ABSTRACT
Statist approaches rooted in the Weberian tradition tend to see the operation of formal and informal practices as dichotomous. Moreover, informal practices are largely seen to enervate state function. Using the immigration policy sphere in the Russian Federation, this chapter demonstrates how formal and informal practices are not only a normal part of state function, but can also be essential for reconciling conflicting state priorities and practices. I use Migdal’s definition of the state as comprising image and practice to argue that contradictions arising in the migration policy sphere can be overshadowed if a key policy practice is erected as a symbol of immigration control. To do so, I analyse two policy mechanisms: migration quotas and deportations, respectively, within their surrounding packages of policy and implementation practices. I then argue that by selecting one key practice to elevate to the level of symbolic immigration control, state actors can draw attention away from contradictions in the policy sphere that may be viewed as evidence of ineffectiveness within the system.
