Public Attitudes toward Asylum Seekers across Europe

Transcription

1 Public Attitudes toward Asylum Seekers across Europe Dominik Hangartner ETH Zurich & London School of Economics with Kirk Bansak (Stanford) and Jens Hainmueller (Stanford)

2 Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 1

3 Stanford - Zurich Immigration Policy Lab Our research agenda Evaluating and designing integration policies and programs (often in collaboration with immigrant service providers and gov agencies) Understanding the drivers of anti-immigrant sentiments, and testing interventions to alleviate hostility Quantify the political consequences of mass migration in origin, transition and destination countries Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 2

4 Public Opinion in Europe Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 3

5 1 Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 2 Part II: Preferences over allocation 3 Part III: Causal Effect of Education?

6 Part I: Research Questions 1 What types of asylum-seekers is the European public willing to accept? 2 What kind of preferences sociocultural, economic, political explain natives attitudes toward asylum-seekers? 3 To what extent are attitudes toward asylum-seekers heterogeneous across sociodemographic subgroups and countries? Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 4

7 Survey fielded across Europe in early ,000 adult citizens in 15 Dublin countries in Europe: Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom Asylum Applications per Capita in 2015 (Population in 1000s) (0.1,0.6] (0.6,1.4] (1.4,4.6] (4.6,10.3] (10.3,18] Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 5

8 Which of the two applicants would you personally prefer to be allowed to stay in [respondent s country]? Two different asylum-seekers ATTRIBUTE APPLICANT 1 APPLICANT 2 Age 21 Years 62 Years Language Skills Previous Occupation Speaks broken English Unemployed Speaks fluent English Teacher Different attributes of the asylumseekers Religion Christian Muslim Consistency of Asylum Testimony Vulnerability Minor inconsistencies Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) Major inconsistencies No surviving family members Origin Iraq Pakistan Reason for Migrating Seeking better economic opportunities Persecution for ethnicity Gender Male Male Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 6

9 Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Forced Choice (Pooled) Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 7

10 Sociotropic Economic Evaluations Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 8

11 Humanitarian Concerns Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 9

12 Anti-Muslim Bias Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 10

13 Anti-Muslim Bias across Political Ideology Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 11 Far Left Left Center Right Far Right

14 General Consensus: Educational Levels < Lower Secondary Lower Secondary Lower Tier Upper Secondary Upper Tier Upper Secondary Advanced Vocational BA Level >= MA Level None Broken Fluent Language skills: Muslim Agnostic Christian Religion: Economic opportunities Ethnic persecution Religious persecution Political persecution Reason for migrating: Handicapped No surviving family Victim of torture PTSD None Vulnerability: Doctor Teacher Accountant Farmer Cleaner Unemployed Previous occupation: 62 years 38 years 21 years Age: Iraq Ukraine Pakistan Eritrea Kosovo Afghanistan Syria Country of origin: Male Female Gender: Major inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies No inconsistencies Asylum testimony: Effect on probability of acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 12

15 Forced Choice by Countries Full Sample Austria Czech Republic Denmark France Germany Greece Hungary Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Italy Netherlands Norway Poland Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 13

16 Sample Conditional Categorical Categorical Size Supporter Rejecter Accepter Austria % 9% 7% Czech Republic % 8% 4% Denmark % 11% 8% France % 11% 8% Germany % 6% 9% Greece % 7% 14% Hungary % 12% 6% Italy % 7% 16% Netherlands % 10% 7% Norway % 8% 7% Poland % 7% 6% Spain % 4% 24% Sweden % 11% 11% Switzerland % 10% 8% United Kingdom % 14% 6% Total Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 14

17 Conclusion Part I 1 Attitudes towards asylum-seekers are shaped by sociotropic evaluations, humanitarian, and religious concerns 2 General consensus across different types of respondents (and education levels) as well as countries 3 Implications for policy: Strong anti-muslim bias indicates a large challenge for solving the current crisis and successfully integrating refugees Pro-asylum advocacy groups could highlight refugees deservingness and vulnerability as well as their economic contributions Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 15

18 1 Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 2 Part II: Preferences over allocation 3 Part III: Causal Effect of Education?

