Victoria Finn

• Finn, Victoria & Ramaciotti, Juan Pablo (2024). Reject, Reject, Reject...Passed! Explaining a Latecomer of Emigrant Enfranchisement. Politics and Governance. ISSN 2183-2463. doi: 10.17645/pag.7331. Show summary

  Despite the extensive spread of external voting across the world, exceptions remain as some countries have not passed such regulations (e.g., Uruguay) or have passed them but lag implementation (e.g., Nicaragua). Others still took a long time to join the trend, possibly presenting a pushback to the commonly accepted notion of norm diffusion to explain migrant enfranchisement. We examine a latecomer by asking why Chile took so long to enfranchise emigrants. Classified as a liberal democracy with a century of legal history of foreign-resident voting, it repeatedly rejected proposed bills on external voting since 1971. Chile enacted external voting only in 2014, regulated it in 2016, and applied it in 2017. Through legal historical content analysis, we identify which political actors proposed the bills, when, and why each failed. Left and right-leaning actors gave normative, legal, and procedural reasons that resulted in rejection and stagnation at various institutional stages. This latecomer’s constitutional tradition, strongly focused on territory and territorial links, potentially sheds light on dozens of other country cases of late adoption of the external franchise.

• Finn, Victoria & Ramaciotti, Juan Pablo (2024). Reject, Reject, Reject…Passed! Explaining a Latecomer of Emigrant Enfranchisement. Politics and Governance. ISSN 2183-2463. 12. doi: 10.17645/pag.7331.
• Finn, Victoria (2023). Migrants’ Intention to Vote in Two Countries, One Country, or Neither. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. ISSN 1745-7289. doi: 10.1080/17457289.2023.2189727. Show summary

  While most electoral behavior affects politics in just one political community, migrant voters may affect turnout rates in two: the countries of origin and residence. Considering this context, we evaluate individual-level intentions to vote in national elections, as an emigrant for origin-country elections and as an immigrant in the residence country. Examining South-South migrants, our dataset comprises 1,477 respondents from an online survey during Chile’s 2017 presidential election; 94.7% are from Latin American countries, meaning most also hold external voting rights. Chile automatically registers immigrants in the electorate for multilevel elections after a five-year residence; we find many respondents are ill-informed about this, but those who know they can vote show higher probabilities of being an immigrant voter (they vote only in the residence country) or a dual transnational voter (they vote in both countries). Being interested in politics also increases the decision to vote in not just one but two countries. Longer intention to stay increases immigrant and dual transnational voting, while decreases emigrant voting. We also find that high self-reported discrimination is conducive to participating only in origin-country elections.

• Finn, Victoria (2023). Enfranchising Migrants in Chile: A Century of Politics, Elites, and Regime Changes. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. ISSN 1369-183X. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182714. Show summary

  Enfranchising migrants into the demos is a growing global trend, not exclusive to democracy. Analysing a country that has expanded migrant suffrage in both democracy and dictatorship, I address how and why Chile became one of the most inclusive countries worldwide for migrant voting rights. Chile was a pioneer for enacting select immigrant suffrage rights in relative democracy in 1925, expanded the rights in 1980 during dictatorship, then was a latecomer for granting emigrant voting rights in liberal democracy in 2014. Stepping away from analysing enfranchisement in consolidated democracies in the ‘Global North’, I unpack almost a century of elite-led top-down politics in Chile through historical analysis and taking 1980 enfranchisement as an extreme case. The evidence comes from constitutional laws, transcribed debates from constitutional commission sessions, scholarly literature, national censuses, and electoral data. The findings reveal the durability of migrant voting rights and a normative path dependence of who belongs as voters. Inclusivity requires not only continued implementation in elections but also rights survival through shifting ideology and political regime types.

