Asylum, welfare and work: reflections on research in asylum and refugee studies

Abstract

Purpose – Over the past 30 years asylum has become an issue of great political significance, public interest and media coverage in most “Western” countries. Policies and laws designed to deal with asylum seekers have proliferated, as have the resources required to manage them. These developments have come as a result of the rise of asylum as a social, political and economic “problem” which is seen to necessitate urgent action. Within this context, some countries, such as Britain, have sought to limit asylum seekers’ social and economic rights. In Britain specifically this has involved making paid employment illegal for asylum seekers, and in the process making the government liable for the living costs of such individuals – creating a situation of forced welfare dependency. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – This paper provides a review of research into work and welfare policy relating to asylum seekers in Britain. The paper focuses particularly on three key issues which are affected by asylum policies relating to work and welfare. These have all received particular scholarly attention in recent years: destitution, illegal working and forced labour, and the impact on integration outcomes. Findings – In the final section the author proposes some directions for future research. Originality/value – The review is, of course, not exhaustive, but does provide an overview of key themes in the literature and should be of interest to scholars interested in the politics, sociology and social policy of asylum.

A life in waiting: Refugees' mental health and narratives of social suffering after European Union border closures in March 2016

“…In addition, lack of right to work (Mayblin, 2014;Popescu, 2016) and lack of activities (Crepet et al, 2017) can have negative consequences for mental wellbeing. Our study corroborates such findings, as the refugees narrated how lack of meaningful activities such as work, school, etc., made time in Greece seem empty and pointless.…”

Troubling the exclusive privileges of citizenship: mobile solidarities, asylum seekers, and the right to work

“…In Britain, the effective exclusion of asylum seekers from employment is used by the government as a policy tool to socially exclude and marginalise asylum seekers (Mayblin 2014a). Successive governments have argued that this deters potential asylum seekers from coming to the country, though there is no evidence to support this assertion.…”

“…From 2010, if granted the right to work, asylum seekers were restricted to jobs on a government's shortage occupations list. This list is so selective that it in effect presents a total barrier to legal employment for the vast majority of asylum seekers (UKBA 2013;Mayblin 2014a).…”

Finding purpose through altruism: The potential of ‘doing for others’ during asylum

“…The individual participants engaged with a number of altruistic occupations, demonstrating altruism, collectivism and principlism; prompted by kinship, empathy, learned behaviour and moral principles (Batson, 2011). This article has recognised the known benefits of altruism, (Muzick and Wilson, 2003;Post, 2005;Otake, Shimai, Tanaka-Matsumi, Otsui and Fredrickson, 2006;Keonig, McGue, Krueger and Bouchard, 2007;Brown, Brown, House and Smith, 2008;Salvati, 2008;Wright, 2013), applying them to refugees and exploring the potential for altruism, as meaningful occupation, to promote successful resettlement (Colic-Peisker, 2009;Lunden, 2012;Mondaca and Josephsson, 2013;Mayblin, 2014;Nayar and Sterling, 2013;Suleman and Whiteford, 2013) During asylum, when access to occupation is significantly restricted, people require enormous drive, resourcefulness and energy to engage. Occupation during asylum is linked to both social structures and personal characteristics, requiring researchers and practitioners to both challenge social structures (World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT), 2006; 2014), and build on personal characteristics (Crawford et al 2016).…”