A TYPOLOGY OF STATELESSNESS BENEDIKT BUECHEL* Although statelessness within the modern state system has many facets, there has not been any attempt to work out a formal typology. When conceptualising statelessness in singular terms, theorists miss something important: they fail to capture the full moral scope of statelessness. This article addresses this shortcoming. It is divided into four parts. First, I will show how statelessness is categorised under the UN’s framework. Second, I will turn to legal and social theory to argue that statelessness can be best understood through the two concepts of responsibility and recognition. Third, I will identify three different subtypes of statelessness. They derive from the source of nationality deprivation and include voluntary statelessness, structural statelessness and denigrative statelessness. Finally, I will offer some concluding remarks. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction........................................................................................................... 237 A De Jure Vis-à-Vis De Facto Statelessness ................................................ 239 Statelessness as Responsibility and Recognition .................................................. 239 A Nationality as a Legal Concept ................................................................. 239 1 Object Versus Subject Theory...................................................... 240 B Legal and Social Recognition ................................................................... 243 Three Subtypes of Statelessness ........................................................................... 245 A Voluntary Statelessness ............................................................................ 246 B Structural Statelessness............................................................................. 248 C Denigrative Statelessness ......................................................................... 251 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 255 INTRODUCTION In 2014, marking the 60th anniversary of the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (‘1954 Statelessness Convention’),1 the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (‘UNHCR’) launched the global #IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness within the modern state system.2 In its press release, UNHCR described various characteristics that it associates with this condition. Some of these characteristics are the consequences that people suffer as a result of statelessness: having no legal identity, no passport, no vote and no opportunity to get an education. Other reasons why people are made stateless include: ethnic, religious or gender discrimination and regional instability. The press release also distinguishes between nationality and citizenship. One does not have to look any further to realise that statelessness is complex. * 1 2 Benedikt Buechel is a PhD candidate in the Department of Social and Political Science at the University of Edinburgh. They may be reached at benedikt.buechel@gmail.com. This article has been greatly improved by the comments and suggestions of Kieran Oberman, Elizabeth Cripps, and Lukas Slothuus. I am also grateful to the two anonymous reviewers. The term ‘stateless person’ is a misnomer since ‘in Roman law persona was somebody who possessed civil rights’: Hannah Arendt, Responsibility and Judgment (Schocken Books 2003) 12. ‘UNHCR Launches 10-year Global Campaign to End Statelessness’, UNHCR (Blog Post, 24 November 2014) <https://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2014/11/545797f06/unhcr-launches10-year-global-campaign-end-statelessness.html>, archived at <https://perma.cc/FNM66NNB>.