What Happens When the United States Stops Taking in Refugees?

Fee, Molly; Arar, Rawan

doi:10.1177/1536504219854713

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In light of concerns about below-replacement fertility and baby boomer cohorts reaching retirement age, migration represents one important remedy against population aging. The number of resettled people and migrants in the U.S. has been declining since 1980 but declined even more dramatically after the Trump administration's 2017 Executive Order titled "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" (6,25).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Long-term Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on U.S. Population Structure

Tilstra¹,

Polizzi²,

Wagner³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The immediate, direct effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States population are immense. Millions of people were affected by the pandemic: many died, others did not give birth, and still others could not migrate. Research that has examined these individual phenomena is important, but fragmented. The disruption of mortality, fertility, and migration jointly affected U.S. population counts and, consequently, future population structure. We use data from the United Nations World Population Prospects and the cohort component projection method to isolate the effect of the pandemic on U.S. population estimates until 2060. If the pandemic had not occurred, the population of the U.S. would have 2.1 million (0.63%) more people in 2025, and 1.7 million (0.44%) more people in 2060. Perhaps most striking is that pandemic-induced migration changes will likely have a larger long-term effect on future population size than mortality, despite comparable short-term effects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Long-term Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on U.S. Population Structure

Tilstra¹,

Polizzi²,

Wagner³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the modern period, refugees also benefit from the fact that they enter the US with permanent legal residence (Portes and Rumbaut 2001;Alba and Nee 2003). Although, in some cases, financial assistance is minimal given structural and resource constraints of resettlement agencies (Fee 2019;Fee and Arar 2019;Gowayed 2019), the positive governmental reception and legal status alone are assumed to facilitate refugee integration. Akresh 2008;Tran and Lara-Garcia 2020).…”

Section: Refugee Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refugees without Assistance: English-Language Attainment and Economic Outcomes in the Early Twentieth Century

Abramitzky¹,

Boustan²,

Catron³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States has admitted more than 3 million refugees since 1980 through official refugee resettlement programs that provide temporary assistance. Scholars have highlighted the success of refugee groups to show the positive impact of governmental programs on assimilation and integration. In the past, however, refugees arrived without formal selection processes or federal support. We examine the integration of historical refugees using a large archive of recorded oral history interviews to understand linguistic attainment and economic outcomes of migrants who arrived before 1940. Using detailed measures of vocabulary, syntax and accented speech, we find that refugee migrants achieved higher levels of English proficiency than did economic migrants, a finding that holds even when comparing migrants from the same country of origin or religious group. This study improves on previous research of immigrant language acquisition, which typically rely on self-reported measures of fluency, and on studies of refugees, which typically assign refugee status based on country-of-birth alone. Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that refugees, being unable to immediately return to their origin country, may have had greater incentive to learn or be exposed to English, which increased their linguistic attainment. Our results provide an optimistic historical precedent for the incorporation of refugees into American society.

show abstract

“…Austria and Denmark are cases in point, having suspended resettlement altogether, and, most dramatically, the United States-the main provider of resettlement places-significantly down-sized its program under the Trump administration (Fee and Arar, 2019). These developments suggests that despite the observed expansion of resettlement policies, the policy practice is subject to significant fluctuations stemming from refugee emergencies and partisan dynamics.…”

Section: Resettlement Policies In Oecd Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most prominently, former US president Donald Trump slashed refugee intakes despite growing humanitarian need (Fee and Arar, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do states admit refugees? A comparative analysis of resettlement policies in OECD countries

Lutz

Portmann

2021

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many refugee-receiving countries have restricted their asylum policies and stepped up their border control policies to prevent asylum seekers from reaching their territories. At the same time, the resettlement of refugees has gained popularity. Many states have introduced resettlement schemes or have increased the number of refugees they resettle. Why do states voluntarily admit refugees by expanding resettlement? This article develops a comprehensive theoretical account of countries' resettlement choices and identifies the determinants of their openness to refugee resettlement through an empirical analysis of 33 OECD countries between 1980 and 2019. We find that the supplyside factor of wealth best predicts whether a country engages in refugee resettlement. The number of effective resettlement admissions tends to fluctuate with the demand-side factor of humanitarian need. Nevertheless, the expansion of resettlement policies does not result in a subsequent expansion of humanitarian protection. Instead, states combine resettlement policies with restrictive border control policies which allows them to preserve their humanitarian credentials while curtailing refugees' overall access to asylum. These findings provide important insights into the policy-making of refugee resettlement and the strategic considerations the asylum governance of liberal democracies.

show abstract

What Happens When the United States Stops Taking in Refugees?

Abstract: Most of the world’s 25.4 million refugees have been displaced for five or more years. A sharp curtailment in refugee arrivals to the United States, then, isn’t just a national decision, but a global disruption.

Cited by 17 publications

References 2 publications

The Long-term Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on U.S. Population Structure

The Long-term Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on U.S. Population Structure

Refugees without Assistance: English-Language Attainment and Economic Outcomes in the Early Twentieth Century

Why do states admit refugees? A comparative analysis of resettlement policies in OECD countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About