19 Dissension in Europe Let me be very clear when it comes to accepting refugees, solidarity between EU member states is still largely non-existent. This is quite possibly our biggest challenge for the future. While some EU members are taking responsibility, providing refuge for thousands of refugees, several EU countries are accepting almost no-one. - Former EU Home Affairs Commissioner Malmström, 2014 Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 16

20 Low Support for Increased Asylum Responsibility Austria (n=1,202) Czech Republic (n=1,200) Denmark (n=1,192) France (n=1,199) Germany (n=1,130) Greece (n=1,200) Hungary (n=1,195) Italy (n=1,196) Netherlands (n=1,195) Norway (n=1,190) Poland (n=1,196) Spain (n=1,203) Sweden (n=1,183) Switzerland (n=1,201) United Kingdom (n=1,201) Pooled (n=17,883) Want More Asylum Seekers in Own Country (%) Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 17

21 Part II: Research Questions 1 What type of asylum regime do European voters want? 2 To what extent are voters asylum regime preferences driven by self-interested considerations versus common burden-sharing norms? 3 Do public preferences point to any feasible opportunities for asylum regime reform? Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 18

22 The Problem Asylum Policy Coordination as a Problem of International Cooperation The allocation of asylum-seekers as a collective action problem The public will as a constraint against commitment Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 19

23 The Problem Asylum Policy Coordination as a Problem of International Cooperation The allocation of asylum-seekers as a collective action problem The public will as a constraint against commitment Proportional Equality as a Solution A common focal point in intergovernmental negotiations on burden-sharing agreements A powerful norm that appears also to be shared and respected at the domestic level by ordinary citizens Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 19

24 The Problem Asylum Policy Coordination as a Problem of International Cooperation The allocation of asylum-seekers as a collective action problem The public will as a constraint against commitment Proportional Equality as a Solution A common focal point in intergovernmental negotiations on burden-sharing agreements A powerful norm that appears also to be shared and respected at the domestic level by ordinary citizens Will voters support proportional equality in a high-stakes, real-world situation with countervailing decision-making impulses and competing self-interest considerations? Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 19

25 Outcome Variable: Asylum-Seeker Allocation Preference In your opinion, how should the number of asylum applications per country be determined? The number of asylum applications allocated to each European country should be based on the country of first entry (e.g. asylum-seekers are required to submit their asylum application in the European country in which they initially arrive). the same for every European country (e.g. asylum-seekers are allocated such that each European country receives the same number of asylum applications). proportional to the country s capacity (e.g. asylum-seekers are allocated to each European country depending on its population, GDP, unemployment rate, and number of past applications). Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 20

26 Experiment #1: Providing Information with Policy Arguments Under current regulations, asylum-seekers are generally required to submit their applications in the country through which they first entered Europe (i.e. the country of first entry ). The goal behind this policy is to maximize efficiency. However, some people have pointed out that the current policy puts an unfair burden on border countries that are more likely to serve as entry points for asylum-seekers. Accordingly, they recommend allocating asylum applications either equally across all countries or based on each country s capacity. In your opinion, how should the number... Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 21

27 Experiment #2: Prompting Self-Interest by Describing Consequences In your opinion, how should the number of asylum applications per country be determined? The number of asylum applications allocated to each European country should be based on the country of first entry (e.g. asylum-seekers are required to submit their asylum application in the European country in which they initially arrive). This would mean approximately 38,700 applications allotted to the United Kingdom. the same for every European country (e.g. asylum-seekers are allocated such that each European country receives the same number of asylum applications). This would mean approximately 43,200 applications allotted to the United Kingdom. proportional to the country s capacity (e.g. asylum-seekers are allocated to each European country depending on its population, GDP, unemployment rate, and number of past applications). This would mean approximately 159,600 applications allotted to the United Kingdom. Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 22

