Asylum Policy in the EU: The Case for Deeper Integration

Over the last decade the locus of policy-making towards asylum seekers and refugees has shifted away from national governments and towards the EU as the Common European Asylum Policy has developed. Most of the focus has been on the harmonisation of policies relating to border control, the processing of asylum claims and reception standards for asylum seekers. But this still falls far short of a fully integrated EU-wide policy. This paper examines the basis upon which a joint EU policy can be justified. I then ask whether superior outcomes can be achieved by harmonisation alone or if more centralised policy-making is necessary. I chart the progress of harmonisation and burden-sharing in the development of the Common European Asylum System and explore its effects. I also study the political feasibility of deeper policy integration by analysing public attitudes in the European Social Survey. I conclude that deeper integration is both desirable and politically possible.Refugees, Asylum seekers, Asylum policy, Harmonisation, Burden-sharing

Integration and onward migration of refugees in Scotland: preliminary evidence from the SUNRISE database

Despite the operation of UK dispersal policy for nearly a decade, there has been little examination of the resulting impacts upon refugee mobility and integration. Implemented under the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act, the rationale behind UK dispersal was to 'spread the burden' (Robinson et al. 2003). The housing of asylum seekers to various locations across the UK was employed to discourage settlement in the South East (and particularly London) and distribute costs amongst UK local authorities. The main aim was to relieve housing and social pressures in South East England, where the majority of new arrivals spontaneously concentrated. By instituting a policy of compulsory dispersal, UK asylum policy has removed an asylum seeker's freedom to choose where to settle. This means that since 2000, the UK Home Office has implemented a policy of dispersal whereby asylum seekers are housed on a no choice basis to locations around the country. Asylum seekers in the UK are housed in various locations in England, Scotland and Wales. At the end of December 2006, the top three dispersal towns in England were Leeds, Birmingham and Manchester (Bennett et al. 2007). All asylum seekers fully supported by NASS and dispersed to Scotland are located in Glasgow City (5,010). In Glasgow, housing is provided for asylum seekers by Glasgow City Council as well as the YMCA. A small number of asylum seekers are located in Edinburgh (75) and supported on a subsistence only basis. In Scotland, and indeed within the UK as a whole, the largest concentration of asylum seekers is housed within Glasgow. Furthermore, there are an estimated 10,000 refugees and asylum seekers in Scotland which represent over 50 different nationalities (Charlaff et al. 2004). As a result the discussion focuses upon this local case study. Dispersal policy is one key element of UK asylum policy that determines the geographical distribution of asylum seekers across the country. But nearly a decade since the UK Home Office implemented dispersal policy, knowledge gaps still remain in understanding the onward migration decisions of refugees. Despite the clear aim of dispersal to determine local and national movements of asylum seekers, there has been surprisingly little attention paid to the role played by current UK dispersal policy in onward migration and integration. Policy driven research has tended to focus upon international and national issues to the exclusion of micro level processes (Bowes et al. 2009). Indeed, the majority of literature on dispersal has focused upon critiquing the policy for being driven by void housing and concentrating vulnerable populations in deprived, inner city neighbourhoods. With attention clearly focused upon critiquing dispersal policy, the potential long-term implications for refugee integration have been under-researched. The aim of this paper is to reassert the importance of considering mobility issues in refugee integration research. The current UK asylum policy environment is considered before attention turns to the theoretical developments in understanding refugee integration. Empirical evidence is presented from the Scottish Refugee Council's SUNRISE (Strategic Upgrade of National Refugee Integration Services programme) database to identify the geography of onward migration flows as well as the diversity of individuals engaged in movement around the UK during the asylum process as well as after being granted or refused status. The empirical material is employed to provoke questions of how onward migration may be linked to refugee integration. This includes considering factors which predispose individuals to migrate and how this may usefully provide insights into the process of refugee integration

New issues in refugee research : the integration and onward migration of refugees in Scotland: a review of the evidence

Despite the operation of UK dispersal policy for nearly a decade, there has been little examination of the resulting impacts upon refugee mobility and integration. Implemented under the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act, the rationale behind UK dispersal was to 'spread the burden' (Robinson et al. 2003). The housing of asylum seekers to various locations across the UK was employed to discourage settlement in the South East (and particularly London) and distribute costs amongst UK local authorities. The main aim was to relieve housing and social pressures in South East England, where the majority of new arrivals spontaneously concentrated. By instituting a policy of compulsory dispersal, UK asylum policy has removed an asylum seeker's freedom to choose where to settle. This means that since 2000, the UK Home Office has implemented a policy of dispersal whereby asylum seekers are housed on a no choice basis to locations around the country

The European Union and refugees: towards more restrictive asylum policies in the European Union?