• Umpierrez de Reguero, Sebastián; Finn, Victoria & Peltoniemi, Johanna (2023). Missing Links in Migrant Enfranchisement Studies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. ISSN 1369-183X. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2023.2182709. Show summary

  We identify four main strands of the migrant enfranchisement literature since 2010 and outline its main (debated) concepts. We pinpoint missing links among the strands, such as a tendency for scholars to study the electoral rights of foreign residents (immigrants) separate from nationals abroad (emigrants). Other missing links lie with actors and processes along the migrant enfranchisement legal path, with more studies focused on enacting or implementing rights versus fewer on why rights stagnate or fail to pass. Another missing link is geographic, favouring South–North over South-South enfranchisement. Despite an overall acceptance of transnational belonging and multi-territorial political participation, research agendas remain disparate across migration studies, political science, sociology, international relations, and other social sciences and humanities. Missing links are missed opportunities to merge disciplinary findings and find (causal) mechanisms to explain migrant enfranchisement. When analysing the four strands, we suggest researchers apply an immigrant-emigrant lens to include origin and residence countries and rights of both emigrants and immigrants. Each article in this Special Issue nuances one of the strands, combines them, or applies the immigrant-emigrant lens. The issue expands the geographic coverage of current studies and offers innovative comparative analyses of Africa, Europe, and Latin America.

• Finn, Victoria (2022). A Qualitative Assessment of QCA: Method stretching in large-N studies and temporality. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology. ISSN 0033-5177. 56, p. 3815–3830. doi: 10.1007/s11135-021-01278-5. Show summary

  Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a descriptive research method that can provide causal explanations for an outcome of interest. Despite extensive quantitative assessments of the method, my objective is to contribute to the scholarly discussion with insights constructed through a qualitative lens. Researchers using the QCA approach have less ability to incorporate and nuance information on set membership as the number of cases grows. While recognizing the suggested ways to overcome such challenges, I argue that since setting criteria for membership, calibrating, and categorizing are crucial QCA aspects that require in-depth knowledge, QCA is unfit for larger-N studies. Additionally, I also discuss that while the method is able to identify various parts of a causal configuration—the ‘what’—it falls short to shed light on the ‘how’ and ‘why,’ especially when temporality matters. Researchers can complement it with other methods, such as process tracing and case studies, to fill in these missing explanatory pieces or clarify contradictions—which begs the question of why they would also choose to use QCA.

• Finn, Victoria & Doña-Reveco, Cristián (2022). Conflicting Priorities in South American Migration Governance. Bulletin of Latin American Research. ISSN 0261-3050. 41(5), p. 802–817. doi: 10.1111/blar.13333. Show summary

  Historical extra-regional emigration patterns have shaped South America's focus on a human-rights approach to migration. Concern for emigrants permeates debates at the annual South American Conference on Migration (SACM), yet national legislation emphasises immigration rather than emigration. Comparing national legislation to SACM documents between 2000 and 2021, we show that countries fail to reflect the same priorities as regional agreements in their laws. The interlevel discrepancies reveal that – despite prominent roles for regional cooperation, international organisations, and global migration governance – when it comes to migration legislation in South America over the last two decades, we find sovereign law-making within national territories trumps regional agreements.

• Finn, Victoria & Besserer Rayas, Andrés (2022). Turning Rights into Ballots: Mexican external voting from the US. Territory, Politics, Governance. ISSN 2162-2671. doi: 10.1080/21622671.2022.2141849. Show summary

  While some countries lag in enacting or implementing voting rights for nationals living outside the territory, others grant them but lag in turning rights into ballots. What explains the stagnation between offering democratic voice on paper to realizing active external voting in practice? We draw from the diaspora politics literature to analyse Mexico as a deviant case: we expect widespread external voting, given extensive state–diaspora institutionalization, continued legal and policy innovations, high financial investment, and consistent application of federal-level external voting since 2006. Yet, 15 years on, around 2% of those with a voter ID card and less than 1% of the pool of over 10 million potential voters participated in the 2018 election. Lowering key institutional barriers and easing voting modalities have yet to spur meaningful participation. Evidence from turnout data and electoral laws is supported with interviews within Mexico’s electoral management body, which capture insiders’ views on the politics behind innovations. The interpretive policy analysis contributes to understanding the role of electoral institutions and governance across territories. Innovations to ease registration and voting can fail to increase external voting numbers, leaving a large group of nationals abroad on the sidelines of democracy.