28 Distribution of Preferences Preference Proportional Same for All Status Quo Germany (n=564) Hungary (n=577) Sweden (n=585) Austria (n=586) Norway (n=590) Switzerland (n=599) Denmark (n=605) Netherlands (n=589) Greece (n=588) Czech Republic (n=592) Italy (n=589) Poland (n=627) Spain (n=627) France (n=619) United Kingdom (n=631) Pooled (n=8,968) Distribution of Preferences over Allocation of Asylum Seeker Applications (%) *Analysis based only on respondents who did not receive the Consequences Treatment. Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 23

29 Experiment #1: Results Control: Policy Arguments Not Shown Treated: Policy Arguments Shown Preference Proportional Same for All Status Quo Preference Proportional Same for All Status Quo Germany (n=296) Hungary (n=288) Sweden (n=290) Austria (n=292) Norway (n=298) Switzerland (n=298) Denmark (n=312) Netherlands (n=310) Greece (n=290) Czech Republic (n=290) Italy (n=309) Poland (n=329) Spain (n=305) France (n=300) United Kingdom (n=323) Germany (n=268) Hungary (n=289) Sweden (n=295) Austria (n=294) Norway (n=292) Switzerland (n=301) Denmark (n=293) Netherlands (n=279) Greece (n=298) Czech Republic (n=302) Italy (n=280) Poland (n=298) Spain (n=322) France (n=319) United Kingdom (n=308) Pooled (n=4,530) Distribution of Preferences over Allocation of Asylum Seeker Applications (%) Pooled (n=4,438) Distribution of Preferences over Allocation of Asylum Seeker Applications (%) *Analysis based only on respondents who did not receive the Consequences Treatment. Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 24

30 Experiment #2: Results Consequences Shown: No Yes Germany Hungary Sweden Austria Norway Switzerland Denmark Netherlands Greece Czech Republic Italy Poland Spain France United Kingdom Pooled Support Proportional Allocation (%) Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 25

31 Experiment #2: Results Consequences Shown: No Yes Germany Hungary Sweden Austria Norway Switzerland Denmark Netherlands Greece Czech Republic Italy Poland Spain France United Kingdom Pooled Percentage Point Difference between Support for Proportional Allocation and Status Quo Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 26

32 Correlates of Support for Proportional Equality Female Age: Income: Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Education: Lower Secondary and Below Upper Secondary Advanced Vocational BA Level MA Level and Above Employed Home Born Ideology: Far Left Left Center Right Far Right Cosmopolitanism Nationalism Knowledge EU Attitude Empathy Construct 1 Empathy Construct 2 Altruism Change in Pr(Support Proportional Allocation) *Country fixed effects also included. Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 27

33 Zooming in on Education Female Age: Income: Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 Education: Lower Secondary and Below Upper Secondary Advanced Vocational BA Level MA Level and Above Employed Home Born Ideology: Far Left Left Center Right Far Right Cosmopolitanism Nationalism Knowledge EU Attitude Empathy Construct 1 Empathy Construct 2 Altruism Change in Pr(Support Proportional Allocation) Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 28

34 Conclusion Part II 1 We find substantial public support for an institutional design of proportional allocation (PA) of asylum-seekers 2 Support for PA significantly drops when we inform voters about the consequences in countries that would see an increase but even then PA is supported over the status quo by a majority of voters in most countries 4 At the individual level, support for PA correlates positively with education, but also left-wing political ideology, cosmopolitanism, empathy, altruism, and low levels of nationalism 5 Implications for policy: Reforming the Common European Asylum System towards a system of PA seems politically viable In most countries, voters may be willing to admit more refugees as long as they know the burden is being shared fairly across Europe Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part II: Preferences over allocation 29

35 1 Part I: Attitudes towards asylum-seekers 2 Part II: Preferences over allocation 3 Part III: Causal Effect of Education?

