PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
The project has set out to investigate the relationship between the securitization of migration and corruption – through an investigation of everyday corruption in relation to (internal) border control practices in Malaysia and Greece. In doing this, the project set out to examine both the lived experiences of corruption as well as the institutional and contextual factors that influence its proliferation.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT
The development of the project, particularly in relation to the Greek case, has been profoundly impacted by the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ in Europe. As the project was initiated in early 2015, refugee arrivals to Greece started seeing an unprecedented increase and over the first two years of the project the events we know associate with the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ created both chaos and a humanitarian emergency in various sites throughout the country. For the project, the refugee crisis generated new questions around the relationship between securitization and the management of the crisis – particularly in relation to the new (informal and formal) economic geographies that developed in critical border sites (notably Lesvos, where the bulk of the fieldwork has been conducted). The project has, as a result, come to expand its focus towards the broader ‘disaster capitalist’ logics through which the crisis was governed in Greece, which has allowed me to deepen the analysis of the institutional and contextual factors that impact the proliferation of corruption and other forms of ‘informalities’ in the area of migration management and control (see below).

For the broader development of the project the refugee crisis also meant that the fieldwork in Greece was more time-consuming and complicated than initially anticipated – resulting in that the fieldwork in Malaysia was postponed somewhat. Aside from this, and as will be visible in sections to come, the work on Malaysia has largely followed what was laid out in the project proposal. I have here been able to write and publish several articles on the relationship between securitization of migration and corruption – and also proposed new theoretical ways that we can approach this.

THREE MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE PROJECT
1. The first main contribution of the project is that it has provided one of the first ever in-depth and theoretical reading of the migration-corruption nexus. Through combining a theoretical reading of securitized borders(capes) with an in-depth ethnographic account of migrants’ (as well as enforcement officers') lived experiences of corruption in relation to immigration policing, the project has shown how corruption is not merely part of the border performance, but that it may also become performative of the border itself (see Franck 2018a). As such, corruption not only comes to influence the permeability of the border (i.e. how migrants through the payment of bribes are able to ‘illegally’ cross borders) – but also why and where the border is enforced (ibid).

2. The second main contribution of the project is that it has proposed new ways of theorizing the proliferation of everyday corruption. More precisely, the project has shown how we can read everyday corruption in the context of migration and borders as ‘a space for negotiation’ (Anjaria 2011, see Franck 2018a) and a form ‘quite encroachment’ (Bayat 2010, see Franck 2019). What these frameworks suggest is that corruption is not merely a tactic employed by migrants to avoid arrests, detention or deportation, but also that corrupt arrangements in various ways infringe on the state’s ability to control migrants and ‘produce’ them as particular legal subjects (see also Franck 2017a).

3. The third contribution of the project relates to the outcome of the securitization of migration more broadly. Here, the project has brought forward new insight regarding how securitized migration control practices in the context of the European ‘refugee crisis’ has promoted a ‘disaster capitalist’ logic in the management of refugee flows (Franck 2018b): in which predatory logics come to influence both control and care efforts in border zones (Franck 2017b; Franck and Pallister-Wilkins forthcoming) which also promote new and particular forms of informality (Franck 2017a). In my published and forthcoming work, these informalities are visible in how migrants and refugees read and use official documents in ways that run counter to what the state anticipates (Franck 2017a) as well as in how they actively navigate the legal system, through for example moving in and out of legal status (Franck 2018a; Franck 2019; Franck, Brandström Arellano and Anderson 2018; Franck and Vigneswaran 2019). Finally, as part of the effort to unpack the workings of securitization in the area of migration, the project has also brought forward a unique analysis of securitization as both a gendered and racial process (Gray and Franck 2019).

NEW RESEARCH QUESTIONS GENERATED THROUGH THE PROJECT
Aside from what has been described above (in relation to for example disaster capitalist logics), the project has prompted new questions regarding the various tactics that migrants employ in order to navigate increasingly securitized migration and border regimes. While such tactics (such as using gallows humor, employing modern technologies, etc.) may not be immediately intelligible, they play an important role in how refugees and migrants endure and navigate their journeys. In my forthcoming work I therefore want to build on the insights and findings from this project to explicitly examine these covert or hidden tactics.

INTERNATIONAL DIMENSIONS OF THE PROJECT
The project has greatly benefited from collaborations with scholars both within and beyond my own department. Over the course of the project, I have developed a close collaboration with scholars at Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies at the University of Amsterdam (notably Darshan Vigneswaran and Polly Pallister-Wilkins) – engaging in joint writing projects, conference panels and presentations and research exchanges. I have also worked closely together with scholars at University of York (Harriet Gray and Alice Nah), through joint publications and conference panels. Aside from this, I have worked together with several scholars in and from Greece to develop the analysis of the refugee crisis and its impact (notably Ioanna Tsoni, Malmö Högskola, Evie Papada and Antonis Vradis at Loughborough University and Alexandra Bousiou who is now a PhD student at my own department).

DISSEMINATING RESULTS
The results of the project have mainly been disseminated to academic audiences through seven peer-reviewed articles and five international conference presentations. In addition, I have been invited to present the work at research seminars in the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands and at Warwick University, the UK and have been invited to take part in several smaller workshops on the ‘refugee crisis’ organized by Loughborough University, the UK, as well as the University of Amsterdam.

In disseminating knowledge outside of academia, I have participated in a large number of public debates and events around migration and the ‘refugee crisis’, performed public lectures in schools, museums and other public settings, been interviewed in media reports and podcasts. As a recognition of this work the Chancellor of the University of Gothenburg nominated me for Stiftelsen Åforsks Kunskapspris in 2016.