• Umpierrez de Reguero, Sebastián; Finn, Victoria; Cartagena, Viviana & Baquerizo, Gabriela (2021). El sufragio multiterritorial. Evidencia de migrantes andinos en Ecuador [Multiterritorial Suffrage: Evidence from Andean Migrants in Ecuador]. Revista Andina de Estudios Políticos. ISSN 2221-4135. 10(1), p. 126–151. doi: 10.35004/raep.v10i1.187. Show summary

  En varias localidades del mundo, los migrantes pueden votar en elecciones de sus países de origen, de la misma manera que elegir autoridades y/o emitir preferencias en referéndums de sus países de residencia. Esta investigación analiza los diferentes motivos que los migrantes tienen para su comportamiento electoral en dos territorios independientes. Analizamos 57 entrevistas de diseño semi-estructurado provenientes de migrantes andinos de cuatro países de origen distintos (Chile, Colombia, Perú y Venezuela) que tienen derechos de voto en el exterior, así como derecho de voto en el país de residencia (Ecuador). Evaluamos dos variables dependientes: el voto previo y la intención de voto de los migrantes. Para cada grupo de migrantes, consideramos su comportamiento electoral en cuatro tipos mutuamente excluyentes: (1) sufragio emigrante, (2) inmigrante, (3) dual transnacional o (4) abstención. Las variaciones en el comportamiento electoral de los migrantes dependen de razones contextuales como el año de llegada al país de residencia, y si el migrante tiene aún familiares en su país de origen. Más allá de estos determinantes, variables políticas e institucionales predominan en las narrativas de nuestros informantes.

• Finn, Victoria (2021). Democracy in Croatia: From stagnant 1990s to rapid change 2000–2011. International Political Science Review. ISSN 0192-5121. 42(2), p. 197–212. doi: 10.1177/0192512119863140. Show summary

  This article analyses democracy in post-communist Croatia 1990–1999 and 2000–2011. During the first decade, political stagnation occurred under a competitive authoritarian regime. This ended abruptly and there was a critical juncture, during which a free and fair election marked the start of Croatian democracy in 2000. I first propose a causal chain to explain the election results, suggesting that the occurrence of the election, combined with other necessary factors, revealed the population’s underlying preference for democracy. Internally, this preference then served as a positive feedback mechanism throughout Croatia’s rapid increase in democracy as it became a candidate for European Union membership and finalized accession negotiations. Externally, the European Union influenced democratic progress, particularly via conditionality policies. This historical comparative analysis aims to explain which factors allowed for a rapid increase in democratic quality, positioning the 2000 election results as the main influence.

• Vásquez, Jorge; Finn, Victoria & Umpierrez de Reguero, Sebastián (2021). Cambiando la cerradura chilena: Intenciones legislativas del proyecto de Ley de Migraciones en Chile [Changing the Padlock: Legislative intentions in Chile’s migration law proposal]. Colombia Internacional. ISSN 0121-5612. p. 57–87. doi: 10.7440/colombiaint106.2021.03. Show summary

  Objetivo/contexto: las democracias latinoamericanas del siglo XXI enfrentan una tensión entre “proteger” la soberanía estatal con políticas inmigratorias más restrictivas y adscribirse a los diálogos y acuerdos internacionales más liberales, que promocionan los derechos y la movilidad humana. Una mayor migración intrarregional, especialmente desde Venezuela, ha llevado a varios países a restringir derechos y libertades previamente reconocidos. Nuestro objetivo es profundizar en este giro hacia la restrictividad mediante un análisis empírico de las tendencias e intenciones legislativas de inmigración en Chile. Metodología: desde 2018, el Gobierno de Chile ha promovido medidas para “ordenar” y “regular” la inmigración. Entre estas, modificar la Ley de Migraciones de 1975. Empleamos el índice de políticas de inmigración en comparación (IMPIC), utilizando el proyecto de Ley 8970-06 y la Ley 20430 de refugiados. Conclusión: la administración chilena presenta intenciones legislativas de una mayor restrictividad frente a la inmigración económica y la reunificación familiar, que se direccionan a constreñir la movilidad humana. Originalidad: el artículo extiende el uso de IMPIC en 2010 a 2019, y lo aplica por primera vez en las intenciones legislativas de un gobierno incumbente para comprender mejor los cambios en las estrategias del país como un Estado migratorio.

