Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
STUDYING MIGRATION IN SLOVENIA:THE NEED FOR TRACING GENDER1
Introduction
Th e focus of this chapter is the post-1991 production of research in
Slovenia in the fi eld of migration in general and integration of migrant
women in particular.2 Th e structure follows the main historical trajectory
that profoundly aff ected the development of theoretical and empirical
research on migration in Slovenia. Even though many studies deal with
migration processes in general, there is a visible absence of gendered
research, as well as a lack of focus on integration processes. Similarly,
there is very little reference to labour market issues, and no research
about where migrants, particularly migrant women, work.
1 An earlier version of this chapter appeared as a working paper of the FeMiPol project in 2007 under the title ‘Integration of New Female Migrants in Slovenian Labour Market and Society and Policies Aff ecting Integration: State of the Art’. Th e authors wish to thank Luka Hrovat and Marta Gregorčič for their input in drafting the earlier version of the paper.
2 Th e chapter refrains from analysing in more detail the studies of migration of Slovene citizens, though historical research of émigrés and studies of emigration from Slovenia to European countries and overseas (especially to Americas) have been a longstanding preoccupation especially of the Institute for Slovenian Emigration Studies of the Scientifi c Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts. In line with this book’s focus, this chapter also purposefully omits research on highly skilled migration, for instance so-called ‘brain drain’studies – though these are equally rare in the Slovene context as studies of migra-tion in general. It should also be noted that the literature review in this charter does not extend beyond the 2008/2009 time period.
300 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
Slovenia is marked by a lack of comprehensive and timely data on
the number of women migrants and on the discrimination they may
encounter or violence they may suff er.3 Such information could facilitate
the formulation of appropriate policies and provide hard data to advocate
female migrant workers’ rights. Better understanding is needed of the
characteristics of women’s migration for work and their economic and
social contributions to both sending and receiving countries, including
the scale, use and impact of remittances and savings and the expenditure
patterns of women migrants (UNPFA 2006). Using gender as an
analytical category forces us to rethink the artifi cial separation between
male/female, private/public, and production/reproduction. Th e newly
acquired knowledge that women’s reproductive labour is indispensable
for wage labour and the economy, and that without it labour power and
capital cannot be maintained, let alone reproduced on an expanded
scale, can have a major impact not only on the way one conducts research,
but also on the fi ndings and on the policy implications of these fi ndings.
Such newly acquired knowledge has signifi cant implications for research
on globalised migration processes.
Immigration to Slovenia as one of the socialist republics in the
former federal state of Yugoslavia began in the late 1950s. Th e inner
migrations within Yugoslavia intensifi ed with the processes of indus-
trialisation and urbanisation that made Slovenia one of the popular
destinations for economic migration, particularly from the south-
eastern regions of the state. People from other Yugoslav republics
migrated to Slovenia, which off ered employment possibilities. Especially
in the 1970s, when the Western European states that had been the
primary countries of destination for Yugoslav migrants started limiting
immigration, a pronounced economic migration to Slovenia began, as
migrants settled in the industrial cities, the capital Ljubljana and the
coastal region. One of the fi rst studies on migration processes and on
migrants thus stems from the period when Slovenia was still a part of
3 However, see Pajnik, Kogovšek and Zupanc (2006), Pajnik, Bajt and Zupanc (2006), Ayres and Barber (2006) or Cukut and Černič Istenič (2007) for notable recent exceptions.
301Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Yugoslavia: the book by Silva Mežnarić (1986) ‘Bosanci’: a kuda idu
Slovenci nedeljom? (‘Bosnians’: Where do Slovenes go on Sundays?)
presented sociological research on migrant workers from other Yugoslav
republics that had been conducted in the 1975–1983 period. Pointing to
the fact that social distance existed between the Slovenes and the
immigrants from other republics, the author argued that symbolic
confl icts that are played out at the level of diff erent languages, cultures
and national rituals are in fact tensions created by unequal access to
the main sources of power and control in the society. Mežnarić there
ore provided Slovene studies of migration with a powerful semi-
nal study.
Th e fi rst studies dealing with modern migration therefore appeared
in Slovenia before it became an independent state in 1991. Th e wider
framework of Yugoslavia and its inner migrations, which became
particularly salient in the 1970s, were the primary focus of research.
With the above mentioned 1986 publication of the seminal study on
migrants, Slovenia saw the beginning of a more focused approach to
migration, although Slovene social scientists had already begun
publishing articles on migration in the 1970s.4
In accordance with the scope of this chapter, it is possible to
diff erentiate among three periods of pronounced academic interest in
migration in Slovenia, all related to socio-economic and political
developments. Firstly, with the armed confl icts following the collapse of
Yugoslavia in the 1990s, it was the existing situation of the growing
number of refugees in Slovenia that triggered research. Secondly, the
so-called ‘immigrant crisis’ of 2001 generated further academic analysis.
And thirdly, the present situation is marked by a continuation of
theoretical and empirical research in the fi eld of studies of migration
and integration. In addition, Slovenia’s EU membership since May
2004 has also infl uenced the proliferation of academic as well as action-
4 One of the key sociologists in this fi eld was Peter Klinar, who began publishing articles on migration in the early 1970s and is also the author of two monographs on international migration (Klinar 1976, 1985) and of several articles (e.g. Klinar 1993a, b).
302 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
based research. A growing number of scholars are connecting migra-
tion studies with the issue of integration; there is also a rising trend in
gendered research that recognises the current world trends towards
feminisation of migration. Nonetheless, the fact that these are merely
beginnings is highlighted in most introductory chapters, whereas sev-
eral conclusions end with a plea that more research is needed in terms
of labour migration to Slovenia and the question of integration and
integration policies in general, as well as studying migrant women in
particular.
