1. Introduction1
In an increasingly interdependent world, rising numbers of asylum
seekers and their highly unequal distribution across countries have meant
that forced migration is now regarded as one of the key challenges facing
nation states today.2 This challenge is made even greater by the fact that
one state’s policy decisions on the relative leniency or restrictiveness of its
asylum regime will create externalities for other states and can thus lead
to strained relations between states.3 As a consequence, forced migration
has also come to be seen as a crucial challenge for international policy
coordination, leading, for example, to rapid advances in the efforts of the
European Union to provide for solutions in this area.
Policy makers charged with finding an appropriate response to these
challenges have been faced with two key questions: First, why have some
states been faced with a much higher number of asylum applications than
other states. And second, what public policy measures can effectively
influence the number of asylum seekers that a state receives? From a
national perspective, the most frequent response to the first question has
been to argue that if states’ asylum burden is disproportionate, then these
countries’ asylum procedures are probably too lenient and their welfare
provisions too generous in international comparison. By increasing the
restrictiveness of their asylum policy, the argument goes, states will be
1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 98th American Political Science
Association Annual Meeting, Boston, 29 August — 1 September 2002. The author is
grateful for comments and suggestions received, in particular from Fabio Franchino,
Simon Hix, Torun Dewan and Mathias Koenig-Archibugi.
2 The largest part of the world’s 15 million asylum seekers in 2001 sought refuge in
developing countries. However, since the early 1980s the number of asylum seekers in
Europe has increased almost tenfold to 970.000 in 2001. In the period between 1985 and
1999, Switzerland as the largest recipient of asylum seekers on average relative to its
population size, was faced with 30 percent more asylum applications than Sweden, 40
percent more than Germany, 6 times as many as France and the UK, 30 times as many
as Italy and 300 times as many as Portugal and Sweden (UNHCR 1999).
3 Recent examples are the currently strained relations between Denmark and Sweden
following the introduction of highly restrictive asylum measures by the new conservative
government in Denmark and the controversy about the Sangatte refugee camp which
soured relations between France and Britain.