unequal distribution of asylum burdens have remained ineffective. The
paper argues that this is because the key determinants of an asylum
seeker’s choice of host country are historical, economic and reputational
factors that largely lie beyond the reach of asylum policy makers. It also
suggests that the effectiveness of unilateral policy measures will be
further undermined by multilateral attempts to harmonise restrictive
policies and that current efforts such as those by the European Union
consolidate, rather than effectively address, existing disparities in the
distribution of asylum burdens.
To make this argument the paper proceeds as follows: After a short
overview of recent public policy responses, an analysis of the theoretical
literature on migration will identify theoretically informed pull factors.
From this, the paper will generate a number of hypotheses. The next part
develops and explains the model which is subsequently used to test the
hypotheses empirically based on data for 20 OECD countries over the
period 1986-1999. The final section discusses the empirical results which
call into question some widely held assumptions about the underlying
reasons for the unequal distribution of 'asylum burdens' and the
effectiveness of unilateral and multilateral deterrence measures.
2. Setting the Scene: Forced Migration and Public Policy
Since the mid-1980s, the issue of immigration and asylum has gained
considerable prominence in OECD countries. The combination of
heightened migration pressure and reduced willingness to accept inward
migration, has pushed the issue towards the top of the political agenda. As
economic and political uncertainties increased in the 1990s, public opinion
(often encouraged by electioneering politicians and a xenophobic media)5
5 The words "floodgates", "swamped", "scroungers", "soft touch" and "bogus" are
frequently used by newspapers (and at times by politicians) in the context of asylum
policy. Take the following examples from newspaper headlines in the UK: "Our land is