It is worth pointing out that in Slovenia local activists, collectives
and networks had a signifi cant impact on the development of migration
studies. Th e fi rst actions of solidarity with people in detention centres
and the ‘erased’ were organised in 2001, and this consequently
encouraged studies in the fi eld of migration processes, human rights
and on the topic of the ‘erased’ (Pajnik, Lesjak-Tušek and Gregorčič
2001; Lipovec Čebron 2002; Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003).5
Methods used in studies of migration processes
Qualitative methods are prevalent in the literature on migration, while
quantitative methods are used in most studies to a lesser extent in
Slovenia. Th e most common are the descriptive method and overview
analyses of the existing literature and other sources (offi cial reports,
laws, public opinion polls etc.). Analysis also includes legislative
provisions (Dedić 2004) and demographic changes (Bevc 2000). In
order to gain information directly from the migrants themselves, the
interview or questionnaire method, combined with the ethnographic
method, are also popular tools of research. Th e ethnographic meth-
od and interviews were used in Immigrants, Who Are You? (Pajnik,
5 In February 1992, over 25,000 people were deleted from the registry of permanent residents of Slovenia (the majority of them were members of other nations and nationalities of the former Yugoslavia). Th is illegal and unconstitutionaladministrative measure later became known as the ‘erasure’.
303Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Lesjak-Tušek and Gregorčič 2001), where the authors interviewed
migrants in detention centres in order to present their stories. Th e
Bosnian refugees living in Slovenia were also interviewed for research
purposes ( Janko Spreizer et al. 2004). Moreover, research with migrants
(Lipovec Čebron 2002), and the use of questionnaires about all fi elds of
integration (Komac and Medvešek 2005) resulted in valuable studies
of migrants in Slovenia, their position and the problems they encounter.
Th e researchers also conducted several biographical interviews with the
‘erased’ people, though most of the interviews were with the male ‘erased’
(Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003). Studies using questionnaires aimed at
giving a voice to the voiceless, presenting the interviewees as subjects
and not as objects of research. Th is represents a big step towards migrants’
participation through research, which could and should be followed by
their participation in creating the migration policies as a two-way
process. Th e biographical method, however, has only recently become an
important research method (cf. Pajnik, Bajt and Zupanc 2006; Cukut
and Černič Istenič 2007).
When relying on quantitative methods, the researchers operate with
information based on offi cial statistics. Such data are commonly provided
by offi cials of the Ministry of the Interior, or taken from police reports
or statistical yearbooks of the Statistical Offi ce. When possible, informal
or unoffi cial estimates are also used. Other quantitative information is
provided in the interviews with and questionnaires by migrants. Such
data include the number of migrants, percentage of male and female
migrants, their country of birth, and so on. Th ese data enable the
researchers to gather limited information about migration fl ows, gender
and age structure, social status etc., and allows comparisons of the
number of migrants in diff erent years (Pajnik and Zavratnik Zimic
2003; Zavratnik Zimic 2003, 2004a). Even though the opinion of the
people most involved with the migration process, such as migrants, state
offi cials and NGO representatives, is a highly informative and useful
tool for studying integration into a given society, this method has only
rarely been used, though practised in a few cases (Pajnik, Lesjak-Tušek
and Gregorčič 2001; Lipovec Čebron 2002; Komac and Medvešek
2005). Signifi cantly, some of the recent research grants this method
304 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
its due attention (e.g. Pajnik, Bajt and Zupanc 2006; Černič Istenič,
Knežević Hočevar and Cukut 2007).
Research on migrations in the fi rst decade of independent statehood
Refugees from the war zones of the collapsing Yugoslavia
Th e troubled period of the late 1980s brought an intensifi cation of
socio-political and economic problems, growing national confl icts, and
ultimately the break-up of Yugoslavia. Th e 1991 creation of Slovenia as
a state and the wider political and economic changes in the region
contributed to a shift in migration patterns. Th ousands of people from
various regions of the defunct Yugoslavia were forced out of their homes,
and by 1992 Slovenia was supposedly hosting about 70,000 refugees,
initially from Croatia, mostly from Bosnia-Herzegovina, some from
Kosovo. Since the Slovene authorities considered these people to be in
Slovenia only temporarily, the Offi ce for Immigration and Refugees,
founded in 1993, focused merely on temporary protection of these
‘forced migrants’, not recognising their status as that of refugees.
Th e attitude of the Slovene public towards Bosnian refugees
underwent several changes.6 Initially, sympathetic feelings prevailed,
and people were eager to help by raising funds and providing food,
clothes, and toys for children. As war consumed the former Yugoslavia,
the number of people fl eeing their homes rose. Many were staying with
their families and friends in Slovenia; hence, informal social networks
played a crucial part and eased the state’s role of support in various ways.
Th e general expectation and hope was that the situation was temporary
6 Th e term ‘refugee’ is used here despite the fact that legally these persons were not granted refugee status. Th e term ‘Bosnian’ is used to designate residents orcitizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina, though they were in fact predominantly ‘Muslims’, which was an ethnic/national category that was replaced in 1994 with the term ‘Bosniak’.
305Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
and that people would soon be able to return to their homes, which in
many cases proved impossible as time passed. After the initial welcom-
ing mood of help and solidarity, the attitude began to change. Th e war
lasted much longer than expected and the Bosnian refugees had no
alternative but to stay in Slovenia.
Th e situation of the endless perpetuation of the ‘temporality’ of
refugees not only aff ected them profoundly in terms of exacerbating the
precariousness of their position in Slovenia, but also contributed to the
growing dissatisfaction in the society. Stirred by intolerant and biased
media reports, soon the prevalent rhetoric cautioned the Slovenes
against the ‘refugee tide’ (Doupona Horvat, Verschueren and Žagar
1998; Pajnik 2007b). Looking for reasons and explanations for these
tensions, some researchers argued that they were primarily due to
cultural and religious diff erences, since the Bosnian refugees were in
majority Muslims who did not speak Slovene (Klinar 1993b). Th eir
visible otherness in terms of language as well as culture, the xenophobic
argumentation went, exposed them to discrimination and intolerance
(Vrečer 1999a, b). Analysis of public rhetoric between April 1992 and
March 1993 showed that the refugees were reduced to ‘a problem’
and a threat to the Slovene society (Doupona Horvat, Verschueren
and Žagar 1998). Th e position of people with temporary status of
protection in Slovenia therefore drew signifi cant academic interest.
Studies dealt with the situation of Bosnian refugees in Slovenia in terms
of their integration prospects (Vrečer 1999b; Kranija and Nadarević
2000), in terms of ‘security’ and attitudes of state offi cials towards
them (Meško and Lobnikar 2000; Lobnikar et al. 2002), and in terms
of media representation practices (Pajnik 2007b).
