current border situation between the US and Canada? The current border situation has changed from a very open border in to a more closed border situation. Why does the US fear an open border with Canada so much?
1.4 Research question
“Is a Schengen agreement possible between the US and Canada and how could a Schengen agreement be a solution for the hardening of the US Canada border?”
To complete my master’s thesis I should also answer these questions, which could be used as sub questions:
- Why are restrictions imposed?
- Do both Canadians and Americans who live in the border area feel affected by the border itself?
- How are the Canadians and Americans affected by the US-CA border after 9/11? - What are the economic effects of these border restrictions?
- How could this situation being changed?
- Do both Canadians and Americans wish to cross the border without restrictions? - Why does a border situation like the Netherlands and Germany not happen between Canada and the US?
- Is it possible to revise the current Visa regime?
Conceptual model by Biswas (2009)
The conceptual model in figure 2 perfectly describes the changing relation between the US and Canada after 9/11.
1.5 Methods
1.5.1 Research strategy
The research of this master’s thesis has focussed itself on two fields, the social problem created by the border restrictions and a political solution for the current border situation. To get an answer on the main research question, literature research was not enough, I had to talk with experts on the field of the US-Canada border, and this was either someone in the (local) government or a professor who is well known in the field of the US-Canada border. An average citizen on the street cannot tell me why an agreement like Schengen will or will not work on the border between the US and Canada. The experts helped me to answer the question with regard to the political solution.
My research internship was at the Carleton University in Ottawa, they have guided me in my research process at their university and I could use their resources. From Ottawa it is 80km to the US-Canada border, my idea was to go to the actual US-Canada border at Cornwall, Ontario or Johnstown, Ontario and interview people there. What is their opinion on the US-Canada border and how do they feel affected by the border?
When I arrived in Canada, I discussed my research proposal with Professor Victor Konrad and Melissa Kelly, my supervisors at the Carleton University. They advised me that it was not the best method to interview people at the border. They advised that I would need to rent a car in order to get to the border which would have made this approach quite costly and would also be time intensive. There was also the chance that I would spend a whole day in these small border towns without getting good interviews, because people only cross there and would probably give short uninterested answers, so an in depth interview would not have been possible. In addition to this, the border area is a very sensitive area where you are not allowed to come close to, unless you want to cross it and interviews could make border officers suspicious of my intended actions.
Due to this conversation, I made a new research strategy with my supervisors at the Carleton University. In my research proposal I spoke of conducting research on the borderlands and at the actual border near Cornwall/Johnstown. Ottawa the city where I have done my research internship is part of these borderlands and most of the Canadians live a maximum of 100km away from the border, so most of the Canadians live in these borderlands. I was only staying for 2.5 months in Ottawa so I could not risk going to these border towns and come back without anything useful, except the experience itself. In order to control the process better and due to my research on borderlands we decided to focus my research here in Ottawa. The border debate is a hot topic here in Ottawa (as it is a government town). First I made an interview guide, which has been edited after a few feedback sessions with Professor Victor Konrad, Melissa Kelly and other masters students. After these sessions a thorough interview guide was finalized which I was then to use for the semi structured interviews that I planned to have with 30 people in Ottawa.
Beside the interviews that I held in Ottawa, I also researched using literature on the US-Canada border, and with this research phase I wanted to form my theoretical framework and understand why this border changed so much in the last 15 years.
In order to get a better idea of the current situation, I went on a trip together with Professor Victor Konrad, Melissa Kelly and other masters students to the US Canada border crossing at Cornwall, Ontario. I wanted to see with my own eyes how the current border situation is, because until then I only knew how the situation was by listening to stories of others or by reading literature on the current situation. On this trip we visited two places, the border crossing at a town called Cornwall and Cornwall Island, which is part of Akwesasne a first
nation territory of Mohawks. Cornwall Island is a small island on the river the Saint Lawrence, that river is also the border between the US and Canada, Cornwall Island is part of Canada. The border crossing station was previously stationed on Cornwall Island until May 1, 2009 when the Government of Canada announced that the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) will be carrying firearms at all border crossings along the Canada US border starting June 1. Mohawk leaders were against the policy and asked for an exception to be made in the policy for the Cornwall border because it is located on Mohawk territory. They were against the firearms because the Cornwall border crossing was located in a residential area at a major crossroad with a bus stop, recreational fields, a play area and several small businesses (Von Hlatky & Trisko, 2012).