• Finn, Victoria & Jakobson, Mari-Liis (2021). Mobility During Pandemics: Moving Borders and Citizenship into Uncharted Territories . Cosmos + Taxis. ISSN 2291-5079. 9(5+6), p. 109–121. Show summary

  During the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, governments implemented travel restrictions and self-isolation, decreasing mobility for most individuals, but also permitted repatriation and ‘essential’ work, increasing mobility for others. How has the governance of human mobility from March to August 2020 affected the concepts of borders and citizenship? Drawing on evidence from countries in the European Union and South America—regions with more fluid intraregional mobility pre-pandemic—we compare states’ reactions to evaluate moving borders and citizenship. We find fluctuating internal borders and external borders pushing further into other territories. By differentiating between people and essential work, governments deteriorated the rule of law since the frequently changed measures undermined individuals’ ability to predict mobility and income. Migrants were additionally affected because of legal statuses of being a resident national, emigrant, dual national, temporary or permanent immigrant, or having an irregular status. Short-term policy reactions may lead to long-term consequences; we foresee exceptions and control mechanisms under expanded Leviathan-style approaches could continue to affect individual mobility in and between countries.

• Brumat, Leiza & Finn, Victoria (2021). Mobility and Citizenship During Pandemics: The Multilevel Political Responses in South America. PArtecipazione e COnflitto. ISSN 1972-7623. 14(1). doi: 10.1285/I20356609V14I1P321. Show summary

  During the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, (im)mobility policies affected individuals' citizenship rights and movement within countries and across international borders. Prior to the pandemic, the mobility regime in South America was relatively open for regional migrants, bolstered on free residence and equal rights. In this analysis, we focus on human mobility and citizenship rights in South America by examining local and national government responses to Covid-19 between March and August 2020. Using databases, newspaper columns, government websites, and legislation, we outline the region's travel restrictions and exceptions, closures and militarization of borders, internal movement procedures, and economic subsidies to ease Covid-19's impact. While the regional mobility regime had already been under stress since 2015, exceptions to border closures and internal mobility further stratified people based on legal and economic statuses. Deeply affecting individual-state relations, access to mobility and citizenship rights such as labor, housing, and healthcare varied between nationals and non-nationals and between regular and irregular migrants. Reactions may have longer term effects, especially for Venezuelans, since the crisis created new inequalities and contradictions within the regional mobility regime, originally aimed at reducing them.

• Finn, Victoria & Doña-Reveco, Cristián (2021). Peaks and Pitfalls of Multilevel Policy Coordination: Analyzing the South American Conference on Migration. Migration Letters. ISSN 1741-8984. 18(4), p. 487–496. doi: 10.33182/ml.v18i4.1234. Show summary

  Regional Consultative Processes (RCPs) have become a central component of migration governance; these are the loci of interstate migration policy discussions. Currently 15 RCPs meet worldwide in every region, except the Caribbean, to form non-binding agreements and to coordinate migration policy approaches. Building on previous reports, migration governance literature, and existent thematic analyses specific to the region, we evaluate RCPs’ multilevel migration policy coordination by comparing national laws to regional topics and accords. We compare two decades of national legislation in all 12 South American countries to regional discussion at the South American Conference on Migration (SACM) since its first annual meeting in 2000. We find synergies and discrepancies between translating regional migration governance strategies from the RCP into national-level migration management. The SACM has reinforced the member states’ focus on regional integration and provided a space for dialog to agree on approaches and best practices. Yet, countries have not uniformly incorporated these into national legislation. Our multilevel analysis reveals the complexities that RCPs face in overcoming regional-national discrepancies in immigration policy coordination.

• Finn, Victoria & Umpierrez de Reguero, Sebastián (2020). Inclusive Language for Exclusive Policies: Restrictive Migration Governance in Chile, 2018. Latin American Policy. ISSN 2041-7373. 11(1), p. 42–61. doi: 10.1111/lamp.12176. Show summary

  Contemporary liberal democracies have employed exclusive or restrictive language, such as promising stricter border control, to ease domestic concerns about increased immigration, while simultaneously maintaining inclusive outcomes by accepting immigrants to support labor markets or to concur with global norms. Dynamic changes in migration flows disrupt this exclusive–inclusive balance known as the policy gap. Aligned with the South American shift since 2016 to more restrictive migration measures, in 2018, Chile’s new administration proposed legislation to replace the migration law, started a regularization process, and issued two executive decrees to change nationality specific visa procedures. We analyze the language, timing, and implementation of the decrees as units of analysis, juxtaposing their apparent versus actual purposes. Since Chile positions restrictive measures as protective of immigrants, this case of migration governance inverses the policy gap debate; now, inclusive language disguises exclusive outcomes.

