Asylum Recognition Research Articles

Multiple Encounters: Queer Migrants and Bureaucratic Violence

In this paper, we analyze the multiple encounters queer asylum seekers face due to violence embedded in border control and asylum recognition processes. This analysis is based on the reconstitution of two narratives that form part of an ethnographic study, the result of five years of fieldwork with queer migrants in Brazil and Spain. We employ the notion of bureaucratic violence to understand the ambiguities between control and protection in the emergence of the LGBTI refugee as a subject of rights in the humanitarian realm.

Why courts are the life buoys of migrant rights: anti-immigrant pressure, variation in judicial independence, and asylum recognition rates

ABSTRACT A rise in anti-immigrant pressure can reduce asylum recognition rates, irrespective of individuals’ protection needs. Independent courts, which often act as a safeguard of migrant rights vis-à-vis such pressures, have been subject to increasing political interference. Yet, we know very little about how variation in the level of judicial independence – especially among lower courts – affects policy outcomes. In this paper, we assess the impact of anti-immigrant pressure and judicial independence on first and final instance refugee status determination decisions across 28 European Union member states over a ten-year period (2008–2018). We find that the relative independence of courts makes the biggest difference in asylum recognition rates at first and final instance when levels of anti-immigrant pressure are particularly high. This effect can be demonstrated not just regarding asylum appeals, but also for first instance decisions, suggesting that independent courts can have a liberal ‘foreshadowing effect’ on national asylum agencies.

Salience, preference, and asylum outcomes in Germany and the UK, 2002–2019

AbstractWhat explains different rates of positive asylum decisions in Western democracies? Legislators and bureaucrats respond to public preferences on immigration, though studies have not accounted for salience amplifying preferences. Using autoregressive models, I find relationships between salience, preferences, and asylum recognition rates in Germany and the UK, indicating that asylum administration responds to public opinion. High salience and more open immigration preferences are associated with increased asylum recognition rates in Germany, while lower rates in the UK follow high salience and restrictive preferences. Applications rejected under these adverse conditions precede increases in successful appeals, suggesting political pressure or their own preferences lead bureaucratic actors to reduce rates in the UK. These results do not support lobbying or a culture of disbelief as influences on immigration policies. Rather, they raise questions about Western democracies’ adherence to an international rules-based asylum system and highlight mechanisms by which policy responds to public opinion.

Asylum recognition rates in Europe: Policies and performance

A minority of applicants for asylum in Europe gain some form of recognition as refugees, and this has been a controversial issue. From the early 2000s, the EU introduced a series of directives to prevent a race to the bottom in asylum policies and to harmonise policy between destination countries, but the results have not been fully assessed. In this paper I examine the determinants of recognition rates for asylum applicants from 65 origin countries to 20 European destinations from 2003 to 2017. The outcomes of the EU directives have been mixed, but taken together they are associated with increased recognition rates. These made a modest contribution to the trend increase in recognition rates, most of which is due to increased political terror and human rights repression in origin countries. But differences between European countries remain large, even after accounting for origin-country composition and for differences in the adoption of EU directives. Some of this may be accounted for by differences in bureaucratic frameworks through which policy is administered.

Collectivized Discretion: Seeking Explanations for Decreased Asylum Recognition Rates in Finland After Europe's 2015 “Refugee Crisis”

In 2015, during the so-called “refugee crisis” in Europe, Finland was among the European countries receiving exceptionally large numbers of asylum applications. As the volume of asylum applications surged, however, the percentage of positive asylum decisions in Finland declined substantially. In this article, we explore reasons for this dramatic drop in recognitions rates and examine Finnish immigration control authorities’ use of discretion in asylum credibility assessment. Our approach is unique in its application of mixed methods to examine asylum decisions in pre- and post-crisis situations. We found that asylum caseworkers’ inconsistent assessment of similar facts and lack of faith in the veracity of applicants’ claims were essential to the mass denial of young Iraqi asylum applicants in Finland. This finding is important because it illustrates how asylum officers are able to “shift the border,” or generate a shift in asylum decision-making on a grand scale, without meaningful changes in law. Asylum officers, we show, are able to bring about such a shift via what we call collectivized discretion, or large-scale use of discretion, in asylum status determinations to control migration. Prior research on discretion in asylum decision-making highlights the individual decision-maker. This article expands discretion research by offering new insights on large-scale, collective discretionary shifts in the application of asylum law. We conclude that it is crucial that asylum status determinations be anchored in the individual assessment of each applicant's case, as collectivized discretion can lead to arbitrary results in the application of asylum law, potentially forcing those in need of refugee protection to face deportation.