At midnight on May 30, all CBSA border guards left the Cornwall border crossing because of safety concerns after hundreds of Mohawk people had surrounded the border crossing to protest the new firearms policy. The border crossing was later completely closed and moved to Cornwall, on the other side of the river. Due to this situation, Mohawk people living on Cornwall Island which is part of Canada now need to cross a border crossing every day if they go buying groceries in Cornwall, even though they live in Canada. This had huge negative effects on the Mohawk community; imagine that you need to cross a border every day to buy groceries even though you are already in your own country (Von Hlatky & Trisko, 2012).
Cornwall Island was the first stop on our trip at the US Canada border, where the Mohawk community told about the history of Cornwall Island and the current troubling situation. When we drove back from Cornwall Island to Cornwall, we had to pass the actual border crossing; they asked what we were doing there and if we entered the US. We said that we visited the Mohawks on Cornwall Island and that we didn’t enter the US. The CBSA guard said: “what did you do with the Indians? There is nothing to be seen there”. The general feeling was that he was quite rude and you could feel the tension surrounding the Mohawk subject, but we were allowed to pass the border without showing our passports, which was not the case for the car in front of us and behind us.
The second stop on our trip was the actual border crossing station in Cornwall, which used to be on Cornwall Island. They told us how the border crossing works and that everyone needs to show their passport in order to cross the border. They guided us through the whole station and showed us almost every room. The border officials told a very different story then the Mohawk people did, in fact CBSA showed pictures of cars belonging to Mohawk people which were filled with illegal cigarettes, apparently the Cornwall border crossing is very known for smuggling of goods and people. I personally felt a certain tension at the border crossing, something that I also felt when I landed on JFK airport in New York, US. We Europeans are not familiar with such borders. But the trip also showed me that the people who work at the border are people who have a family at home and do what they need to do, they treat people with mutual respect and were very friendly, and this could be different for everyone. They told us that American border guards see it as a privilege to enter the US, only Americans have that right, others get in with a visa but don’t have the right that a citizen of America does. The trip really demonstrated to me the problems that a guarded border crossing can cause, and in this instance it was a small border crossing, there were cars already lining up to enter Canada. Considering the same in a main border crossing at Windsor-Detroit it would be easy to imagine the big delays it could cause and other consequences.
In order to get more insight on the decision making in Canada, I visited Parliament hill to attend a meeting of the government, which included Canadian Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau. To prepare I read several local papers like Ottawa citizen to see what is going on in the current debates. In order to meet people and interviewees, I also joined a young
diplomats group on Wednesday evenings, where all young diplomats came together for networking and shared knowledge. At these groups I talked about the border, and I also interviewed some members about their experiences with the border.
1.5.2 Data collection
The data for this thesis has mainly been collected in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada where the research internship organisation, the Carleton University is located. I was in Ottawa from the 11th of April until the 30th of June 2016, and during the days in April I prepared the interview
guide for the interviews in Ottawa.
The intention was to interview 30 people in Ottawa who have experience with the US-Canada border. These 30 people include 10 experts who are professors at Carleton
University or any other Canadian university and experts on the US-Canada border but each of them has a different field such as security or migration. I aimed for 20 people divided between 10 policymakers who are entangled somehow in the policy field of the US-Canada border, (their data will be especially important for the questions with regard to the possibility of a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada). The remaining 10 people were students who have experiences with the US-Canada border; their input was useful for the experience part with the border itself.
Together with Professor Victor Konrad and Melissa Kelly, we have made a list of professors who I could interview and they gave me a list of policymakers and universities who are part of the Borders in Globalization (BIG) project, which research focus is on the US-Canada border.
I worked in the masters office on the Carleton University, it was here I came in touch with other students who live in Canada and have experiences with the US-Canada border since it is relatively close to Ottawa.
In the beginning of May, I approached my interviewees via e-mail in order to schedule a time with them in May and June. I also asked the interviewees if it was OK to record the interview in order to transcribe it and then use it after the interview.