Studies on migration in 2001
Th e period between 2000 and 2001 saw the emergence of the so-called
‘immigrant crisis’, when ‘an explicitly stigmatising and discriminatory
media discourse on illegal immigrants gained ground in Slovenia’
( Jalušič 2001, p. 13). Th is was connected to the fact that migration from
‘Th ird World’ countries was slowly becoming more pronounced, which
306 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
brought about a change in the perception of migrants on the part of
offi cials, media and the inhabitants of Slovenia. Th e intolerant public
reaction and anti-immigrant rhetoric also meant that a growing number
of topics related to migration started appearing in the literature, focusing
even more on ‘foreigners’, the ‘erased’, migrants and refugees.
Th e reason for the escalation of the intolerant public attitudes and
xenophobic media discourse was the equation of migrants with crimi-
nalised ‘illegals’, since the media reports focused on undocumented
migrants ‘caught’ crossing the border illegally. Sent to detention centres,
where they faced poor living conditions and questionable legal help,
they were not allowed to move freely, and in reality posed no tangible
threat to the population. Nevertheless, civil initiatives were launched
whenever the nearby local population felt particularly threatened by the
presence of detention centres, and began to resist the settling of migrants.
Such ‘voices of the people’ spread like wildfi re, promulgated by the
media, which encouraged the beliefs of the public that Slovenia was yet
again under threat (cf. Pajnik 2008). In reaction, attempting to open up
the public debate and stop the intolerant public discourse, conferences
were held about what should be done and how to guarantee human
rights and protection for migrants.
Moreover, the year 2001 saw a major breakthrough in the fi eld of
migrant and refugee studies. Th e results of the research project
Immigrants, Who Are You? were published by the Peace Institute (Pajnik,
Lesjak-Tušek and Gregorčič 2001). Th is was the fi rst research to deal
directly with the migrants. Th e poor conditions in detention centres in
which migrants lived were revealed and presented to the Ombudsman.
For the fi rst time the Ombudsman’s Annual Report addressed the issue
of migration processes and problems relating to asylum seekers, whose
human rights were often violated. Th e 2001 report thus included facts
about the Centre for Foreigners (detention centre) in Postojna, where
migrants lived in miserable conditions (Pajnik, Lesjak-Tušek and
Gregorčič 2001; Ombudsman Annual Report 2001).
Th e issue of intolerance in Slovene society was problematised, and
began to be scrutinised by a growing number of social scientists and
307Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
activists, and gradually also to be debated in the media. Groups of
activists organised with the aim to promote freedom, the right to move,
and the introduction of global citizenship not based on ethnic origin.
Th e protests were a response to governmental violation of human rights
of migrants and to the xenophobic attitudes of the Slovene population
towards those who had a diff erent culture, religion or nationality, and
were portrayed in the media as a threat to the Slovene national
identity.
After 2001, studies of migration in Slovenia began to proliferate.
Ethnographic research on asylum seekers and undocumented migrants
(Pajnik, Lesjak-Tušek and Gregorčič 2001; Lipovec Čebron 2002), the
‘erased’ (Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003; Zorn 2003), and the refugees
from Bosnia-Herzegovina (Vrečer, 1999b, 2007; Janko Spreizer et al.
2004) was complemented by comparative analyses of integration
policies (Bešter 2003), and by using questionnaires in order to study
the migrants’ integration (Komac and Medvešek 2005).
Contemporary literature on migration and integration
As one of the countries entering the Schengen border regime in 2008,
Slovenia also had to adjust its migration and border policies, which
seriously aff ected migration and rights of migrants. Th e decline of ethics
in migration policy, which was done in order to adopt the European
Union’s migration standards in Central and Eastern Europe, is a case in
point. Slovenia’s migration policy, already restrictive even before the
adoption of EU standards, has become even harsher. Few people are
granted asylum. Often EU standards are not compatible with human
rights as outlined in the Declaration of Human Rights (Milohnić 2002).
Th is raises important questions regarding how the adoption of EU
principles infl uences the migration process and how it aff ects the human
rights of migrants. Most studies see the Schengen border regime as
a wall which divides the rich and the poor. On the one hand, it enables
mobility inside the Schengen border regime; on the other hand, it
308 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
restricts the mobility of people from other countries. A big challenge
for the EU is thus the adoption of a social citizenship that would
extend respect for human rights (Milohnić 2002; Pajnik and Zavratnik
Zimic 2003; Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003; Dedić 2004). In this context
EU migration policies on the borderline between migrants’ aspirations
and restrictive policies come to the forefront (Verlič Christensen 2000,
2002), as well as studies debating traffi cking in human beings as
a controversial social (Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003) and legal issue
(Oberstar 2003; Peršak 2005).
Research on attitudes towards migrants
Th e rising interest of the research community in issues of migration
could hardly keep up with the fast developing trend of categorising
most migrants in pejorative terms. Th e police and mass media in
particular would often resort to using terms such as ‘illegals’ and ‘illegal
immigrants’, thus criminalising migrants (cf. Pajnik 2008). Th is was
partially due to the lack of information and knowledge about the ‘new’
migrants that were coming from afar, for example from Iraq, Iran,
Bangladesh, China, or the African countries. Such terms were soon
reproduced in public and often associated with criminal activities. Th e
need for a more neutral word was imminent, hence the adoption of the
term ‘prebežniki ’ (migrants), meaning people who are on the move, by
Pajnik et al. (2001).7 As the media also began using the new term it soon
became more common. For the people who were victims of the ‘erasure’
and who had lost permanent resident status, the word ‘erased’ is used
(Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003; Zorn 2003; Dedić 2004; Zorn 2004,
2005; ČKZ 2007).
7 Th e term ‘prebežniki ’ is also discussed at length, for instance, in the foreword to the second edition of Th e Rhetoric of Refugee Policies in Slovenia, which was published in 2001 (see Doupona Horvat, Verschueren and Žagar 1998), and in Lipovec Čebron (2002), where it signifi es ‘undocumented’ migrants.
309Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Th e media discourse has placed much stress on the distinction
between ‘us’ and ‘them’ as diff erent. Such categorisations infl uenced the
attitude of citizens and particularly the inhabitants of local communities
in terms of perceiving migrants and refugees as a threat ( Jalušič 2001;
Drolc 2003). Th ey were portrayed as invaders who disrupt the habits of
the local population, who are an economic burden, who take away ‘our
jobs’, or ‘steal our women’. People would oppose the government’s
intention to establish temporary detention centres – not on the basis
of the inhumanity of such centres, but because of their perception of
migrants as a threat. In order to understand such dynamics, people
who actively opposed migrants were interviewed, and their public
appearances were analysed, revealing that their fears were mostly based
on media reports and stereotypes (Dobaj et al. 2002). Another study
showed that police offi cers had the lowest level of acceptance of migrants,
while social workers, non-governmental workers and volunteers were
the most tolerant (Lobnikar et al. 2002). Public opinion polls about
attitudes towards migrants were also examined, yet no specifi c con-
clusions were drawn (Komac and Medvešek 2005).
