Unaccompanied Minors’ Vulnerability in European Migration Governance: a Comparison between Italy and Spain.

Unaccompanied minors have emerged as one of the most vulnerable categories within contemporary European migration governance. Often described as subject to a “triple vulnerability” linked to childhood, migrant status, and separation from family, these minors are disproportionately affected by restrictive migration policies, fragmented child protection systems, and politicized narratives surrounding migration. This research examines how the vulnerability of unaccompanied minors is conceptualized, shaped, and addressed within multilevel governance frameworks through a comparative analysis of Italy and Spain from 2010 onwards. Drawing on vulnerability theory and critical approaches to migration governance, the research treats vulnerability as a dynamic and contested concept rather than an inherent or static condition. While childhood vulnerability is universally recognized, the vulnerability of unaccompanied minors is also politically and socially produced through processes of border securitization, racialized and xenophobic narratives, and contradictory policy responses that oscillate between protection and control. These tensions generate moral categorizations of deserving and undeserving subjects and practical dilemmas concerning dependency, agency, victimization, and criminalization. Italy and Spain are selected as case studies due to their shared characteristics as Mediterranean frontline countries, former emigration states, and EU Member States operating within a common international and European child protection framework. Both countries have formally recognized unaccompanied minors primarily as children within their national legislation, yet their governance approaches diverge across time and territorial levels. The analysis focuses on key critical junctures, including the so‑called migration crisis, COVID‑19 pandemic, shipwrecks, border blockages, and growing far‑right influence, which have reshaped national priorities and governance dynamics. The study adopts a longitudinal and cross‑sectional comparative methodology combined with process tracing to examine policy evolution and institutional responses over time. Data are collected through qualitative content analysis of legislative frameworks, policy documents, political party programmes, and reports produced by state and non‑state actors, alongside semi‑structured interviews with stakeholders operating at national, regional, and local levels. Particular attention is paid to the role of regions, municipalities, and civil society organizations in translating, adapting, or contesting national and EU policies in practice. The central argument advanced is that the governance of unaccompanied minors’ vulnerability is profoundly shaped by multilevel and networked interactions rather than by national frameworks alone. Local state and non‑state actors often act as key mediators, filling gaps left by fragmented governance or, conversely, exacerbating vulnerabilities through uneven implementation. Variations in political orientation, institutional capacity, access to funding, and local traditions of inclusion help explain divergent protection outcomes within and across both countries. Ultimately, the research highlights persistent inconsistencies between normative commitments and practical responses in European migration governance. By foregrounding the multilevel dynamics and local practices shaping unaccompanied minors’ vulnerability, the study contributes to broader debates on child protection, migration securitization, and the limits of EU governance in addressing complex and contested social issues.