The interviews were semi-structured, based on a list of 12 questions with the opportunity to go off track/script once something interesting came up during the interview. All 30
interviewees got the same 12 questions of my interview guide. This created a more consistent research basis and made it possible for me to compare answers between interviewees and then between the three groups and allowed me to see any similarities or differences between the answers of all the interviewees and thus the three groups.
According to Ragin & Amoroso (2011) qualitative research is used to see key aspects of cases more clearly, the researcher is looking for ‘hidden meanings, little heard voices and multiple interpretations. Qualitative research is an inductive process; a social phenomenon is explored in order to find empirical patterns that can function as the beginning of a theory (From practice to theory) (Nicholas J. Clifford, Shaun French and Gill Valentine, 2010).There is no theory that I wanted to test by doing research in the field, I wanted to understand how people who cross the border felt and what they thought of the imposed restrictions and I wanted to look if it is possible to create a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada, this all can lead up to a new theory.
Semi-structured questions are specified, but the interviewer is more freely to probe beyond the answers to seek clarification and elaboration. The interviewer should not only be aware of the content of the interview, but also be able to record the nature of the interview and the
way in which he/she asks the questions (May, 2002).
This consistent approach to interviews gave me the answers I needed on the structured questions, but it also gave me the opportunity to go beyond these questions with a semi-structured approach, to see if there were more interesting things, this depends on the person I interviewed and their experiences with the border restrictions.
With qualitative research you can ask people why they have certain feelings concerning a particular experience; why they feel affected by border restrictions. With quantitative
research, you can only ask on a scale from 1-10 how much they feel affected and what they want to change. But to find the real reasons behind these feelings, it is better to conduct an interview with these people to hear them talk and hear their arguments. With an interview you can collect more data than with a survey, a survey is most of the time easier to analyse but that depends on your questions. As long as you keep some structure within your
interview (semi structured) then you can compare different interviews better with each other since you asked several questions in both interviews, you can compare their answers.
Nicholas J. Clifford, Shaun French and Gill Valentine (2010) state that you need to take care of several ethical issues when you conduct semi-structured interviews or focus groups. This includes confidentiality, anonymity and participants need to be assured that all the collected data will remain secure, participants will remain anonymous and that participants have the right to withdraw from the research at any time.
Another ethical issue that researchers who use semi-structured interviews need to consider carefully is how to interview in different cultural contexts. When someone from the “first world” interviews someone from the “third world”, you need to take care of local codes of conduct (Nicholas J. Clifford, Shaun French and Gill Valentine, 2010).
I asked the people that I interviewed if they wished to be kept anonymous or not and I dealt and will deal respectful with all data that is collected. I didn’t need to worry that much about the cultural context since the US and Canada both belong to the “West”, same goes for the Netherlands; we have roughly the same norms and values. But Dutch people are often seen as direct, and direct can sometimes be seen as rude, so I was mindful of this as I conducted interviews.
When conducting these interviews I kept the following conditions in the back of my mind. Three conditions for successful interviewing according to May (2002):
– Accessibility: does the interviewee have access to the information that the interviewer seeks. Yes the people that I interviewed are people who have crossed the border and know what the struggles are with these border restrictions, they can provide me with the right information. The question if Schengen is possible or not, will mainly be answered by interviews with policymakers and experts. I wanted to interview 10 policymakers and 10 experts on the US/Canada border, like Professor Viktor Konrad who wrote a book on this border.
– Cognition: an interviewee should understand what is expected from him/her (Translate sensitizing concepts to everyday talk! Don’t use difficult theoretical terms). I asked questions like: do you feel affected by the border restrictions? Terms like Schengen were explained, when the interviewees were not familiar with the term.
– Motivation: the interviewer must make the subjects feel that their participation and answers are valued. Only the people who live in these borderlands can help answer my main
questions and sub questions, so I was motivated to interview these people and see how they felt about the border situation. These interviews helped me answer my sub-questions and in the end the main research questions.
ask, with space to get off track when I heard something interesting for my topic. These questions were well phrased in order to get detailed answers and not just a simple yes or no. I informed my respondents well ahead of the interview about the goal of my research and why I wanted to interview them; how I will use the information and I asked if it’s ok to record the interview. Using this approach I intended to gain consent for my interview. The interviews started with non-probing questions such as how they are doing and what their personal experience is with the border; getting meaningful information from a respondent is easier when they feel comfortable. While doing an interview I summarised the key points that the respondent has provided so far, this kept the interviewee and me sharp in order to get new information and that we were not constantly talking about the same question.