• Finn, Victoria (2020). Migrant Voting: Here, there, in both countries, or nowhere. Citizenship Studies. ISSN 1362-1025. 24(6), p. 730–750. doi: 10.1080/13621025.2020.1745154. Show summary

  Moving past the literature on states granting migrant voting rights, in this article I focus on individuals exercising rights in order to question the connections between (non)citizenship, political membership, and participation in contemporary societies. With over 120 countries worldwide having enfranchised migrants in some form, the binary of ‘here’ and ‘there’ is insufficient to categorize and study migrant political engagement. This article contains a new typology to classify the four options of migrant voting: immigrant (only in the destination country), emigrant (only in the origin country), dual transnational (in both), and abstention (in neither). While emigrant voting requires citizenship, immigrant noncitizen voting does not, so active noncitizen voting weakens the defining dimensions of citizenship as a concept. As a first application, I analyze differences between individuals pertaining to each of the four types, based on a 2017 survey of 680 migrants in Chile since this country grants extensive migrant suffrage rights.

• Finn, Victoria (2019). Entre el individuo y el Estado: Burocracia pre-y post-migratoria [The Individual versus the State: Pre- and Post-Migration Bureaucracy]. REMHU: Revista Interdisciplinar da Mobilidade Humana. ISSN 1980-8585. 26(56), p. 159–178. doi: 10.1590/1980-85852503880005609. Show summary

  (English below) Mientras algunos estudios migratorios proponen un rol estatal preponderante, otros declaran que la globalización y el transnacionalismo tienen un poder estatal reducido. Existe una ambigüedad acerca de cuán influyente es el Estado de destino, particularmente en relación a los individuos, en materia de decisiones migratorias. En este artículo, se plantea una aproximación teórica-conceptual para analizar la relación entre el migrante (emigrante e inmigrante) como unidad individual y el Estado en regímenes democráticos contemporáneos en términos de control migratorio. Desde una perspectiva de la economía política, se clarifica cuáles son las condiciones políticas y legales necesarias y suficientes durante la trayectoria migratoria. Las decisiones estatales circunscriben quién migra e indican cuáles países de destino continúan intentando ejercer el control mediante lo que se conceptualiza en este análisis como “burocracia post-migratoria”. El examinar cómo estas barreras estatales afectan la agencia de los individuos permite luego investigar la integración de los inmigrantes. Some migration literature present a predominant state role, whilst others convey that globalization and transnationalism have resulted in reduced state power. There is ambiguity regarding the destination state’s influence, as compared to individuals, in migration decisions. To fill this gap, I suggest a conceptual theoretical approach for analyzing the relationship between a migrant (emigrant and immigrant) and the state within contemporary democratic regimes of migratory control. Through a political economy lens, I define which political and legal aspects are necessary and sufficient conditions during the migrant trajectory. State decisions dictate who migrates and show which destination countries continue to attempt to control migration, through what I define as ‘post-migration bureaucracy.’ Examining how state limits affect individuals’ agency allows for supplementary research on immigrants’ integration.

View all works in Cristin

• Szulecki, Kacper; Erdal, Marta Bivand; Finn, Victoria Jean & Stanley, Ben (2023). Do Central European Diasporas Matter for Homeland Election Results?
• Finn, Victoria (2022). Tsourapas, Gerasimos. 2021. Migration diplomacy in the Middle East and North Africa: Power, mobility and the state. Manchester University Press: Manchester. pp. 192. International migration. ISSN 0020-7985. 60(4), p. 231–233. doi: 10.1111/imig.13020. Show summary

  The newest book by Gerasimos Tsourapas (2021) further establishes him as a go-to theoretical and empirical source on migration diplomacy and the politics of migration. The book investigates what role cross-border mobility takes in states’ diplomatic strategies and how it plays out in practice. While the case studies comprise countries in the Middle East and North Africa from 1952 onwards, the book also brings in ‘Global North’ perspectives on permanent migration and state-led strategies to deflect asylum seekers in order to keep refugees in the ‘Global South’. Migration diplomacy is distinct from migration management (or governance) since it lies at the intersection of a state's migration and refugee policies and their foreign policy. It entails how states use diplomatic tools, processes and procedures to manage international human mobility, as well as how states leverage migration to achieve other aims. Strategies can change at the drop of a hat, with immediate effects on interstate conflict or cooperation and on individual migrants.