The far-right and asylum outcomes: Assessing the impact of far-right politics on asylum decisions in Europe

Despite decades of efforts to harmonize asylum procedures, large unexplained differences in asylum outcomes persist across European Union member states. Unfortunately, relatively little empirical literature has examined the causes of disparities in asylum recognition rates. In this paper, I suggest that domestic politics impact how asylum claims are adjudicated. I analyze origin-specific asylum recognition rates in 27 European Union member states from 2000-2018. The findings show that right-wing parties in government are associated with lower asylum recognition rates. This effect is strongest for far-right parties. When far-right parties gain legislative seats and cabinet positions, there is a substantive reduction in recognized asylum claims.

Human rights violations and the gender gap in asylum recognition rates

ABSTRACT During the recent European refugee crisis, more than two million people applied for asylum in Germany. Female applicants stand a higher chance to gain protection than male applicants. Whilst small on average, this gender gap in asylum recognition rates varies strongly across countries of origin which has remained little noticed. We analyse the gender gap in asylum recognition rates for the 56 major countries of origin of refugees whose asylum claims are decided on over the period 2012–2018. We show that both general or gender-unspecific human rights abuses and gender-specific human rights violations are associated with cross-country variation in the gender gap in recognition rates – but in opposite ways. Specifically, we find that the gender gap is lower for refugees coming from countries with worse general human rights abuses in the form of political terror perpetrated by state agents but is higher for refugees from countries with a higher prevalence of female genital mutilation and a higher prevalence of child marriage.

Parents in Exile: Challenges of Parenting among Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Bulgaria

Purpose: This paper looked into the experiences of refugee parents with an aim to uncover the challenges of parenting encountered during and after the asylum procedures in Bulgaria - a country placed at the bottom of the asylum recognition scale in Europe. Methods: Qualitative research through semi-structured interviews of eight parents originating from Iraq, Syria and Palestine was conducted during the 3 months’ period in 2016. Results: Empiric research conducted revealed that procedural shortcomings of refugee protection system in Bulgaria causes severe psychosocial stresses to families in that the factors, such as slow and deficient asylum procedures, inadequate social protection and absence of integration programs, have a direct impact on the family life, parenting and children’s wellbeing. Discussion: These results point to a clear need for improvement of the access to asylum right and subsequent refugee integration in Bulgaria. They also call for a systemic approach in which the refugee rights are fully respected and vulnerability inherent to the refugee parents’ liminal position properly addressed. We further recommend the interventions of social work and mental health professions in ameliorating existent stresses of exclusion and marginalisation of refugee families with an aim to advance their full integration rights.

Women-Friendliness in European Asylum Policies: The Role of Women’s Political Representation and Opposition to Non-EU Immigration

Based on the 1951 Refugee Convention, traditional conceptions of refugees typically referred to the politically active male persecuted for his obstructive acts against a communist regime. Yet, today’s asylum seekers are increasingly female with very different experiences of persecution and different reasons to flee their countries of origin. Not all states have updated their asylum policies to reflect the specific situation of women—an issue the refugee crisis in 2015 brought to glaring light. We develop a Women-Friendliness in Asylum Index (WFA), which reveals clusters of states within the European Union (EU) with a solid implementation of women’s rights in their asylum recognition and reception framework and others whom have yet to adapt their asylum policies to consider women’s needs. In addition, we show that women’s political representation is a key factor in explaining women-friendly asylum policies, whereas critical attitudes toward immigrants from non-EU countries retard the gendered revision of European asylum policies.

“Memorless”

Though it is crucial to the recognition of asylum seekers as refugees, the discussion about their mediated visual representations within host countries’ media is marginalized in academic discourse. Therefore, this study analyzes the visual coverage of asylum seekers’ protests, held in Israel, between December 2013 and January 2014. A qualitative analysis of 79 photographs, published in two newspapers during that time, reveals that asylum seekers are visually framed as (1) imminent threat to society, and (2) as victims in circumstances they cannot influence. Moreover, (3) they are dehumanized through various visual techniques. These visual framings turn the asylum seekers into “memorless” entities—people carrying neither a unique collective memory nor life stories—thus further complicating asylum seekers’ plight.