36 Part III: A Natural Experiment in Access to Higher Education Tertiary (ISCED 5) Universities (Advanced Track) (ISCED 5A) Universities of Applied Sciences (ISCED 5A) Higher Vocational Training (ISCED 5B) Upper Secondary (ISCED 3) Matura Schools (Advanced Track) Teacher Training Colleges Specialized Middle Schools Vocational Education Lower Secondary (ISCED 2) Lower Secondary School (Advanced Track) Lower Secondary School (Medium / Lower Track) Entry Test Primary (ISCED 1) Primary School Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 30

37 Swiss secondary school entry tests Centralized exam at transition primary to secondary school in 60s, 70s, and 80s Thresholds: rank in given school and year, or points Classification into two of secondary school: Gymnasium (upper level) vs. Sekundarschule (lower level) Differentiation of skill levels at age 12/13 Only upper level graduates can access university Main feature: no strategic sorting because external experts graded exams Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 31

38 Example questions: Writing Briefly describe the two pictures! Write how the story continues by taking the role of the boy, the girl, or the cat! Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 32

39 Effect of Test Score on Education Advanced track degree (System NP schools) Pr(matur = 1) Distance to threshold Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 33

40 Effect of Education on Immigration Attitudes Impact of Education on Immigration Attitudes Agree that Immigration Harms Switzerland High School Degree (Matura) University Degree No Degree Degree No Degree Degree Degree Posession Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 34

41 Key references Kirk Bansak, Jens Hainmueller, Dominik Hangartner (2016): How Economic, humanitarian, and religious concerns shape European attitudes toward asylum seekers, Science Vol. 354, Issue 6309, pp Kirk Bansak, Jens Hainmueller, Dominik Hangartner (2017): Europeans would support a proportional sllocation of asylum seekers, Nature Human Behaviour, Vol. 1, Issue 133. Questions/Comments? Dominik Hangartner d.hangartner@lse.ac.uk Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) Part III: Causal Effect of Education? 35

42 Summary Statistics Gender Age Income Quintile Political Ideology Female First Second Third Fourth Fifth Left Center Right Austria 50% 22% 19% 24% 18% 17% 29% 24% 22% 17% 8% 34% 37% 29% Czech Republic 51% 42% 28% 16% 9% 5% 15% 19% 23% 28% 15% 22% 43% 35% Denmark 50% 20% 21% 22% 20% 17% 26% 20% 25% 16% 13% 37% 25% 38% France 51% 23% 20% 21% 20% 15% 29% 23% 17% 22% 9% 30% 35% 36% Germany 50% 20% 18% 25% 21% 16% 25% 23% 21% 20% 11% 41% 36% 24% Greece 47% 33% 29% 25% 10% 3% 37% 28% 19% 10% 5% 36% 36% 28% Hungary 51% 43% 28% 14% 8% 6% 18% 20% 15% 21% 26% 19% 48% 33% Italy 50% 19% 22% 23% 19% 17% 27% 26% 22% 18% 7% 35% 26% 38% Netherlands 50% 22% 17% 23% 21% 17% 30% 22% 19% 19% 9% 28% 33% 39% Norway 49% 22% 22% 21% 19% 16% 28% 26% 19% 13% 13% 34% 24% 42% Poland 49% 19% 30% 25% 15% 11% 15% 22% 20% 24% 20% 23% 39% 38% Spain 50% 22% 25% 22% 17% 14% 23% 25% 18% 16% 17% 51% 23% 27% Sweden 49% 22% 20% 21% 19% 18% 22% 15% 20% 18% 25% 37% 26% 37% Switzerland 50% 22% 20% 23% 19% 16% 33% 29% 20% 14% 4% 29% 30% 41% United Kingdom 52% 26% 19% 21% 18% 16% 29% 21% 19% 19% 12% 27% 43% 30% Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 36

43 Summary Statistics, continued Education Lower Upper Advanced BA Level MA Level Secondary Secondary Vocational and Above and Below Austria 8% 53% 20% 5% 13% Czech Republic 5% 56% 15% 10% 14% Denmark 22% 37% 10% 22% 8% France 10% 45% 21% 9% 16% Germany 5% 38% 29% 15% 13% Greece 4% 32% 19% 29% 16% Hungary 4% 49% 18% 19% 9% Italy 13% 48% 4% 11% 23% Netherlands 32% 34% 7% 12% 15% Norway 13% 35% 17% 23% 12% Poland 9% 35% 13% 14% 29% Spain 23% 19% 16% 17% 25% Sweden 12% 38% 28% 11% 11% Switzerland 10% 50% 24% 7% 9% United Kingdom 17% 37% 14% 21% 11% Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 37

