Reforms welcome? Evidence on the nature of asylum backlash and orderly admissions as a remedy

Tobias Hillenbrand
Additional contact information
Tobias Hillenbrand: RS: GSBE MGSoG, Maastricht Graduate School of Governance

No 2025-026, MERIT Working Papers from United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT)

Abstract: The correlation between rising asylum immigration and the electoral success of far-right anti-immigration parties has sparked concerns about a potential “Democratic Dilemma” – namely, a trade-off between a country’s openness to immigrants and the preservation of democratic institutional quality. Against this backdrop, I investigate the nature of the backlash to asylum immigration and analyze the potential of an “Orderly Admission Reform” to restore public acceptance for refugee protection. The data comes from an original large-scale online survey experiment conducted in Germany, Europe’s largest refugee-receiving country, where public sentiment changes have been particularly pronounced. My results reveal a “Principle-Practice” gap: while most Germans remain committed to refugee protection in principle, they express dissatisfaction with how the asylum system functions in practice. Qualitative analysis suggests that although there are concerns about the overall size of the refugee population, respondents take greater issue with the association between asylum immigration and irregular immigration. A reform proposal that aims to close irregular pathways for asylum seekers while simultaneously scaling up orderly admissions of recognized refugees enjoys broad public support. Support levels can be further boosted by embedding the proposal description in a prime that highlights aspects of improved control and management. Findings from a conjoint experiment further indicate that respondents favour policies aimed at shifting from irregular toward orderly immigration pathways, rather than endorsing the most restrictive policy options. Support for the reform proposal is remarkably consistent across diverse societal groups – including some that are typically highly polarized on immigration issues.

JEL-codes: A13 D63 F22 J15 O15 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025-11-17
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/files/289590472/wp2025-026.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:unm:unumer:2025026

DOI: 10.53330/PZPD3802

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in MERIT Working Papers from United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Ad Notten ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).