Smuggling critique into impact: Research design principles for critical and actionable migration research

The article examines how academics can mobilize their epistemic resources to engage with justice claims able to challenge border violence. Many migration scholars would like to find ways to mobilize their knowledge to resist migrants’ human rights violations. Despite increased focus on research impact, border violence is only increasing. On the one hand, policy makers do not act on scholarly recommendations that are highly critical, but not necessarily actionable. On the other hand, when scholarly recommendations are actionable, legal and policy changes do not necessarily result in meaningful improvements for refugees’ and other migrants’ dignity. As a result, there is a dichotomy between applied research that is not critical and critical research that is not actionable. Against this backdrop, this article explores how migration researchers can reclaim the meaning of impact and smuggle critique into the term. The article is based on auto-biographical explorations of what it means for an anthropologist to produce knowledge on migration from within law faculties and as policy officer and research consultant for human and refugee rights organizations. Based on this material, the article argues that migration scholars who seek justice should not produce more evidence, but rather take law seriously as a knowledge practice. The article develops three design principles for migration scholars who seek to resist in the short- and medium-term migration laws and policies that violate human right principles. First, build knowledge alliances with justice actors. Second, theorize knowledge needs in justice claims. Third, broker the validity of truth claims.