EU management of migration is undergoing an unprecedented transformation because of the use of databases and information systems. Drawing on the concept of border performativity, this article discusses how data is transforming the border. In particular, the article focuses on 1) how the EU JHA databases are evolving, from separate systems each with one purpose to multi-purpose databases, and 2) how the new EU plan – the interoperability regulation – connects and merges biometric and biographical data, as part of a shift from a silo-based approach towards a single centralised information system. The article – based on results of several research projects carried out between 2011 and 2019 adopting mixed methodology – discusses the border crossers’ role in challenging this digital border control, both in light of the current practices of data collection and processing and newly approved EU regulations. The article argues that the transformation of border control practices into practices driven by data processing makes it more difficult for border crossers to manoeuvre the system and legally challenge decisions based on data processing, thus, hampering the transformation of the border from below.
AasKF (2011) 'Crimmigrant' bodies and bona fide travelers: Surveillance, citizenship and global governance. Theoretical Criminology15(3): 331–346.
2.
AdenH (2020) Interoperability between EU policing and migration databases: Risks for privacy. European Public Law26(2): 93–108.
3.
AlivertiA, et al. (2019) Tracing imprints of the border in the territorial, justice and welfare domains: A multi-site ethnography. Howard Journal58(2): 240–259.
4.
AnagnostouD (2014) Rights and Courts in Pursuit of Social Change: Legal Mobilisation in the Multi-Level European System. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
5.
AndersonB (2010) Pre-emption, precaution, preparedness: anticipatory action and future geographies. Progress in Human Geography34(6): 777–798.
6.
AndreasP (2000) Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide. Cornell: Cornell University Press.
7.
BigoD (2014) The (in)Securitization practices of the three universes of EU border control: military/navy - border guards/police - database analysts. Security Dialogue45(3): 209–225.
8.
BirksMMillsJ (2015) Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.
9.
BoehmF (2012) Information Sharing and Data Protection in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice – Towards Harmonised Data Protection Principles for Information Exchange at EU-Level. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.
10.
BordieuPWacquantL (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
BosworthM (2008) Border control and the limits of the sovereign state. Social and Legal Studies17(2): 199–215.
12.
BroedersD (2007) The new digital borders of Europe: EU databases and the surveillance of irregular migrants. International Sociology22(1): 71–92.
13.
BroedersD (2011) A European ‘border’ surveillance system under construction. In: DijstelbloemHMeijerA (eds) Migration and the New Technological Borders of Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillian UK, pp.40–67.
14.
BroedersDHampshireJ (2013) Dreaming of seamless borders: ICTs and the Pre-emptive governance of mobility in Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies39(8): 1201–1218.
15.
BrouwerE (2008)Digital Borders and Real Rights. Effective Remedies for Third-Country Nationals in the Schengen Information System. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
16.
BrouwerE (2020) Large-Scale databases and interoperability in migration and border policies: The Non- discriminatory approach of data protection. European Public Law26(2): 71–92.
CharmazK, et al. (2018) Evolving grounded theory and social justice inquiry. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage, pp.720–776.
19.
Côté-BoucherK (2016) The paradox of discretion: Customs and the changing occupational identity of Canadian border officers. British Journal of Criminology56(1): 49–67.
20.
Côté-BoucherK (2020) Border Frictions. Gender, Generation and Technology on the Frontline. London and New York: Routledge.
21.
CustersB, et al. (2013) Discrimination and Privacy in the Information Society. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
22.
DimitrovaAQuintelT (2021) Technological experimentation without adequate safeguards? Interoperable EU databases and access to the multiple identity detector by SIRENE bureaux. In: HallinanD (ed) (2021)Data Protection and Privacy: Data Protection and Artificial Intelligence, et al. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp.217–252.
FabiniG (2019) Internal bordering in the context of undeportability: Border performances in Italy. Theoretical Criminology23(2): 175–193.
27.
Fernández-BessaC (2019) A theoretical typology of border activism: From the streets to the council. Theoretical Criminology23(2): 156–174.
28.
FerrarisV (2015) Border control: a new frontier for automated decision making and profiling. In: CreemersNGuagninDKoopsBJ (eds) Profiling techonologies in practice. Applications and impact on fundamental rights and values. Oisterwijk: Wolf Legal Publishers, pp.89–126.
29.
FerrarisV (2020)Il migrante datificato nei confini del futuro: senza potere di fronte a un oscuro potere?. In: GozzoSPennisiCAseroV, et al. (eds) Big data e processi decisionali. Strumenti per l'analisi delle decisioni giuridiche, politiche, economiche e sociali. Milan: Egea, pp.135–148.
FrankoK (2020) The Crimmigrant Other. Migration and Penal Power. London and New York: Routledge.