44 Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Cross Country Heterogeneity in Aversion to Economic Migrants Effect on Probability of Acceptance Greece Hungary Germany Netherlands Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 38

45 Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Christian Agnostic Muslim Cross Country Heterogeneity in Asylum Seeker Religion Preferences Effect on Probability of Acceptance Norway Germany France Poland Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 39

46 * Number of Asylum-Seeker Applications Implied by Each Allocation Method Country Status Quo Same for All Proportional Germany Hungary Sweden Austria Norway Switzerland Denmark Netherlands Greece Czech Republic Italy Poland Spain France United Kingdom Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 40

47 Experiment #2: Results Using Rankings Consequences Shown: No Yes Germany Hungary Sweden Austria Norway Switzerland Denmark Netherlands Greece Czech Republic Italy Poland Spain France United Kingdom Pooled Prefer Proportional Allocation over Status Quo (%) Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 41

48 Summary Statistics Gender Age Income Quintile Political Ideology Female First Second Third Fourth Fifth Left Center Right Austria 50% 22% 19% 24% 18% 17% 29% 24% 22% 17% 8% 34% 37% 29% Czech Republic 51% 42% 28% 16% 9% 5% 15% 19% 23% 28% 15% 22% 43% 35% Denmark 50% 20% 21% 22% 20% 17% 26% 20% 25% 16% 13% 37% 25% 38% France 51% 23% 20% 21% 20% 15% 29% 23% 17% 22% 9% 30% 35% 36% Germany 50% 20% 18% 25% 21% 16% 25% 23% 21% 20% 11% 41% 36% 24% Greece 47% 33% 29% 25% 10% 3% 37% 28% 19% 10% 5% 36% 36% 28% Hungary 51% 43% 28% 14% 8% 6% 18% 20% 15% 21% 26% 19% 48% 33% Italy 50% 19% 22% 23% 19% 17% 27% 26% 22% 18% 7% 35% 26% 38% Netherlands 50% 22% 17% 23% 21% 17% 30% 22% 19% 19% 9% 28% 33% 39% Norway 49% 22% 22% 21% 19% 16% 28% 26% 19% 13% 13% 34% 24% 42% Poland 49% 19% 30% 25% 15% 11% 15% 22% 20% 24% 20% 23% 39% 38% Spain 50% 22% 25% 22% 17% 14% 23% 25% 18% 16% 17% 51% 23% 27% Sweden 49% 22% 20% 21% 19% 18% 22% 15% 20% 18% 25% 37% 26% 37% Switzerland 50% 22% 20% 23% 19% 16% 33% 29% 20% 14% 4% 29% 30% 41% United Kingdom 52% 26% 19% 21% 18% 16% 29% 21% 19% 19% 12% 27% 43% 30% Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 42

49 Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Rating (Pooled) Change in Rating Level Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 43

50 Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Scaled Rating (Pooled) Change in Rating Level Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 44

51 Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Binary Rating (Pooled) Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 45

52 Far Left Left Center Right Far Right Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 46

53 Effect of Asylum Seeker Country of Origin by Respondent Knowledge Level (Pooled) Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Low Knowledge High Knowledge Iraq Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 47

54 Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Asylum Testimony: No inconsistencies Minor inconsistencies Major inconsistencies Gender: Female Male Country of Origin: Syria Afghanistan Kosovo Eritrea Pakistan Ukraine Iraq Age: 21 Years 38 Years 62 Years Previous Occupation: Unemployed Cleaner Farmer Accountant Teacher Doctor Vulnerability: None PTSD Victim of torture No surviving family Handicapped Reason for Migrating: Political persecution Religious persecution Ethnic persecution Economic opportunities Religion: Christian Agnostic Muslim Language Skills: Fluent Broken None Effect on Probability of Acceptance Dominik Hangartner (ETH Zurich & LSE) 48