Until 2001, the media reports on migrants were often xenophobic
and intolerant; the attitude was particularly anti-migrant and anti-
refugee. After the ‘immigration crisis’ reached its peak and the negative
attitude somewhat changed in 2001/2002, more tolerant and anti-
discriminatory voices began gaining importance in public discourse.
Migrants were no longer portrayed only as intruders and economic
burden, but they were seen as people who suff er, who are without homes
because of poverty, exploitation, traffi cking, war, and so on. Personal
stories of migrants were introduced that changed the initially constructed
negative image of migrants as threatening. Nevertheless, hate-speech,
nationalistic prejudice and racism are still present in the Slovene media.
Th e Mediawatch project of the Peace Institute has been initiated to
closely follow the media reporting, particularly about minority groups,
such as migrants, homosexuals, the Roma etc. Research has shown that
more information and enhanced contact produces better understanding
between social groups, which is confi rmed by the gradually changing
310 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
patterns of media-reporting concerning previously unknown topics
( Jalušič 2001; Lipovec Čebron 2002; Pajnik and Zavratnik Zimic
2003; Andreev 2005; Zorn 2005; Komac and Medvešek 2005; Pajnik
2007b, 2008).8
Most of the studies listed above mention the importance of the
question of integration (e.g. Lipovec Čebron 2002; Pajnik and Zavratnik
Zimic 2003; Pajnik 2007a). However, only one tackles the issue of
integration in specifi cally empirical terms by conducting a survey among
migrants from the Yugoslav successor states on their perception of the
integration process and policy (Komac and Medvešek 2005). In general,
most studies link the issue of human rights and the migration process,
rather than focusing on issues of integration. Slovenia is usually perceived
as a transit country, and most studies claim that human rights are not
fully respected either when undocumented migrants are stopped at the
border or in asylum homes or detention centres. As a consequence, most
literature dealing with traffi cking also includes the topic of human
rights, relating it to practices of exploitation (Zavratnik Zimic et al.
2003; Zavratnik Zimic and Pajnik 2005).
The ‘erased’Th e ‘erased’ people represent a specifi c case. Th eir peculiar situation
and many varied problems related to their loss of status of permanent
residence entered public discourse only around 2001. Soon afterwards
the fi rst literature on this question started appearing. Th e fact that the
issue was made public was a consequence of the organisation of the
‘erased’, established in 2002, and their appearances in the mass media.
In the case of the ‘erased’, fundamental human rights were violated, and
people were left without any legal status. Most of the ‘erased’, or at least
one of their parents, were born in other republics of the former
Yugoslavia, which shows that the ‘erasure’ was based on ethnic origin.9
8 For more on the Mediawatch project, see http://mediawatch.mirovni-institut.si/.9 People with permanent residence in the Socialist Republic of Slovenia prior
to 1991 whose citizenship was of any state other than the former Yugoslavia did not experience the same drastic measure.
311Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Th e result of this administrative ‘erasure’ left 25,671 people statusless
– without documents, which had been destroyed upon submitting them
to public offi cials, without healthcare and social security, and denied the
right to work. Factually, the act of the ‘erasure’ constructed these per-
manent residents as illegal migrants.
Stories from the people who were erased were published in articles
and books; several conferences and roundtables have been organised.
Th e studies portray the ‘erased’ as victims of ‘digital ethnic cleansing’,
and the ‘erasure’ is often described as the ‘civil death’ of thousands
(Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003; Zorn 2003, 2004; Dedić 2004), and as
a policy of severe social exclusion (Dedić 2004). Th e literature on the
‘erased’ deals with the question of integration indirectly, especially if one
looks at the ‘erasure’ as a violent disintegrative process (ibid.).
Integration from a gender perspectiveTh ere are only a few studies on the integration of migrants in Slovenia,
and up until recently none focused on migrant women. Th e perspective
of gender rarely appears in studies about migrants; thus new studies on
that topic are needed in Slovenia. A noted exception is Razpotnik’s
Intersections of Redundancy (2004), a study about young migrant women’s
identities, which bridges the gap by focusing research on the gender
dimension. Nevertheless, it omits further discussion of gendered eff ects
of migration, assuming rather static roles of male and female migrants.
Most recent research, however, contributes to the fi eld by study-
ing migration and integration processes from a gender perspective
(e.g. Pajnik, Kogovšek and Zupanc 2006; Pajnik, Bajt and Zupanc 2006;
Cukut and Černič Istenič 2007).
Th e literature in Slovenia has also not included the topic of integra-
tion into the labour market, only the issue of the importance of
employment for independence and self-fulfi lment. Th e study by Komac
and Medvešek (2005) included a questionnaire on economic integration
of migrants from the Yugoslav successor states. Due to their ‘temporary’
status in Slovenia, the Bosnian refugees were never allowed to enter the
labour market and fi nd employment; they were only allowed to par-
312 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
ticipate in the educational process. Th e reason for the exclusion from
the labour market was the nature of their status and their expected
return to Bosnia-Herzegovina after the end of the war.
Th e labour market perspective is occasionally pointed out in research
on migration ( Janko Spreizer et al. 2004), and when analysed as
integration to the labour market it is primarily done from the per-
spective of discrimination of migrants (Kovač 2003; Žitnik 2004,
2008; Komac and Medvešek 2005). Dedić (2004) points out how
marginalised groups (the handicapped, women, refugees, etc.) are often
discriminated against on the labour market. In her work on policies of
inclusion and exclusion, Dedić touches upon the problem of exclusion
of migrant women, both in Slovenia and in the European Union. In her
monograph Invisible Work, Hrženjak (2007) importantly draws attention
to the feminisation of care work, focusing on long-term unemployed
women and on (non-) paid reproductive work. Th e author points out
how non-paid domestic work is frequently considered to be women’s
work, or a ‘labour of love’, whereas paid domestic work is characterised
by the specifi c concurrence of gender, nationality, race, class, citizenship
and age.