• Finn, Victoria; Doña-Reveco, Cristián & Feddersen, Mayra (2019). Migration Governance in South America: Regional Approaches versus National Laws, The Dynamics of Regional Migration Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISSN 9781788119931. doi: 10.4337/9781788119948.00008. Show summary

  This chapter shows that multilateral cooperation cannot only contribute to governing migration through developing common practices and shared discourses, but can also influence migration-related national legislations. Our case study is the South American Conference on Migration (CSM)1 from its establishment in 2000 until 2017. Since its inception, the CSM, alongside other regional institutions, has prioritized human rights and policy coordination. We examine how these themes have been built into the CSM in order to focus on our main question: to what extent are human rights and other CSM topics reflected in its member states’ migration laws? To answer this, we conduct two analyses. First, we determine the main themes within the debates of the CSM from the last 17 years. Second, we search for the CSM themes within national migration legislations in the 12 South American countries over the same period to highlight where regional topics overlap or contrast with national laws. We find that the agreements reached at the CSM have had selected effects on recent migration-related legislation across the continent. Based on this analysis, we suggest that while we can observe a positive effect of regional migration governance on the development of national-level migration laws, there are limits to the synergy between these two levels of migration governance.

• Finn, Victoria (2018). The national versus the foreigner in South America: 200 years of migration and citizenship law. Ethnic and Racial Studies. ISSN 0141-9870. 42(8), p. 1374–1376. doi: 10.1080/01419870.2018.1555336. Show summary

  Analyzing over 200 years of migration and citizenship laws, Dr. Acosta explains how ten South American states have constructed the categories of the “national” and “foreigner”. Fear not! Acosta’s captive writing style holds readers’ attention from start to finish, leaving the legal sources in detailed footnotes. The book evidences constitutional and democratic lessons South America can offer other South-South migration regions as well as the European Union (EU) and United States (US). It appeals to scholars interested in migration, law, politics, history, human rights, racial studies, and nation-building processes. The research question is, “Both policy makers and a large part of the regional academic community have portrayed South America’s approach towards migration and citizenship law as being simultaneously innovative and exceptional. Is this truly the case?” (25). Acosta conducts a historical comparative analysis and uses content analysis, although the operationalization is unstated. The overall answer is that the South American model is distinct and, despite its imperfections, indeed offers alternative approaches to some migration and citizenship challenges. ...

• Finn, Victoria (2021). Migrant Rights, Voting, and Resocialization: Suffrage in Chile and Ecuador, 1925–2020. University of Leiden. Show summary

  https://hdl.handle.net/1887/3210897 Emigrants can vote from abroad for about 120 territories and immigrants can vote in about 50 countries. Many international migrants can vote or abstain in both the origin and residence countries, making four distinct types of migrant electoral behavior: immigrant, emigrant, and dual transnational voting, as well as abstention. Migrant political participation affects democratic decision-making and electoral outcomes in two polities, reasons for which both migrant enfranchisement and migrant voting merit scholarly research. My goal is to unpack why migrants decide to vote or abstain in either the origin or residence country, in both, or in neither. I conducted surveys and interviews in Chile and Ecuador, likely cases in which to find individuals with national-level voting rights in two countries. I argue that political resocialization helps to explain individual-level migrant voter turnout. I posit resources combined with ties to people or places in one or both countries constitute a necessary condition and resources with a motive to vote serves as a sufficient condition for migrant voting. Rather than a trade-off of replacement, over time migrants change their positioning and motives to vote in one country or both countries. The case studies shed light on the legal and normative origins of migrant enfranchisement over the last century, differences among migrant voting variants, and how political (re)socialization processes help explain why migrants vote and change voting behavior over time.

View all works in Cristin