Authors: Müge Dalkıran & Pelin Kılınçarslan, Koç University (KU
This working paper offers a conceptual and empirical investigation of the factors shaping the conclusion and legitimacy of Intergovernmental Return Frameworks (IRFs), a central instrument of the European Union’s (EU) return and readmission cooperation with non-EU countries. It suggests that the success of return negotiations cannot be assessed solely by whether a framework is concluded, as formal agreement does not necessarily translate into legitimate, sustainable, or effectively implemented cooperation. Drawing on theoretical literature, document analysis, expert interviews, and previous FAiR research, the paper develops an analytical framework that examines the conclusion of IRFs and their perceived legitimacy as distinct but interconnected dimensions of negotiation success.
The paper identifies several factors influencing the conclusion of IRFs, including asymmetries of interests and bargaining power, conditionality and issue linkage, negotiation strategies, diplomatic agency, and political timing. It examines how these factors interact with each other within broader political and institutional contexts to facilitate or constrain agreement.