Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
European Union Politics
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Neumayer, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Asylum Destination Choice

What Makes Some West European Countries More Attractive Than Others?

Eric Neumayer

London School of Economics and Political Science, UK e.neumayer{at}lse.ac.uk

This article examines what explains the relative attractiveness of West European countries as a destination for asylum seekers. Individuals coming to Western Europe in order to lodge an asylum application are modelled as utility maximizers who choose the destination country that offers the highest net benefit. This benefit is seen as a function of economic attractiveness, generosity of welfare provisions, deterrent policy measures, hostility towards foreigners and asylum seekers, existing asylum communities, colonial and language links as well as geographical proximity. Results from a large dyadic panel over the time period from 1982 to 1999 demonstrate the impact that these fundamental determinants have on asylum destination choice. The implications of the results for the ongoing debates over fair burden-sharing are complex because they provide arguments for two conflicting interpretations of burden-sharing as either financial side payments or the physical reallocation of asylum seekers.

Key Words: asylum destination • burden-sharing • migration • origin • networks

European Union Politics, Vol. 5, No. 2, 155-180 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1465116504042444
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 European Union PoliticsHome page
F. Franchino
Perspectives on European Immigration Policies
European Union Politics, September 1, 2009; 10(3): 403 - 420.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ChildhoodHome page
M. L. Seeberg, C. Bagge, and T. A. Enger
No Place: Small children in Norwegian asylum-seeker reception centres
Childhood, August 1, 2009; 16(3): 395 - 411.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 European Union PoliticsHome page
M. Czaika
Asylum Cooperation among Asymmetric Countries: The Case of the European Union
European Union Politics, March 1, 2009; 10(1): 89 - 113.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 National Institute Economic ReviewHome page
T. J. Hatton
European Asylum Policy
National Institute Economic Review, October 1, 2005; 194(1): 106 - 119.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
E. Neumayer
Asylum Recognition Rates in Western Europe: Their Determinants, Variation, and Lack of Convergence
Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2005; 49(1): 43 - 66.
[Abstract] [PDF]