Th e only gendered data are the offi cial statistics on migrants, and
these are quite scant.10 Th e lack of focus on this topic raises a serious
concern. Few studies are interested in the gender perspective of the
migration process; and until recently it only emerged in research that
deals with traffi cking. Th e publication Women and Traffi cking consists of
articles about traffi cking, with a focus on the Central and Eastern
European countries, including Slovenia. ‘It is obvious that sex traffi cking
is highly gendered. Th erefore, the gender dimension must necessarily be
introduced, but it must also remain a central thread in the analysis of
migration movements’ (Zavratnik Zimic 2004b, p. 13). In Where in the
Puzzle: Traffi cking From, To and Th rough Slovenia, the authors issue
a call for a change in migration policy (Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003),
with the argument that it would also infl uence traffi cking in women
10 See Ayres and Barber (2006) for a recent attempt at summarising the available statistics on female migrants.
313Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
for the purposes of sexual exploitation. More initiatives are needed for
the integration of women who are staying in Slovenia, and there should
exist initiatives for reintegration. Both studies on traffi cking in human
beings (Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003; Zavratnik Zimic 2004b) criticise
the fact that the issue of traffi cking in Slovenia is portrayed in purely
economic terms. Th e authors point out the problem that the victims of
traffi cking are perceived as criminals because they are involved in the
sex industry – and not as victims who are forced into illegal activities, or
as migrants transgressing state borders.
Th e literature dealing with integration in Slovenia can be divided
into two groups. Th e fi rst group of studies only stresses the importance
of integration, without attaching any further analysis to the issue
(Lipovec Čebron 2002; Đonlić 2003; Pajnik and Zavratnik Zimic 2003;
Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003; Dedić 2004). Th e study Slovenia and
the European Union – Contemporary Citizenship: Politics of Inclusion
and Exclusion by Dedić (2004) analyses the policies of exclusion of
marginalised groups in terms of employment, social security, culture
and anti-discrimination. It focuses also on women, refugees and asylum
seekers. Concluding that no consistent integration policy exists in
Slovenia and all the existing policies are based only on soft law, Dedić
argues that integration policies fall into the context of general social
exclusion.
Even though the studies from the fi rst group do not present
integration of migrants as a prominent topic, at least some idea of
integration policy or integration process is present. For instance, concrete
proposals have been made concerning the integration of asylum seekers
(Lipovec Čebron 2002). Th ey should be granted freedom of movement,
and the right to social security and employment. Integration should
include education, help in fi nding work and proper information for
everyday life. Employment is one of the most important steps towards
achieving integration.
In Where in the Puzzle (Zavratnik Zimic et al. 2003) recommendations
for migration policy are included from the perspective of traffi cking,
i.e. the programmes and initiatives for integration of victims of
traffi cking. It is argued that integration programmes for victims of
314 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
traffi cking need an individual approach. Th is point is of great
importance because victims can by no means be defi ned as a homogenous
‘target group’; hence individual needs have to be met. Victims of sex
traffi cking are a sensitive group (abuse, everyday threats etc.), who
should be treated professionally and with sensitivity, argue the authors.
Migration – Globalization – European Union (Pajnik and Zavratnik
Zimic 2003) points out the disintegration process in Slovenia in the
case of Bosnian refugees, who were never fully integrated. While the
Temporary Asylum Act contained provisions on integration into cultural,
economic and social life, there is still a lack of defi nition of who is
actually responsible for the realisation of integration measures. Th is
poses a major obstacle to the integration process, which in reality then
becomes either a process of assimilation or a state of perpetual exclusion,
even marginality. A quantitative estimate of about 20,000 migrants
a year is off ered in regard to the future integration of migrants (Pajnik
and Zavratnik Zimic 2003). In the same volume, a study of migration
policies in Slovenia and in the European Union (Bešter 2003) presents
diff erent theoretical models of integration and also the policies of
integration of the states that are close to one of the chosen models
(Germany, France and Sweden). Th e aim of the study was to fi nd
suggestions for the Slovene model of integration. Th e integration
policies of Germany, France and Sweden are introduced, and their pros
and cons are debated. Th e situation of the Slovene integration model is
presented and critically evaluated, including some guidelines for the
future. Comparing integration models of other countries and the social
reality of Slovenia, the author claims that the Slovene model of
integration should be based on cultural pluralism and directed towards
the society as a whole. All migrants should receive help in order to start
the process of integration, and they should have the chance to participate
equally in all spheres of social life.
Th e second group of studies pays more attention to integration
processes and policies – all the more important in view of Slovenia’s lack
of functioning integration programmes. Studies in this group (Zavratnik
Zimic 2002, 2003; Vrečer 2001; Pezdir 2004; Komac and Medvešek
2005) focus on integration of migrants; though a gender perspective
315Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
concerning integration is not included. Integration is mostly understood
as integration into the ‘new society’, while the studies lack economic
and gender perspective. Integration into the labour market is only briefl y
mentioned, merely stressing its importance for one’s existence. Non-
existent integration policies in the case of the Bosnian refugees were
analysed in research and presented as the biggest challenge for Slovenia’s
migration policy (Vrečer 2001; Pezdir 2004). Recommendations on
integration were to include communication, education and health care:
a holistic policy of integration was suggested (Zavratnik Zimic 2002),
considering diff erent types of migrants. Th e policy should address the
needs of migrants, who must necessarily be involved in policymaking
processes. Aiming to defi ne integration policy in order to make
recommendations for the integration of migrants into the ‘new society’,
Zavratnik Zimic (2002) off ers specifi c suggestions that include
a network of multicultural houses, groups for preparing integration
programmes, an information campaign and educational programmes.
Th e author notes that integration policy has yet to be defi ned in Slovenia,
while migration policy should be based on research and the work of
NGOs and active individuals and groups. Public space should enable
contact between migrants and the majority population via the help of
the specifi c programmes (ibid.). In her research paper on the inclusion
of migrants into new societies, the focus is on the ethics of care
(Zavratnik Zimic 2003)11 – which can have an impact on migration
policies because it is primarily a system of values and social solidarity.
Th e multicultural or plural model is mentioned as the best option for
Slovenia because it follows the multiethnic social structure, which
should be the guideline for future legislature.
