A/HRC/7/12 page 12 regional initiatives focusing on migration, but none has yet to fully bring about the free movement of persons which would alleviate some of the concerns about irregular migration in the region.22 32. These are just three examples of regional mechanisms that can better regulate demand-driven migration, thereby reducing irregular intraregional migration flows, but much can be done at the bilateral level to facilitate permanent regularized labour mobility for all skill levels, as well as temporary and circular migration schemes. In a time of increased mobility, enhancing the gains from labour migration and facilitating their more equitable distribution requires comprehensive and coherent State policies, capacity-building and bilateral and multi-stakeholder cooperation.23 33. Central to this approach is the recognition of the scope of demand-driven migration as an inadequate understanding of the relationship between migration and its economic drivers has led to manifestations of xenophobia, whether in institutional policies or at the society/community level. A clearer picture of the economic needs of a given State and the gaps that labour mobility can fill, through regularized channels and with adherence to basic human rights standards, may contribute to the generation of a shift from such xenophobic tendencies in host societies. B. Criminalization issues in focus 1. Interception and rescue at sea 34. The phenomenon of migrants travelling by sea in search of safety, refuge or simply better economic conditions is not new. The term “boat people” has now entered into common parlance, with asylum-seekers, refugees, and migrants trying to reach the closest destination by boat, in the Mediterranean, the Caribbean and the Pacific regions, for example. Since the vessels used are often overcrowded and unseaworthy, rescue at sea, disembarkation and processing of those rescued has re-emerged as an important but challenging issue for States, international organizations, the shipping industry and, of course, the vulnerable migrants themselves. Moreover, in an effort to restrict these flows, destination States have increasingly resorted to interception practices within the broader context of migratory control measures. In both cases reports indicate that adequate protection safeguards and attention to the human rights of those rescued or intercepted have not always been evident.24 22 Christine Inglis, “Migration without borders: the Asia-Pacific in an uncertain world”, draft article of the Migration without Borders series, UNESCO, 19 January 2005. 23 24 IOM, International Dialogue on Migration. United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees, “Background Note on the Protection of Asylum Seekers and Refugees Rescued at Sea”, March 2002, final version as discussed at the expert round table Rescue-at-sea: Specific aspects relating to protection of asylum-seekers and refugees, held in Lisbon on 25-26 March 2002. See also UNHCR and International Maritime Organization (IMO), Rescue at Sea: A guide to principles and practice applied to migrants and refugees, September 2006 (www.unhcr.org/publ/PUBL/450037d34.pdf).