Many hypotheses have been formulated to elucidate the underlying causes of irregular migration. In essence, two opposing arguments have been advanced. On the one hand, the “zombie state” concept explains irregularity as the result of states’ inability to control migration flows in the context of globalisation. Conversely, the notion of an “almighty state” posits that, to advance its own or other social interests, the state may “produce” or “favour” the existence of irregularity. While these theories undoubtedly shed light on crucial aspects, they are constrained by three significant limitations. Firstly, they offer mono-causal explanations, which fail to account for the complex and multifaceted nature of irregular migration. Secondly, they tend to overstate the state’s role, even when it is declining. Thirdly, they cannot explain the emergence of irregular migration within different contexts. These theoretical limitations can be linked, among various causes, to the general lack of comparative empirical research on irregular migration.

The presentation will discuss the findings of a comparative study of irregular migration within two distinct contexts. In particular, this study examines the migratory trajectories and lived experiences of Ecuadorian irregular migrants residing in Amsterdam and Madrid. The objective was to ascertain the specific forms of irregular migration in different societies and how it manifests. The presentation will discuss three aspects: the legal trajectories of migrants and their experiences of controls, the labour trajectories, and access to crucial necessities such as housing and healthcare. Based on this analysis, which demonstrates the existence of different irregular migration realities, a proposal for a systemic, differential understanding of irregular migration will be advanced.