Th e Institute for Ethnic Studies published a study on the integration
of migrants that makes them an important part of the research process.
A survey was performed among migrants who came to Slovenia from
the former Yugoslav republics and constitute the so-called ‘new
minorities’ (Komac and Medvešek 2005). Th e sample of migrants was
11 For more on the ethics of care perspective for analysing policies see Sevenhuijsen and Švab (2003).
316 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
half men and half women. Several diff erent topics were covered by
the questionnaire, such as the quality of life, school, media, religion,
employment, political participation etc. Th e basic idea is that integration
is a two-way process, where migrants are treated as subjects and not as
objects. Integration as a whole includes social, economic, cultural and
political integration. Th e researchers studied the status of economic
integration of migrants as one of the most crucial factors behind
integration (for instance their opinion about their employment and
payment). Th is part of the study also includes the gender perspective,
but only as a percentage of women who chose a certain answer, thus
analysing the data by gender, not interpreting them through the gender
dimension. Th e study also does not make any recommendations on
integration for future work, yet it can be used for further research in the
fi eld of integration processes.
With the exception of the abovementioned study (Komac and
Medvešek 2005), none of the literature covers the gender perspective of
integration or integration into the labour market. Occasionally, eco-
nomic integration is mentioned or briefl y discussed, while the gender
perspective is neglected, except for a few statistical data that may be
listed for illustration. Th is gap can be connected to the scarce number of
migration studies that deal with the integration of migrants in general,
and the scant number of research projects that deal with marginalised
groups in Slovenia.
Conclusion
Even though international and transnational migration trends have
grown increasingly more complex over the past decades, and the number
of migrant women amounts to nearly half of all migrants worldwide,
Slovene migration and integration policies as well as studies have long
been neglecting the specifi c importance and particularity of women
migrants. While it is a fact that the current migration trends to Slovenia
still point to the prevalence of male migrants, since women make up about
30 per cent of the migrant population, the offi cial migration data in
317Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Slovenia are hardly ever gender-specifi c, and migrant women seem in-
visible. Th e absence of gender-specifi c data hinders the understanding
and appropriate assessment of women’s role and needs in the migration
process. It is essential to understand the characteristics and realities of
female migration – its causes, diff erentiation and gender-specifi c issues,
including the separation of families and particular vulnerabilities to
traffi cking and violence. Women are more than ever actively involved in
the migration process, and scholars often talk about the feminisation of
migration.
Th e existing research in Slovenia applies the gender perspective as
a result of engagement in various international projects that recognise
the current migration trends, or when occasionally responding to the
need for international migration reports, or when addressing specifi c
EU policies and their application in new member states. Th e rare studies
of migration that do incorporate the issue of women treat the gender
question as relevant, yet often without further explication or deeper
analysis. Further research on female migration in Slovenia – at all stages
of the life cycle – is necessary and fundamental if we are to understand
its challenges and opportunities. Th e recent studies, which tackle these
questions by focusing their research interest on the gender dimension of
migration, confi rm this need (cf. Pajnik, Kogovšek and Zupanc 2006;
Pajnik, Bajt and Zupanc 2006; Cukut and Černič Istenič 2007).
Moreover, a new perspective on migration is required if we are to
address the intellectual and practical challenges it poses. More
comprehensive approaches must be adopted, and the evolution of entire
migration systems across space and time should be analysed. New and
concrete research and policy should be adopted in order to achieve
a deeper understanding of past and present migration dynamics in
Slovenia. Th ere is a common standpoint present in most of the Slovene
literature, which, instead of analysing migration as an integral part of
development and global transformation processes, studies it as a problem
to be ‘managed’ or ‘solved’ by tackling its perceived root causes. Th ere are
many problems clearly associated with migration, such as the challenges
of integration, exploitation and traffi cking. Th is discourse of ‘migration
as a problem’ frames much of research on migration, setting its agenda
318 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
and the questions that it addresses, to the exclusion of other perspectives.
Migration can point out the limitations of the national state, which
defi nes the borders and socially constructs the ‘foreigner’. In this context,
another issue is the rethinking of national citizenship in a transnational
perspective, recognising transnational modalities of living (Pajnik
2007a). Studies on the institutionalisation of the legal, political and
social components of citizenship from a gender-sensitive perspective
must be a priority. Th ese should probe the evolution of rights for migrant
women with regard to entry, the impact of equity programmes for
migrant women, and their participation in the political processes. New
studies should indicate more about the ways in which migrant women
participate in community life, in order to infl uence decision-making
and break down ethnic barriers.
Th e policies of (female) migration should be integrated with overall
development policies so as to maximise the capabilities and contribu-
tions of women. Th e invisible and illegal nature of migrant women’s
work and integration into society should be an important component of
further studies in Slovenia, as well as all other social needs, such as access
to education and other integrative institutions (cultural institutions,
participation in public discussions and space), and to social and health
services. Some of these points were discussed in pioneer research
initiatives into diff erent aspects of migrations (Pajnik, Lesjak-Tušek and
Gregorčič 2001; Lipovec Čebron 2002; Dedić, Jalušič and Zorn 2003).
Yet it is necessary to attempt to integrate these themes into a coherent
and dynamic framework that contributes to the overall understanding
of migration today and in the changing context of Slovenia from the
EU perspective, as exhibited in the latest research (cf. Pajnik, Bajt and
Zupanc 2006). An interdisciplinary and coherent approach is needed, as
well as greater mutual cooperation between researchers and institutions.
It is also crucial to relate current migration patterns to historical trends
in Slovenia, the wider Balkan region and the EU by analysing continuities
and discontinuities, and linking the micro-level understanding of migra-
tion to macro-level trends.
319Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
References
Andreev, A.S. 2005, Active Civic Participation of Immigrants in Slovenia [online], at: http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/politis-europe [accessed 7 September 2009].
Ayres, R., Barber, T. 2006, Statistical Analysis of Female Migration and Labour
Market Integration in the EU [online], Working Paper – WP 3, FeMiPol Project,
at: http://www.femipol.uni-frankfurt.de/docs/working_papers/wp3/Statistical_
analysis.pdf [accessed 7 Semptember 2009].
Bešter, R. 2003, Immigrant Integration Policies, in: M. Pajnik, S. Zavratnik Zimic (eds.),
Migration – Globalization – European Union, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Bevc, M. 2000, Vloga naravnega gibanja in selitev v spreminjanju števila prebivalstva
Slovenije v 90. letih po regijah [Th e impact of migration and natural change of
population on the demographic development of Slovenia in the 1990s], IB revija,
vol. 34, no. 3–4, pp. 64–72.
