Europeans support a proportional allocation of asylum seekers

被引:54
作者
Bansak, Kirk [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hainmueller, Jens [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Hangartner, Dominik [1 ,2 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Immigrat Policy Lab, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] ETH, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Stanford Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[4] Stanford Univ, Grad Sch Business, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[5] ETH, Ctr Comparat & Int Studies, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
[6] London Sch Econ, Dept Govt, London WC2A 2AE, England
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1038/s41562-017-0133
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
What type of common asylum regime would Europeans support? We conducted a survey asking 18,000 citizens of 15 European countries about their preferences regarding different mechanisms for allocating asylum seekers across countries. A large majority supports an allocation that is proportional to each country's capacity over the status quo policy of allocation based on the country of first entry. This majority support is weakened but persists even among a randomly assigned subset of respondents who were made aware that moving to proportional allocation would increase the number of asylum seekers allocated to their own country. These results suggest that citizens care deeply about the fairness of the responsibility-sharing mechanism, rather than only the consequences of the asylum policy. The findings also highlight a potential pathway towards reform of the Common European Asylum System.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2014, HOR 2020 WORK PROGR, DOI DOI 10.2863/11040
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2016, OP PORT REF SIT MED
[3]  
[Anonymous], J REFUGEE STUD
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, DOI [DOI 10.1016/S1574-0110(02)80010-8, 10.1016/S1574-0110(02)80010-8]
[5]   How economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers [J].
Bansak, Kirk ;
Hainmueller, Jens ;
Hangartner, Dominik .
SCIENCE, 2016, 354 (6309) :217-222
[6]   Mass support for global climate agreements depends on institutional design [J].
Bechtel, Michael M. ;
Scheve, Kenneth F. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2013, 110 (34) :13763-13768
[7]  
Betts A., 2003, Journal of Refugee Studies, V16, P274, DOI DOI 10.1093/JRS/16.3.274
[8]   Equality preference in the claims problem: a questionnaire study of cuts in earnings and pensions [J].
Bosmans, Kristof ;
Schokkaert, Erik .
SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 2009, 33 (04) :533-557
[9]   Reframing solidarity in Europe: Frontex, frontiers, and the fallacy of refugee quota [J].
Bozorgmehr, Kayvan ;
Wahedi, Katharina .
LANCET PUBLIC HEALTH, 2017, 2 (01) :E10-E11
[10]  
Fetzer JoelS., 2000, PUBLIC ATTITUDES IMM