Spatial Dependence in Asylum Migration

Abstract

Existing refugees in a destination country from the same source country reduce the uncertainty faced by subsequent asylum migrants since existing refugees can provide information and assistance. We argue that such network effects extend beyond the borders of specific source countries. Potential asylum migrants might also be able to draw on networks from geographically proximate as well as linguistically similar countries and from countries having previously been colonized by the same destination country, thus creating spatial dependence in asylum migration among source countries. Many destination countries meanwhile aspire to reduce the inflow of migrants by tightening their asylum policies. Target countries which restrict their policies relatively more than other destinations deflect some asylum migrants to geographically proximate destination countries, thus creating spatial dependence among target countries. We find evidence for both types of spatial dependence in our global analysis of asylum migration.However, while statistically significant, the degree of spatial dependence among target countries is modest. On the source side, there is evidence for modest spatial dependence among linguistically similar countries and no evidence for spatial dependence among countries which were previously colonized by the same destination country. By contrast, we find substantial spatial dependence among geographically proximate source countries.2

Deciding Where to go: Policies, People and Perceptions Shaping Destination Preferences

“…A more limited number of studies find that these factors only matter in relation to other countries: countries that make their policies more restrictive compared to neighbouring countries can deflect refugees and other migrants to these destinations (e.g. Barthel and Neumayer, 2015). These conclusions are challenged by other studies.…”

“…Thirdly, respondents rarely talked about migration policies in relation to one place only: rather a comparison was often made between two or more places albeit that knowledge about both was usually very limited (see also Barthel and Neumayer, 2015). For example, the preference for Germany over Sweden, or vice versa, often involved juxtaposing opportunities for employment with opportunities for welfare support, revealing a somewhat polarised view of both countries rooted more in stereotypes than policy knowledge and often based on perceptions of the broader economic, social or policy context rather than specific migration policies.…”

Introduction

“…Whereas certain scholars agree that asylum should be considered a form of migration and that refugees 1 can therefore be conflated with other immigrants, other scholars contend that voluntary and forced migration should not be confounded. There is a trend to discuss "asylum migration" (Böcker and Havinga 1998;Borjas and Crisp 2005;Castles and Loughna 2005;Koser and Van Hear 2005;Keogh 2013; Barthel and Neumayer 2015); similarly, the notion of "the migration-asylum nexus" has been established in academia (Borjas and Crisp 2005;Castles 2007; Mingot and de Arimateia da Cruz 2013). Although these approaches address the blurring of voluntary and forced or economic and political migration, they also seem to partly contribute to it.…”

Do asylum seekers and refugees choose destination countries? Evidence from large‐scale surveys in Australia, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka

“…The difference, the say, is due to their focus on refugees globally, while Neumayer () concentrates on Europe. Theilemann (), Hatton () and Barthel and Neumayer () also develop macro‐level models that suggest there are determinants relating to country choice.…”