After the interviews I made transcripts of each interview and started analysing each interview. I looked for common, recurrent or emergent themes among each interview and coded these themes. After analysing these themes I started to look for certain patterns. In the end these themes and patterns answered my sub questions and in the end my main research question.
1.5.3 Interview guide
Down below the final interview guide that I made, including feedback of Henk van Houtum, Victor Konrad, Melissa Kelly and some master students from the Carleton University in Ottawa.
Research question
Is a Schengen agreement possible between the US and Canada and how could a Schengen agreement be a solution for the hardening of the US Canada border?
Key themes: Effects of the border restrictions and possible solutions for the current situation Border experiences
1. What is your experience with the US-Canada border? (When you cross the border and
when you think of the border?)(Could you cross it easily? How open is /was it?)
2. How has your experience changed in the last years? Border restrictions
3. Have you seen any changing trends in the current border situation? (Is it hardening?) 4. Do you think that more heightened restrictions have been imposed in the last 15 years? 5. Do you think that border restrictions should be increased/decreased or stay the same?
(Why?)
Border effects
6. What are the effects of these imposed restrictions? (For example what are the social
effects?)
7. Do you think less Canadians cross the US- Canada border due to these restrictions?
8. Is the US-Mexico border the same as the US-Canadian border? (Security, strictness,
effects etc.)
Border solutions
9. Do you think that the “Beyond the Border Plan” is a step forward to a more open border between the US and Canada?
10. What do you think would be a suitable solution for the current border situation?
(Explains Schengen)
11. Do you think a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada would be possible? 12. Would you cross the border more often if there was free movement of people between the US and Canada?
Final comments
13. What else would you like to tell me with your experience with the border? 1.5.4 Data Analysis
For this project, I had to decide which method would be most suitable to analyse my data with regard to the amount of time that was available and the goal of the research.
I had already described in my research proposal (that I wrote before I went to Canada) that I intended to interview Canadians on their border experiences and that I would like to do semi-structured interviews. These semi-semi-structured interviews led to plenty of data, and with my research I wanted to look to differences and similarities between interviewees’ answers and in the end, answering my research question.
So together with Melissa Kelly I came to the conclusion to use the thematic analysis as a tool to analyse my data. While I was in Canada, Henk van Houtum and PhD student Simone Pekelsma agreed/advised via the mail that this would be a good method for my research. Thematic analysis is a form of analysis that I used once before in the course ‘qualitative methods’ but on a way smaller scale. It is a common form of analysis within qualitative research. Researchers use thematic analysis to determine, investigate and record patterns within data that is for example achieved via interviews. The goal of this method is to create an organization of data and a rich description of the data. It is not just counting phrases or words in a text; it is about identifying implicit and explicit ideas within the data (Guest, MacQueen, Namey, 2012) (Creswell, 2013).
Coding stands central in this method, which leads to the development of themes within the data achieved via the interviews. These codes are tagged on important moments within the data, so parts that answer the question, coding happens before interpretation of the data. The interpretation of these codes can exist out of comparing theme frequencies, identifying theme co-occurrence or graphically displaying relationships between different themes (Guest et al., 2012).
In my research the data set, there were 25 semi-structured interviews, including nine experts on the Canadian border, six policymakers who are entangled with their work to the Canadian border and 10 Canadian students who have experienced crossing the Canadian border. The process of data analysis can occur in two primary ways: inductively or deductively, I did choose to use the inductive approach. Within the inductive approach one works from data to theory instead of theory to data. The identified themes are linked to the data because
assumptions are data driven. Coding of data happens without following a certain framework from an already existing theory (Guest et al., 2012) (Creswell, 2013).
According to Saldana (2009) there are several questions one should always consider when coding data. These are the questions that should be asked throughout all cycles of the coding process and the data analysis
- What are people doing? What are they trying to accomplish?
- How exactly do they do this? What specific means or strategies are used? - How do members talk about and understand what is going on?