Cukut, S., Černič Istenič, M. 2007, Needs for Female Immigrants and Th eir Integration in
Ageing Societies, WP2: Interviews with Female Migrants – National Report Slovenia,
Federal Institute for Population Research, Wiesbaden.
Černič Istenič, M., Knežević Hočevar, D., Cukut, S. 2007, Needs for Female Immigrants
and Th eir Integration in Ageing Societies, WP4: Focus Groups with Stakeholders
– National Report Slovenia, Federal Institute for Population Research, Wiesbaden.
ČKZ 2007, Zgodba nekega izbrisa [Th e Story of an Erasure], Časopis za kritiko znanosti,
vol. XXXV, no. 228.
Dedić, J. 2004, Slovenija in Evropska unija – Sodobno državljanstvo: politike vključevanja
in izključevanja [Slovenia and the European Union – Contemporary Citizenship:
Policies of Inclusion and Exclusion] [online], Research Paper, Mirovni inštitut,
Ljubljana, at: http://www.mirovni-institut.si.
Dedić, J., Jalušič, V., Zorn, J. 2003, Erased: Organized Innocence and the Politics of Exclu-
sion, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Dobaj, P., Družina, J., Mesarič, A., Stibilj, K., Žabjek, I. 2002, Na drugi strani ceste:
raziskava odnosa lokalnega prebivalstva do prebežnikov [On the Other Side of the
Street: A Research on Perceptions of Immigrants by Local Inhabitants], in:
U. Lipovec Čebron (ed.), V zoni prebežništva: Antropološke raziskave o beguncih
v Sloveniji [In the Zone of Immigration: Anthropological Research of Refugees in
Slovenia], Filozofska fakulteta, Ljubljana.
Doupona Horvat, M., Verschueren, J., Žagar, I.Ž. 1998, Th e Rhetoric of Refugee Policies
in Slovenia: Th e Pragmatics of Legitimation, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Drolc, A. 2003, Immigrants Between the Common European Migration Policy and
Local Peculiarities, in: M. Pajnik, S. Zavratnik Zimic (eds.), Migration – Glo-
balization – European Union, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
320 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
Đonlić, H. 2003, Deset let samote: izkušnje bosansko-hercegovskih begunk in beguncev
v Sloveniji [Ten Years of Solitude: Experiences of Bosnian-Herzegovian Refugees in
Slovenia], Društvo Kulturni vikend, Ljubljana.
Gregorčič, M. 2006, Epistemologija izkoreninjanja zatiranja in izključevanja: Alfabet za
sodelovanje z zaprtimi v Velikem otoku pri Postojni in vsemi ujetniki schengenske
periferije, Časopis za kritiko znanosti, no. 226, pp. 89–97.
Hrženjak, M. 2007, Invisible Work, Peace Institute, Ljubljana.
Jalušič, V. 2001, Ksenofobija ali samozaščita? [Xenophobia or Self-protection?],
Intolerance Monitor Report, no. 1, Mirovi inštitut, Ljubljana.
Janko Spreizer, A., Kalčić, Š., Šušmelj, D., Pezdir, T. 2004, Oblike ljudske in birokratske
diskriminacije skozi pogled ljudi, ki jih uradno nikoli niso poimenovali za begunce
[Forms of Discrimination through Views of People Who Were Never Called
Refugees], Razprave in gradivo, no. 45, pp. 226–255.
Klinar, P. 1976, Mednarodne migracije: sociološki vidiki mednarodnih migracij v luči odnosov
med imigrantsko družbo in imigrantskimi skupnostmi [International Migration],
Obzorja, Maribor.
Klinar, P. 1985, Mednarodne migracije v kriznih razmerah [International Migrations in
Crisis Situations], Obzorja, Maribor.
Klinar, P. 1993a, Osnove migracijske politike [Th e Basics of Migration Policy], Teorija
in praksa, vol. 30, no. 7–8, pp. 646–650.
Klinar, P. 1993b, O beguncih v Sloveniji [On Refugees in Slovenia], Teorija in praksa,
vol. 30, no. 1–2, pp. 75–84.
Komac, M., Medvešek, M. (eds.) 2005, Percepcije slovenske integracijske politike. Zaključno
poročilo [Perceptions of Slovenian Integration Policy] [online], Inštitut za narodnostna
vprašanja, Ljubljana, at: http://www.inv.si.
Kovač, B. 2003, Globalization, Migration and Economic Development on the Margins
of Slovenia’s Migration Policy Dilemma, in: M. Pajnik, S. Zavratnik Zimic (eds.),
Migration – Globalization – European Union, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Kranija, D., Nadarević, D. 2000, Kvalitativno raziskovanje resocializacije beguncev
– študija primera zbirni center Črnomelj [Qualitative Research of Resocialisation of
Refugees], Socialno delo, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 5–11.
Lipovec Čebron, U. (ed.) 2002, V zoni prebežništva: Antropološke raziskave o beguncih
v Sloveniji [In the Zone of Immigration: Anthropological Research of Refugees in
Slovenia], Filozofska fakulteta, Ljubljana.
Lobnikar, B., Pagon, M., Meško, G., Umek, P. 2002, Slovenian State Offi cials,
Slovenian Citizens, and Refugees in Slovenia: How Th ey Perceive Each Other,
European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, vol. 10, no. 2/3,
pp. 192–201.
Meško, G., Lobnikar, B. 2000, Begunci – vir kriminalitete ali vir strahu pred
kriminaliteto? [Refugees – Th e Source of Criminality or the Source of Fear of
Criminality?], Socialna pedagogika, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 375–390.
Mežnarić, S. 1986, ‘Bosanci’: a kuda idu Slovenci nedeljom? [‘Bosnians’: Where do Slovenes
go on Sundays?], ZSMS, Ljubljana.
321Studying Migration in Slovenia: The Need for Tracing Gender
Milohnić, A. (ed.) 2002, Evropski vratarji: Migracijske in azilne politike v vzhodni Evropi
[European Gatekeepers: Migration and Asylum Policies in Eastern Europe], Mirovni
inštitut, Ljubljana.
