Problematizing Migration: Governing Rationalities, Programs and Technologies in Ecuador's "Government of Migrants"

Abstract

The adoption of Ecuador’s 2008 Constitution during Rafael Correa’s presidency marked an unprecedented rupture in the country’s migration policy. For the first time, a constitutional text declared that no human being could be deemed illegal on the basis of migratory status and enshrined human mobility as a fundamental right. This transformation positioned Ecuador at the forefront of progressive migration policy frameworks. However, the migration regime that emerged was complex and deeply tensioned. Constitutional norms that expanded mobility rights coexisted with regulations that continued to rely on mechanisms of control and restriction. This tension lies at the core of this dissertation, which examines how migration was constructed and governed as a central object of governmental intervention during Correa’s administration (2007–2017). It argues that the tension between a progressive constitutional framework and a restrictive regulatory regime is not merely an inconsistency. Instead, it constitutes a structural feature of how this government produced and managed migration as an object of governance. Drawing on Foucauldian governmentality and complemented by the perspective of symbolic politics, the study analyzes migration policy as a set of deliberate practices that, through specialized knowledge and regulatory mechanisms, bring particular problems into existence (Dean, 2010; Foucault, 1992; Rose, 1999). In this sense, the research explores the rationalities, programs, and technologies through which migration was rendered thinkable and governable. Empirically, the analysis is based on an extensive corpus of legal and non-legal documents, and 23 semi-structured interviews with high-ranking officials. The findings indicate that migration regulation during Correa’s administration was largely structured around the figure of the Ecuadorian emigrant. This configuration enabled a progressive framework for human mobility, yet marginalized the rights and experiences of foreign immigrants. While indirectly included in the broader policy shift, their position remained secondary and often invisible. Consequently, progressive reforms concerning non-citizens remained largely symbolic, serving primarily to project an image of ethical leadership and internationally legitimate migration governance. The dissertation further shows that progressive reforms coexisted with enduring historical problematizations of migration rooted in security logics, developmentalist aspirations, and colonial discursive frameworks. These continuities enabled restrictive legal norms and administrative practices to persist within an ostensibly progressive constitutional order. Overall, the study argues that Ecuador’s migration regime during this period functioned less as a rupture with past practices than as a rearticulation of long-standing modes of governing mobility.