- What assumptions are they making?
- What do I see going on here? What did I learn from note taking? - Why did I include them?
Guest et al. (2012) wrote: “Applied Thematic Analysis”, in this book they describe the phases one should take in order to successfully apply the thematic analysis on your own data.
Phase 1: Becoming familiar with your own data.
This phase can be done through reading of your data and re-reading of your data, this will result in more familiarity with your own data. You start to understand better what your data includes and you start to see patterns that occur within the data. You can make a notebook where you describe potential codes; analysing data in an active way will make it easier for researchers to search for meanings and patterns in the data (Guest et al., 2012).
After all the interviews, the researcher needs to start transcribing the data into written form. It is important to do this in an accurate way in order to protect the dependability of your
analysis. One should use the same template for transcribing in order to prevent
inconsistencies which can lead to biases in data analysis. Transcribing is a good way to become familiar with your own data, after transcribing all the interviews the researcher should be familiar with the data and should be able to identify patterns or repeating issues (Guest et al., 2012).
Phase 2: Generating initial codes.
These initial codes are generated by describing where and how these patterns occur. This is done through data reduction; the researcher transforms the data into labels in order to create categories which will lead to a more efficient analysis. Coding is a systematic way of
organizing and gaining meaningful parts of data as it relates to the research question. This coding process forms itself through an inductive analysis and it is not a linear process but rather a cyclical process, codes emerge throughout the research process. It allows going back and forth between phases of data analysis and is important to create satisfaction with the final themes. This phase will lead to extensive codes of how data answers your research question, sub question or interview question. Researchers need to be careful while coding that they do not lose more information than is gained with the interviews (Guest et al., 2012).
Phase 3: Searching for themes.
In this phase of thematic analysis a researcher starts to combine codes into overarching themes that exactly describe the data. The researcher needs to focus on broader patterns in the data, putting codes together into eventual themes. A researcher should ask
himself/herself how the relations are formed between codes and themes and between the different levels of existing themes. Some researchers may use visual models to sort codes into potential themes. Themes exist out of ideas and descriptions can be used to explain causal events, statements and morals obtained from the interviews. This phase will lead to a list of candidate themes for further analysis. Don’t throw away too many potential themes because in the end they could be useful for your analysis process (Guest et al., 2012).
Phase 4: Reviewing themes.
Now the researcher should look how all the different themes support the data and the overarching theoretical perspective. When the researcher has the idea that the analysis is incomplete he/she has to go back to phase three and see what is missing. This phase exists out of two levels; first the researcher should look if the themes form coherent patterns if so, the research can move on to the next phase. If the themes don’t form coherent patterns than the researcher should consider the validity of each themes and how they connect to the data. This phase should lead to a coherent recognition of how the themes are patterned to tell an accurate story about the data (Guest et al., 2012).
Phase 5: Defining and naming themes.
In this phase the researcher needs to describe what each theme is, which aspects of data are recorded and what is interesting about the themes. This phase will lead to an analysis of what the themes contribute to the understanding of the data. The researcher can describe for himself/herself what each theme means. The themes should give the reader a full meaning of the themes and why that theme is important for his/her research. The researcher should try to go beyond the surface meanings of the data to make sense of the data in order to write a correct story of what the data means (Guest et al., 2012).
Phase 6: Producing the report.
In this final phase the researcher will write a report wherein answers are given on the sub-questions/interview questions and finally the research question. It is important to notice which themes make a meaningful contributions to understand what is going on within the data. This phase lead to an extensive description of the results which describes the complicated story of the data in such a way that the readers are convinced of the validity and merit of the researchers analysis. This report should be clear and in line with the whole story and its themes in order to be understandable for readers. It is good to take some quotes from the interview to capture the full meaning of the points in the analysis. The argument should be in line of the research question (Guest et al., 2012).
Thematic analysis uses the concept of supporting assertions with data from the grounded theory. The grounded theory constructs theories that are grounded in the data themselves. This can be seen in the thematic analysis because the process consists of reading
transcripts, identifying possible themes, comparing and contrasting themes and building theoretical models. In the grounded theory they use open coding as a form of coding, some call it initial coding just like thematic analysis (Guest et al., 2012).