Several scholars have argued that European countries have decided to cooperate on asylum and migration matters at the EU level in order to develop more restrictive policies. In particular, it has been argued that European states have ‘venue-shopped’ to a new policy-venue in order to escape national constraints. This paper puts this argument to the test by assessing the extent to which the development of EU cooperation on asylum matters has indeed led to the adoption of more restrictive asylum standards. The paper argues that, actually, EU asylum cooperation has led to an overall increase in protection standards for asylum-seekers and refugees. This outcome is explained by two main factors: the increasing ‘judicialisation’ of asylum in the EU and institutional changes in the EU asylum policy area that have strengthened the role of more ‘refugee-friendly’ institutions

Human trafficking and the effectiveness of asylum policies

We investigate the effects of restrictive asylum policies on the number and group composition of asylum seekers. We model the choices of refugees and traffickers about whether to migrate and to apply for asylum. Counter-intuitively, restrictive asylum policies do not lead to a reduction in the inflow of refugees or to a better selection of asylum seekers. Instead, we show that under conditions outside the control of policy makers these policies can increase the number of asylum claims and the number of refugees working in slave-like conditions and prevent some of those most in need of protection from accessing it. --Asylum policy,Illegal immigration,Human trafficking

Does Policy Matter? On Governments’ Attempts to Control Unwanted Migration

Public policy making on asylum takes place in an environment of intense public scrutiny, strong institutional constraints and international collective action problems. By assessing the relative importance of key pull factors of international migration, this article explains why, even when controlling for their differences in size, some states receive a much larger number of asylum seekers than others. The analysis of 20 OECD countries for the period 1985-1999 further shows that some of the most high profile public policy measures—safe third country provisions, dispersal and voucher schemes—aimed, at least in part, at deterring unwanted migration and at addressing the highly unequal distribution of asylum burdens have often been ineffective. This is because the key determinants of an asylum seeker’s choice of host country are historical, economic and reputational factors that largely lie beyond the reach of asylum policy makers. Finally, the paper argues that the effectiveness of unilateral policy measures will be further undermined by multilateral attempts to harmonise restrictive policies and that current efforts such as those by the European Union will consolidate, rather than effectively address, existing disparities in the distribution of asylum burdens.public policy effectiveness, asylum, migration pull factors, deterrence, burden sharing, collective action problems, international co-operation, European Union

Do Not Send Us So We Can Become Refugees Again' From 'nationals of a hostile state' to deportees: South Sudanese in Israel

The focus of this report is the collective non-removal policy towards asylum seekers in Israel. This policy, the terms of which have never been clearly defined by the Israeli authorities, applies to most of the 55,000 African asylum seekers in the country. In examining the case of the South Sudanese, most who were deported after the Israeli government ended its policy of collective non-removal toward them; this report also considers the general failure to protect the rights of refugees and asylum seekers within Israel's asylum system. By comparing systems of temporary protection in other countries with that of collective non-removal in Israel, the report shows that Israel's policy falls below standards of temporary and humanitarian protection applied in other countries and constitutes a breach of customary refugee and human rights.The report places the state's decision to end application of the non-removal policy toward the South Sudanese in the context of the current political and social atmosphere in Israel. In the run up to the elections in January 2013, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced that with the construction of a security fence along the border with Sinai successfully blocking the entry of "hundreds of thousands of migrants", his party is "now moving on to the second stage, that of repatriating the infiltrators who are already here." Netanyahu added by saying: "just as the blocking was possible, so too the repatriation is possible and we will achieve this goal." Although these announcements have no legal grounding and the great majority of asylum seekers in Israel cannot be deported to their home countries due to different reasons described in this report, they have a great influence on the asylum seekers communities in Israel. The proposed policies demonstrate that the non-removal policy and the decision to cease applying it toward the South Sudanese responded not only to events in South Sudan but to political and state agendas in Israel which are inimical to asylum seekers and which continue to shape the lives of those who remain here

Asylum legislation and asylum applications: a geographical analysis of Belgian asylum policy by country of origin (1992-2003)

In many European countries a traditional policy and legal response to an undesirable increase of asylum applications has been the change of asylum law and procedures. By making it more difficult to obtain asylum and refugee status, the attractiveness as a possible country of asylum is believed to diminish. In the period from 1992 to 2003 three major revisions of the Belgian asylum procedure were enacted. When speaking in absolute figures these changes resulted in a certain decrease in the number of asylum applications filed. However, upon a closer examination of the number of asylum applications per country of origin, the effects appeared to be quite differential. Hence, factors other than geographical ones, such as the location of the country of origin or distance, must be decisive for the effect of a change in legislation on the number of asylum claimants coming from one particular country. Nevertheless, it has been possible to distinguish seven clusters of countries of origin where similar developments in patterns of asylum applications and shifts therein, depending on changes in asylum law, can be seen

Humanitarian Protection Advocacy in East Asia: Charting a Path Forward

In this article, I make the following three-part argument. Firstly, I claim that despite the fact that a far greater number of asylum-seekers in Japan, Korea, and Mainland China receive humanitarian protection status than receive refugee status, legal advocacy regarding asylum in East Asia disproportionately focuses on refugee law and policy. Secondly, I argue that by neglecting a potentially productive advocacy framework, this disproportionate focus on refugee law has deleterious consequences for the development of robust and humane asylum systems in the region and for the provision of asylum protection to the greatest number of individuals. Thirdly, I assert that international law provides tools for effective humanitarian protection-based advocacy, and outline four avenues for legal advocacy that I believe can lay the groundwork for progressive reforms of humanitarian protection law and policy in East Asia

"Infiltrators" or refugees? An analysis of Israel's policy towards African asylum seekers

This article adopts a genealogical approach in examining Israeli immigration policy by focusing on the situation confronting African asylum seekers who have been forced back into Egypt, detained and deported but who have not had their asylum claims properly assessed. Based on immigration policies formulated at the time of Israeli independence, whose principle objective was to secure a Jewish majority state, we argue that Israel’s treatment of African asylum seekers as ‘infiltrators’/economic migrants stems from an insistence on maintaining immigration as a sovereign issue formally isolated from other policy domains. Such an approach is not only in violation of Israel’s commitment to the Refugee Convention, it directly contributes to policies which are ineffective and unduly harsh