Abstract
This chapter aims to investigate how similar the European Member States are in the treatment of Syrian asylum seekers, measuring differences and relating them to the political framework of the European Union. The cluster-analysis method is applied to reveal the features in national asylum procedures grouping European Member States by level of asylum-related migration pressure experienced in recent years. To assess the convergence of the Common European Asylum System, differences in the distribution and recognition rates issued by European Member States are explored taking account of the age-specific demographic patterns of Syrian asylum seekers from year-to year. Results give evidence of national consistencies in the application of the European asylum-related directives for vulnerable targets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bakewell, O. (1999). Can we ever rely on refugee statistics? Radical Statistics, 72, 3–15. www.radstats.org.uk/no072/article1.htm
Beine, M., et al. (2016). Comparing immigration policies: An overview from the IMPALA database. International Migration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12169.
Brekke, J., & Brochmann, G. (2014). Stuck in transit: Secondary migration of asylum seekers in Europe, national differences, and the Dublin regulation. Journal of Refugee Studies, 28(2), 145–162.
COM. (2016a). 197 final report Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council towards a reform of the Common European Asylum System and enhancing legal avenues to Europe, Brussels 6.4.2016.
COM. (2016b). 270 final Proposal of Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third country national or a stateless person (recast), Brussels, 6.5.2016.
COM. (2016c). 272 final, European Commission Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of Eurodac, Brussels, 4.5.2016, 2016/132 COD.
Costello, C. (2012). Courting Access to Asylum in Europe: Recent Supranational Jurisprudence Explored. Human Right Law Review, 12(2), 287–339.
Disney, G., et al. (2015). Evaluation of existing migration forecasting methods and models, Report for the Migration Advisory Committee. Southampton: ESRC Centre for Population Change.
Durieux, J. F. (2013). The vanishing refugee: How EU asylum law blurs the specificity of refugee protection. In H. Lambert, J. McAdam, & M. Fullerton (Eds.), The global reach of European Refugee Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ECRE. (2013). European Council on Refugees and Exiles, Dublin II Regulation: Lives on Hold, February 2013, Brussels. http://www.ecre.org/component/content/article/56-ecre-actions/317-dublin-ii-regulation-lives-on-hold.html
European Commission. (2016a). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, COM(2016) 270, 4.5.2016/0133 COD.
European Commission. (2016b). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Towards a Reform of the Common European Asylum System and Enhancing Legal Avenues to Europe, Brussels, 6.4.2016, COM (2016) 197 final.
European Commission. (2015). Evaluation of the Dublin III Regulation. DG Migration and Home Affairs, Final report.
Eurostat. (2016). Asylum quarterly report first time asylum applicants and first instance decisions on asylum applications: First quarter 2017. EUROSTAT Statistics Explained.
EU Directive 2013/32/EU. (2013). Procedures for Granting and Withdrawing International Protection (recast). Official Journal of the European Union.
EU Directive 2008/115/EC On common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals. Official Journal of the European Union.
European Parliament. (2000). Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. 2000/C 364/01. Official Journal of European Communities. 18.12.2000.
EU Regulation 862/2007. (2007). On Community statistics on migration and international protection and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 311/76 on the compilation of statistics on foreign workers. Official Journal of the European Union.
Ghio, D., Gioia, C., Sermi, F., & Tarchi, D. (2018). Measuring asylum-related migration pressure. Joint Research Centre European Commission, poster presentation, European Association Population Studies, Annual Meeting 2018, Brussels.
Gonzalez-Settlage, R. (2012). Indirect Refoulement: Challenging Canada’s participation in the Canada-United States Safe Third Country Agreement. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 30(1), 142–189.
Hatton, T. J. (2011). Seeking asylum trends and policies in the OECD, Centre for Economic Policy Research., ISBN: 978-1-907142-40-6.
Hatton, T. J., Moloney, J. (2015). Applications for asylum in the developed world: Modelling asylum claims by origin and destination. Australian National University CEPR Working Paper May 2015. ISBN: 0 86831 625 3.
Hatton, T. J., & Williamson, J. G. (2005). What fundamentals drive world migration? In G. J. Borjas & J. Crisp (Eds.), Poverty, international migration and asylum. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hurwitz, A. (1999). The 1990 Dublin convention: a comprehensive assessment. International Journal of Refugee Law, 11(4), 646–677.
Leekers, A. (2012). How (un)restrictive are we? ‘Adjusted’ and ‘expected’ asylum recognition rates in Europe Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie Research and Documentation Centre (WODC) Cahier (pp. 2015–2010).
Mascani, P., & van Bochove, M. (2009). Gender stereotyping in the Dutch asylum procedure: “Independent” men versus “dependent” women. IMR International Migration Review, 43(1 (Spring 2009)), 112–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2008.01149.x
Mascini, P. (2008). Explaining inequality in the implementation of asylum law. Refuge: Canada’s Periodical on Refugees, 25(2), 164–181.
Neumayer, E. (2005). Asylum recognition rates in Western Europe: Their determinants, variation and lack of convergence. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49, 43–66.
Riedel, L., & Schneider, G. (2017). Dezentraler Asylvollzug diskriminiert: Anerkennungsquoten von Flüchtlingen im bundesdeutschen Vergleich, 2010–2015. Universität Konstanz.
Reuters Report. (2017). Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-immigration-poll-exclusive/exclusive-almost-half-of-canadians-want-illegal-border-crossers-deported-reuters-poll-idUSKBN16R0SK. Login on 7th April 2018.
Thielemann, E. (2006). The effectiveness of Governments’ attempts to control unwanted migration.
UNHCR. (2009). Statistical Yearbook.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ghio, D. (2020). Differences Among European States Involving Syrian Asylum Seekers. In: Carlson, E.D., Williams, N.E. (eds) Comparative Demography of the Syrian Diaspora: European and Middle Eastern Destinations. European Studies of Population, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24451-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24451-4_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-24450-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-24451-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)