1.6 Hypothesis
Europe always used to be the perfect example of a region that was torn apart by war but has since come together and now works together to prevent any other wars but also to become economic compatible with the US and Japan. Breaking down barriers and opening borders with the Schengen agreement has brought a lot of prosperity to the EU and made her economic compatible with other regions. Europeans can easily trade, travel or work within their states, all thanks to the Schengen agreement.
Although the US and Canada don’t have a long history of wars compared to Europe, both countries seem to have a good relationship and have the same level of economic
development, it would probably just be as “easy” and beneficial to torn down the border between both of these states as it was in the EU.
But the key question is, are both the US and Canada ready for this? And is there a will for such an agreement, especially in a world where fear, terrorism and illegal migrants are becoming more and more daily topics in current debates. And the EU seems to have
problems with Schengen due to the influx of migrants and terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels and Nice.
1.7 Guide
This thesis exists out of four chapters, after this introduction, chapter 2 theoretical framework starts. In this chapter the theoretical background of this master’s thesis will be more defined including the bigger debate on open borders, the Schengen agreement and the changing US-Canada border will be described.
Chapter 3 will describe the actual analysing method and the results from the interviews, including a sub conclusion of the interviews.
In the end, chapter 4 will be the conclusion of this master’s thesis, wherein the possibility to create a Schengen agreement between the US and Canada will be answered. The second part of this chapter will be a reflection based on this research.
In the appendix you can see the codes and themes for each interview question and interview group and the interview reports per group.
2. Theoretical framework
In this master’s thesis I want to research what the effects are of the border restrictions at the US-Canada border on the lives of people who live in these borderlands, both Americans and Canadians. What would be a solution for this current border situation, why is it not possible to go back to the “good-old-days” when both Americans and Canadians could cross the border without decent passports but with a library-pass for example? Why does a Schengen agreement not work or exist? In order to answer these questions one must first get some insight in the greater debate of open borders wherein this research belongs. I will first briefly go back to my bachelor’s thesis wherein I describe the open border debate, and after that I will describe what Schengen is and why it could work before I will further zoom in on the US Canada border itself.
2.1 The open border debate
Last year in my bachelor’s thesis I researched the possibility to abolish the worldwide visa system, with the supervision of Henk van Houtum at the Radboud University. The debate on opening up borders caught my attention and I wanted to explore this topic further. In my bachelor’s thesis I looked further in to the development of the US immigration policies and why they have one of the toughest visa systems in the world. Going further with research on the US Canada border felt only natural for me, it fits perfectly in the greater debate that I follow and am interested in, namely the opening up of borders. The best example of tearing down borders is the Schengen agreement, where countries jointly teared down their internal borders in order to create free flows of people, goods and services. This happened among fairly equal developed countries. Recently, the Netherlands and Belgium even traded some parts of land without any problems surrounding the trade. The New York Times (2016) wrote: “Belgium and the Netherlands trade land and remain friends”, something that seems so rare in other parts of the world. While in other parts of the world, there is war over territory; yet in the EU they trade land and tear down borders.
Now that I better understand US immigration policies, I want to research if it is possible to create an open border between the US and Canada via a Schengen agreement. Both countries are like the countries within the EU, fairly equal developed so tearing down the border between both would be possible, in fact it is often referred to as the longest
undefended border in the world. I knew at the start of this research that this is going to be a though question but 15 years ago people didn’t believe that you could travel freely from Latvia to Portugal without any border controls and look at it now (Visscher, 2015). This master’s thesis draws on the same line of enquiry but not the visa system itself but border restrictions/ the border itself. Last year I cited that Neumayer (2006) wrote that international travel had grown really hard in the last 40 years, but that there is a certain revival of strict visa restrictions since 9/11. “In order to guarantee security and order a state has to keep a close eye on who enters its territory and must be free in its decision to refuse entry”, argued by Bertelsmann in 1914. Ninety years later states still subscribe to this view with a few amendments as well as the increasingly hostile reaction to asylum and other migration to Western high-income countries (UN 2002 in Neumayer, 2006).
Although we live in a world that is getting more and more connected we still use that visa system that tells if you are allowed to travel to another country or not. The globalisation process is slowed down and the cross border activities between two neighbouring countries