Do asylum recognition rates in Europe respond to transnational terrorism? The migration-security nexus revisited

Scholars assume that transnational terrorism has culminated in policy securitization with expansive restrictions on migration. I evaluate the impact of transnational terrorism on asylum recognition among European Union and Schengen member-states from 1980 until 2007. I unpack the impact of terrorism according to the location of incidents. The article illustrates that policy tightening is more pronounced when recipient states experience terrorism on their own soil or against their citizens. In contrast, measuring transnational terrorism as attacks worldwide mutes the impact of security concerns. The findings show that policy stringency is not directed against particular sources of terrorism and demonstrates that the humanitarian principles underpinning asylum recognition have not been eroded by terrorism. The article thus represents an important step in differentiating between channels of impact whereby transnational terror shapes policy outcomes.

The Europeanization of asylum policy: an assessment of the EU impact on asylum applications and recognitions rates

Asylum policy in the European nation-states has been a subject of increasing influence form the European Union over the last 12 years since the call for the establishment of a Common European Asylum System. This article presents an assessment of the EU impact on the asylum policy outcomes in the 27 member states, Norway and Switzerland. The article focuses on three central hypotheses about the effects of Europeanization – a race to the bottom, convergence and burden sharing. Using aggregate and origin-specific asylum data for the period 1999–2010 provided by the UNHCR, we show that the increasing Europeanization of asylum policy has not resulted in a race to the bottom in which asylum recognition rates and the numbers of admitted refugees have eroded. Contrary to existing literature, we find some evidence for convergence of the overall asylum recognition rates but important national differences in the recognition of applicants from the same country of origin persist. Europeanization has not led to more equal distribution of the applications and recognitions of asylum status in Europe. Overall, the EU has had only a limited impact on the changes in asylum policy outcomes.

Political Asylum and Sovereignty-Sharing in Europe

AbstractIn focusing on the relationships between asylum recognition rates and the different institutional arrangements through which European states share or preserve their sovereignty, this article seeks to show how sovereignty-sharing affects the right to political asylum in practice. After a qualitative overview of variations in sovereignty-sharing forms, the article presents the results from a multiple regression analysis of the relationship between legal and institutional frames of asylum decision-making in 17 West European countries (EU-15, Norway and Switzerland) and the asylum recognition rates in these countries. The article ends with a brief assessment of the significance of the results for a potential policy change in the European Union.

Asylum Recognition Rates in Western Europe

Substantial variation in recognition rates for asylum claims from the same countries of origin subjects refugees to unfair and discriminatory treatment. This article demonstrates the extent of variation and lack of convergence over the period from 1980 to 1999 across Western European destination countries. Refugee interest groups also suspect that political and economic conditions in destination countries, as well as the number of past asylum claims, unduly affect recognition rates. This article estimates the determinants of asylum recognition rates. Origin-specific recognition rates vary, as they should, with the extent of political oppression, human rights violations, interstate armed conflict, and events of genocide and politicide in countries of origin. Recognition rates for the full-protection status are lower only in times of high unemployment in destination countries. Such rates are also lower if many asylum seekers from a country of origin have already applied for asylum in the past.

Asylum Recognition Rates in Western Europe - Their Determinants, Variation and Lack of Convergence

Substantial variation in recognition rates for asylum claims from the same countries of origin and therefore prima facie equal merit subjects refugees to unfair and discriminatory treatment. This article demonstrates the extent of variation and lack of convergence over the period 1980 to 1999 across Western European destination countries. Refugee interest groups also suspect that political and economic conditions in destination countries as well as the number of past asylum claims unduly impact upon recognition rates. This article estimates the determinants of asylum recognition rates. Origin-specific recognition rates vary, as they should, with the extent of political oppression, human rights violations, inter-state armed conflict and events of genocide and politicide in countries of origin. Recognition rates for the full protection status only are lower in times of high unemployment in destination countries. Such rates are also lower if many asylum seekers from a country of origin have already applied for asylum in the past.