"La Cina è vicina": the control of residency in Italy and People’s Republic of China

Journal title SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE
Author/s Enrico Gargiulo, Michele Mastandrea
Publishing Year 2020 Issue 2020/121 Language Italian
Pages 20 P. 52-71 File size 196 KB
DOI 10.3280/SUR2020-121004
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The article aims to compare the ways two different countries, China and Italy, enact similar legal and administrative tools to regulate internal migrations. To this end, it analyses the logics and mechanisms that regulate people’s movement within the national space. More specifically, the study conducted here focuses on the systems of control of residency acting in the two countries. In this way, it contributes to migration studies and border studies by showing that restricting internal migrations prevents the access to welfare. People lacking residency are more vulnerable and precarious in labour market and in their lives.

Keywords: Residency, internal borders, mechanisms of migration control, restrictions to welfare access, civic stratification, urban-rural migrations

  1. Bigo D. (2014). The (in)securitization practices of the three universes of EU border control: Military/Navy - border guards/police - database analysts. Security Dialogue, 45(3): 209-225. DOI: 10.1177/0967010614530459
  2. Brambilla C. (2015). Il confine come borderscape. InTrasformazione, 4(2): 5-9.
  3. Brochmann G. (1999). Controlling immigration in Europe. In Brochmann G., Hammar T. (eds.). Mechanisms of Immigration Control: A Comparative Analysis of European Regulation Policies. Oxford: Berg Publishers.
  4. Buckingham W., Chan K.W. (2008). Is China abolishing the Hukou system? China Quarterly, 195: 582-606. DOI: 10.1017/S0305741008000787
  5. Cuttitta P. (2007). Segnali di confine. Il controllo dell’immigrazione nel mondo-frontiera. Milano: Mimesis.
  6. Dutton M. (1999). Policing and Punishment in China: From Patriarchy to the People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Fan C. (2008). China on the Move: Migration, the State, and the Household. New York: Routledge.
  8. Froissart C. (2008). Le systeme du hukou: pilier de la croissance chinoise et du maintien du PCC au pouvoir. Les études du CERI, 149.
  9. Gallo S. (2007). Le anagrafi arruolate: l’Istat e le normative contro l’urbanesimo tra Italia fascista e Italia repubblicana. Le Carte e la Storia, 13(1): 175-190. DOI: 10.1411/24800.
  10. Gallo S. (2011). Senza attraversare le frontiere. Le migrazioni interne dall’Unità a oggi. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  11. Gargiulo E. (2011). Localizzazione dei diritti o localismo dell’appartenenza? Abbozzo di una teoria della residenza. Società Mutamento Politica, 2(3): 241-261. DOI: 10.13128/SMP-10330
  12. Gargiulo E. (2014). Residenza, anagrafe, cittadinanza: la migrazione interna come questione socio-giuridica nell’Italia di oggi. In Colucci M., Gallo S. (a cura di). L’arte di spostarsi. Rapporto 2014 sulle migrazioni interne in Italia. Roma: Donzelli.
  13. Gargiulo E. (2015). Dalla popolazione residente al popolo dei residenti: le ordinanze e la costruzione dell’alterità. Rassegna italiana di sociologia, 56(1): 3-26. DOI: 10.1423/79143
  14. Gargiulo E. (2016). La residenza come campo di tensioni. I conflitti sull’iscrizione anagrafica e la loro rilevanza per lo studio delle migrazioni interne. In Fornasin A. et al. (a cura di). Per una storia della popolazione italiana del ‘900. Udine: Forum Editrice.
  15. Gargiulo E. (2017). The limits of local citizenship: administrative borders within the Italian municipalities. Citizenship studies, 21(3): 327-343. DOI: 10.1080/13621025.2016.1277982
  16. Guariso A. (2012) (a cura di). Senza distinzioni. Quattro anni di contrasto alle discriminazioni nel Nord Italia. Milano: Associazione Avvocati Per Niente Onlus.
  17. Huysmans J. (2000). The European Union and the Securitization of Migration. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5): 751-777. DOI: 10.1111/1468-5965.00263
  18. Litao Z., Rong C.F. (2010). China’s hukou reform: the Guangdong and Shanghai cases. EAI Background Brief, 551.
  19. Lockwood D. (1996). Civic Integration and Class Formation. British Journal of Sociology, 47(3): 531-550. DOI: 10.2307/591369
  20. Lorenzetti A. (2009). Il difficile equilibrio fra diritti di libertà e diritto alla sicurezza. In Lorenzetti A., Rossi S. (a cura di). Le ordinanze sindacali in materia di sicurezza pubblica e sicurezza urbana. Origini, contenuti, limiti. Napoli: Jovene.
  21. Mallee H. (2003). Migration, hukou and resistance in reform China. In Perry E., Selden M. (eds.). Chinese Society. Change, conflict and resistance. London-New York: Routledge.
  22. Mezzadra S. (2001). Diritto di fuga. Migrazioni, cittadinanza, globalizzazione. Verona: Ombre Corte.
  23. Mezzadra S., Neilson B. (2013). Border as Method, or, the Multiplication of Labor. Durham: Duke University Press
  24. Morozzo della Rocca P. (2003). Il diritto alla residenza: un confronto tra principi generali, categorie civilistiche e procedure anagrafiche. Il Diritto di Famiglia e delle Persone, 4: 1013-1042.
  25. Morris L. (2003). Managing Migration: Civic Stratification and Migrants’ Rights. Londra: Routledge.
  26. Paasi A. (1998). Boundaries as Social Processes: Territoriality in the World of Flows. Geopolitics, 3(1): 69-78. DOI: 10.1080/14650049808407608
  27. Rumford C. (2006). Theorizing Borders. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(2): 155-169. DOI: 10.1177/1368431006063330
  28. Salter M.B. (2008). When the Exception Becomes the Rule: Borders, Sovereignty, and Citizenship. Citizenship Studies, 12 (4): 365-380. DOI: 10.1080/13621020802184234
  29. Sassen S. (2006). Territory, Authority, Rights. From Medieval to Global Assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  30. Selden M., Tiejun C. (1994). The Origins and Social Consequences of China’s Hukou System. The China Quarterly, 139: 644-668. DOI: 10.1017/S0305741000043083
  31. Su F., Tao R. (2013). State Fragmentation and Rights Contestation: Rural Land Development Rights in China. China & World Economy, 21(4): 36-55.
  32. Torpey J. (1998). Coming and Going: On the State Monopolization of the Legitimate “Means of Movement”. Sociological Theory, 16(3): 239-259. DOI: 10.1111/0735-2751.00055
  33. Treves A. (1976). Le migrazioni interne nell’Italia fascista. Torino: Einaudi.
  34. Van Houtum H., Van Naerssen T. (2001). Bordering, Ordering and Othering. Tijdschriftvoor Economiche en Sociale Geografie, 93(2): 125-136. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9663.00189
  35. Walters W. (2002). Mapping Schengenland: Denaturalizing the Border. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 20(5): 561-580.
  36. Wang F.L. (2005). Organizing through labor and exclusion. China’s hukou system. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Enrico Gargiulo, Michele Mastandrea, "La Cina è vicina": il controllo della residenza tra Italia e Repubblica Popolare Cinese in "SOCIOLOGIA URBANA E RURALE" 121/2020, pp 52-71, DOI: 10.3280/SUR2020-121004