Oberstar, J. 2003, Migracije, trgovina z ljudmi in zaščita žrtev [Migrations, Traffi cking
in Human Beings and Protection of Victims], Pravna praksa, vol. 22, no. 8,
pp. 23–32.
Pajnik, M. 2007a, Integration Policies in Migration Between Nationalizing States and
Transnational Citizenship, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, vol. 33, no. 5,
pp. 849–865.
Pajnik, M. 2007b, Medijske podobe o beguncih [Media Images of Refugees], Socialno
delo, vol. 46, no. 1–2, pp. 1–11.
Pajnik, M. 2008, Mnenja o migrantih v tisku: potreba po korektivu javnomnenjskega
raziskovanja [Opinions on Migrants in the Press: Towards Corrections in Public
Opinion Research], Annales, vol. 18, no. 1.
Pajnik, M., Bajt, V., Zupanc, S. 2006, Policies Aff ecting Female Migrants: Report on
Key Informant Interviews in Slovenia [online], Working Paper Nr. 8 – WP 2,
FeMiPol Project, at: http://www.femipol.uni-frankfurt.de/docs/working_papers/
wp2/Slovenia.pdf.
Pajnik, M., Kogovšek, N., Zupanc, S. 2006, Mapping of Policies Aff ecting Female
Migrants and Policy Analysis: Th e Slovenian Case [online],Working Paper
Nr. 8 – WP 1, FeMiPol Project, at: http://www.femipol.uni-frankfurt.de/docs/
working_papers/wp1/Slovenia.pdf.
Pajnik, M., Lesjak-Tušek, P., Gregorčič, M. 2001, Immigrants, who are you? Research on
Immigrants in Slovenia, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Pajnik, M., Zavratnik Zimic, S. (eds.) 2003, Migration – Globalization – European Union,
Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Peršak, N. 2005, Trgovina z ljudmi in migracije: pogled od spodaj [Traffi cking in
Human Beings and Migrations], in: Z. Kanduč (ed.), Criminality, Social Control
and Postmodern Processes, Inštitut za kriminologijo, Ljubljana.
Pezdir, T. 2004, Transnacionalne aktivnosti – primer migrantov iz Bosne in Hercegovine
in njihovih potomcev v Sloveniji [Transnational Activities – Th e Case of Migrants
from Bosnia-Herzegovina and Th eir Off spring in Slovenia], Časopis za kritiko
znanosti, vol. 32, no. 217-218, pp. 184–194.
Razpotnik, Š. 2004, Preseki odvečnosti: nevidne identitete mladih priseljenk v družbi
tranzicijskih vic [Intersections of Redundancy: Invisible Identities of Young Female
Immigrants], Pedagoška fakulteta, Ljubljana.
Sevenhuijsen, S., Švab, A. (eds.) 2003, Labyrinths of Care: Th e Relevance of the Ethics of
Care Perspective for Social Policy, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
UNFPA 2006, Female Migrants: Bridging the Gaps throughout the Life Cycle, Selected
Papers of the UNFPA-IOM, Expert Group Meeting, New York, 2-3 May.
Verlič Christensen, B. 2000, Migracijska politika Evropske skupnosti in Slovenija
[Migration Policy of the EU and Slovenia], Teorija in praksa, vol. 37, no. 6,
pp. 1117–1131.
322 Veronika Bajt, Mojca Pajnik
Verlič Christensen, B. 2002, Evropa v precepu med svobodo in omejitvami migracij
[Europe between Freedom and the Limitations of Migration], Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana.
Vrečer, N. 1999a, Smrt in žalovanje v begunstvu: Bošnjaki, Bošnjakinje v Sloveniji [Death, Grief and Mourning in Exile: Bosnian Muslims in Slovenia], Etnolog, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 321–338.
Vrečer, N. (ed.) 1999b, Vsakdanje življenje beguncev in begunk v Sloveniji [Everyday
Life of Refugees in Slovenia], Slovensko etnološko društvo, Ljubljana.Vrečer, N. 2001, When Will Social Exclusion and Temporary Protection of Bosnian
Refugees in Slovenia End?, Razprave in gradivo, no. 38–39, pp. 388–392.Vrečer, N. 2007, Integracija kot človekova pravica: prisilni priseljenci iz Bosne in Hercegovine
v Sloveniji [Integration as a Human Right: Forced Immigrants from Bosnia-Herzegovina
in Slovenia], Založba ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana.Zavratnik Zimic, S. 2002, Slovenski model migracijske politike: perspective in možnosti
države na “schengenski periferiji [Slovenian Model of Migration Policy], Research Paper, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.
Zavratnik Zimic, S. 2003, Etika skrbi v migracijskih politikah [Ethics of Care in Migration Policies], Teorija in praksa, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1143–1154.
Zavratnik Zimic, S. 2004a, Migration Trends in Selected EU Applicant Countries, vol. 6: Slovenia: Th e Perspective of a Country on the ‘Schengen periphery’, International Organization for Migration, Vienna.
Zavratnik Zimic, S. (ed.) 2004b, Women and Traffi cking, Mirovni inštitut, Ljubljana.Zavratnik Zimic, S., Kavčič, U., Pajnik, M., Lesjak Tušek, P. 2003, Where in the Puzzle:
Traffi cking from, through and to Slovenia: Assessment Study, International Organi-zation for Migration, Ljubljana.
Zavratnik Zimic, S., Pajnik, M. 2005, Trgovanje z ženskami: perspektiva žrtve [Traffi cking in Women: Th e Victim’s Perspective], Teorija in praksa, vol. 42, no. 1,pp. 113–135.
Zorn, J. 2003, Izbrisani v svojih lastnih besedah [Th e Erased in Th eir Own Words], Balcanis, no. 7–9, pp. 89–93.
Zorn, J. 2004, Th e Politics of Exclusion: Citizenship, Human Rights and the Erased in Slovenia, Revija za sociologiju, vol. 35, no. 1–2, pp. 61–72.
Zorn, J. 2005, Ethnic Citizenship in the Slovenian State, Citizenship Studies, vol. 2,no. 2, pp. 135–152.
Žitnik, J. 2004, Immigrants in Slovenia: Integration Aspects, Migracijske i etničke teme, no. 2–3, pp. 221–241.
Žitnik, J. 2008, Statistical Facts are Human Fates: Unequal Citizens in Slovenia,Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 77–94.
Top Related