32.
Fundamental Rights Agency (2013) Fundamental Rights at Europe's Southern Sea Borders Luxembourg. Publication office March 2013. Available at: https://fra (accessed 07/08/2020).
GeddesA (2000) Immigration and European Integration: Towards Fortress Europe?Manchester: Manchester University Press.
38.
GlaserNStraussA (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
39.
GoldS (2012) Border control biometrics and surveillance. Biometric Technology Today7(12): 9–11.
40.
HaggertyDKEricsonRV (2000) The surveillant assemblage. British Journal of Sociology51(4): 605–622.
41.
HallA (2017) Decisions at the data border: discretion, discernment and security. Security Dialogue48(6): 488–504.
42.
HayesB (2010) “Full spectrum dominance” as European security policy: On the trail of the “NeoConOpticon”. In: HaggertyKSamatasM (eds) Surveillance and Democracy. London: Routledge, pp.148–169.
43.
HoffmannA (2019) Where fairness fails: Data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information Communication and Society22(7): 900–915.
44.
LyonD (2001) Surveillance Society: Monitoring Everyday Life. Buckingham: Open University Press.
45.
LyonD (2003) Surveillance as Social Sorting: Privacy, Risk, and Digital Discrimination. New York: Routledge.
46.
MezzadraSNeilsonB (2013) Border as a Method, or, the Multiplication of Labor. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
47.
MilivojevicS (2019) Mobility and Proliferation of Borders in the Western Balkans. London and New York: Routledge.
48.
PereraS (2007) A pacific zone? (In)Security, sovereignty, and stories of the pacific borderscape. In: RajaramPKGrundy-WarrC (eds) (2007)Borderscapes: Hidden Geographies and Politics at Territory's Edge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp.201–227.
49.
PickeringS, et al. (2014) The criminology of mobility. In: PickeringSHamJ (eds) The Routledge Handbook on Crime and International Migration. London and New York: Routledge, pp.382–395.
50.
RaleyR (2013) Dataveillance and countervailance. In: GitelmanL (ed) “Raw Data” Is an Oxymoron. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, pp.121–145.
51.
ScheelS (2017) “The secret is to look good on paper”: Appropriating mobility within and against a machine of illegalization”. In: De GenovaN (ed) The Borders of Europe: Autonomy of Migration, Tactics of Bordering. Durham and London: Duke University Press, pp.37–63.
52.
ScheelS (2020) Biopolitical bordering: Enacting populations as intelligible objects of government. European Journal of Social Theory23(4): 571–590.
53.
SegraveMWondersN (2019) Introduction: transforming borders from below: Theory and research from across the globe. Theoretical Criminology23(2): 133–135.
Statewatch (2020b) The EU's Biometric Identity Initiatives: Challenges and Ways Forward for Civic Society Action. Confidential Document.
56.
StumpfJP (2006) The crimmigration crisis: immigrants, crime, and sovereign power. American University Law Review56(2): 367–419.
57.
Van Der WoudeMAHVan Der LeunJP (2017) Crimmigration checks in the internal border areas of the EU: Finding the discretion that matters. European Journal of Criminology14(1): 27–45.
58.
VavoulaN (2020b) Databases for Non-EU nationals and the right to private life. In: BignamiF (ed) EU Law in Populist Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 227–266.
59.
VavoulaN (2020a) Interoperability of EU information systems: The deathblow to the rights to privacy and personal data protection of third-country nationals?European Public Law26(2): 131–156.
60.
WebbM (2007) Illusions of Security: Global Surveillance and Democracy in the Post-9/11 World. San Francisco: City Lights.
61.
WeberL (2006) The shifting frontiers of control. In: PickeringSWeberL (eds) Borders, Mobility and Technologies of Control. Heidelberg: Springer, 21–43.
62.
WeinbergerD (2011) Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now that the Facts Aren’t the Facts, Experts are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room is the Room. New York: Basic Books.
63.
WilsonD (2006) Biometrics, borders and the ideal suspect. In: PickeringSWeberL (eds) Borders, Mobility and Technologies of Control. Heidelberg: Springer, pp.87–109.
64.
WondersN (2006) Global flows, semi-permeable borders and new channels of inequality: border crossers and border performativity. In: PickeringSWeberL (eds) Borders, Mobility and Technologies of Control. Heidelberg: Springer, 63–86.
65.
ZemansFK (1983) Legal mobilization: The neglected role of the law in the political system. The American Political Science Review77(3): 690–703.
66.
ZolbergAR (1997) The great wall against China. In: LucassenJLucaseenL (eds) Migration, Migration History, and History: New Perspectives. New York: Peter Lang, 111–121.
