↓ Skip to main content

Claiming control: cooperation with return as a condition for social benefits in Austria and the Netherlands

Overview of attention for article published in Comparative Migration Studies, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Claiming control: cooperation with return as a condition for social benefits in Austria and the Netherlands
Published in
Comparative Migration Studies, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40878-018-0085-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sieglinde Rosenberger, Sabine Koppes

Abstract

Theoretically embedded in the migration/social policy nexus, this paper investigates cooperation with return (CWR) as a policy tool to remove practical deportation barriers for third-country nationals pending removal. Based on legal and policy documents and expert interviews with stakeholders in Austria and the Netherlands, the paper asks how CWR is implemented and what influence it has, both on migration control aims and on access to social rights. We argue that the politicization of the issue and diverging interests between policy networks of welfare and migration affect the regulation and implementation of the tool. By comparing the use of CWR within two country contexts, the analysis presented here adds valuable insights on features of governmental instruments in response to the "deportation gap". The paper further adds to the literature on sanction-oriented, personalized migration policies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 20%
Student > Master 4 20%
Researcher 3 15%
Professor 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 40%
Arts and Humanities 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,701,873
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Comparative Migration Studies
#78
of 295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,374
of 345,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Comparative Migration Studies
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 295 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.