Research
Database

The Asylum Information Database (AIDA) is a database containing information on asylum procedures, reception conditions and detention across 20 countries. This includes 17 European Union (EU) Member States (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Germany, Spain, France, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom) and 3 non-EU countries (Switzerland, Serbia, Turkey). Country and annual reports, legal briefings and video testimonies of asylum seekers; conduct fact-finding missions to further investigate important protection gaps established through the country reports. The website also allows for a comparison of different types of data related to the asylum procedure, reception conditions and detention among up to three countries. AIDA started as a project (September 2012 – December 2015) of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), in partnership with Forum Réfugiés-Cosi, the Hungarian Helsinki Committee and the Irish Refugee Council, and is now developing into a core research and documentation activity of ECRE. The overall goal of the database is to contribute to the improvement of asylum policies and practices in Europe and the situation of asylum seekers by providing all relevant actors with appropriate tools and information to support their advocacy and litigation efforts, both at the national and European level. These objectives are carried out by AIDA through the following activities: - Country reports - AIDA contains national reports documenting asylum procedures, reception conditions and detention in 20 countries. - Comparative reports - AIDA comparative reports provide a thorough comparative analysis of practice relating to the implementation of asylum standards across the countries covered by the database, in addition to an overview of statistical asylum trends and a discussion of key developments in asylum and migration policies in Europe. Annual reports were published in 2013, 2014 and 2015. This year, AIDA comparative reports are published in the form of thematic updates, focusing on the individual themes covered by the database. Thematic reports on reception and asylum procedures were published in March and September 2016 respectively. - Fact-finding visits - AIDA includes the development of fact-finding visits to further investigate important protection gaps established through the country reports, and a methodological framework for such missions. Focus on the reception conditions; transit zone at borders and on issues relating to asylum detention and the criminalisation of irregular entry; looking at registration and the unavailability of accommodation as barriers to access the asylum procedure. - Legal briefings - Legal briefings aim to bridge AIDA research with evidence-based legal reasoning and advocacy. With the assistance of information gathered from country reports, these short papers identify and analyse key issues in EU asylum law and policy and identify potential protection gaps in the asylum acquis. Legal briefings so far cover: (1) Dublin detention; (2) asylum statistics; (3) safe countries of origin; (4) procedural rights in detention; (5) age assessment of unaccompanied children; (6) residence permits for beneficiaries of international protection; and (7) the length of asylum procedures.

Know Reset aimed at conducting a systematic inventory of resettlement frameworks and practices in the EU, providing a comparative analysis and assessment of resettlement in the Member States, evaluating their resettlement capacity while addressing policy recommendations to the EU and its Member States in order to enhance cooperation and improve resettlement activities. To better understand Member States’ decision-making and better explore the potential for developing resettlement capacity in the EU, the Project has covered the 27 EU Member States whatever the nature and degree of their involvement in refugee resettlement. Unique field research has also been conducted in three major countries of first asylum (Kenya, Pakistan, Tunisia) by external experts hired for the Project, who dedicated their observation and analysis on EU Member States resettlement practices in the pre-departure phase. The Final Report compiles various deliverables of the Know Reset Project: a series of tables and graphs for quantitative and qualitative country comparison, 27 "Resettlement Country Profiles", 3 Country of First Asylum Reports and 2 EU Comparative Reports.

'Liberal theorists of democracy traditionally believe in the rule of law and universal human rights. Yet a group of anti-liberal thinkers such as Agamben have recently argued that rights are not universal but depend on political institutions that can arbitrarily take away these rights. For them, the current plight of refugees, asylum seekers and illegal immigrants in Western democracies illustrates their point. It shows that our democracies allow for an increasing lawless space (‘the camp’) where people become rightless and are exposed to the arbitrary intervention of a police force. Yet I believe that the radical anti-liberal view is as problematic as the liberal view it seeks to replace. In my project, I will therefore develop an alternative theoretical framework that offers a ‘third way’ that would criticize liberal theory without therefore embracing the radical conclusions of anti-liberal critics. To develop this alternative, I will draw on the political theorist Lefort. I will first develop an alternative to Agamben’s theory based on Lefort’s paradigm and then see what this alternative model would mean for our understanding of refugees and illegal immigrants. I will then examine how the alternative model could respond to four major objections and publish the research-results.'

"Theoretical background and objectives This project aims to explain religion as a core component of ethno-cultural diversity in European society and focuses on the Turkish and Moroccan second generation. A first research question regards the association between structural integration, in terms of educational and labour market attainment, and religiosity. In line with distinct national histories of church-state relations (Bader, 2007; Fetzer and Soper, 2005; Koenig, 2007) and ensuing religious opportunity structures (De Wit and Koopmans, 2005; Statham, Koopmans, Guigni and Passy, 2005), differential associa­tions between structural integration and religiosity are expected. A second study focuses on childhood religious socialisation (Kelley and De Graaf, 1997; Myers, 1996) and acculturation orientations (Berry, 2001; Van de Vijfer and Phalet, 2004) as predictors for religiosity in young adulthood. Shifting focus to intergroup relations as an explanatory approach to religion among the second generation, two other papers focus on religious identification. The first examines identity multiplicity (Roccas and Brewer, 2003) among the second generation and asks when Muslim and Turkish or Moroccan ethnic identities are compatible or conflicting with national (e.g. German, Dutch) and city identities. A fourth study looks at politicised Muslim identities (Simon and Klandermans, 2001), relating religious identification and perceived discrimination to political attitudes and engagement, in terms of support for political Islam and political action. Research design, data and methodology Structural equation modelling is applied to comparative survey data of the Turkish and Moroccan second generation in major European cities from the TIES-project ('The Integration of the European Second generation', cf. Crul and Schneider, 2010). Multi-group models are used to test measurement equivalence of latent constructs such as religiosity, acculturation and politicisation, and to assess the contextual (non-)equivalence of associations between structural integration, religious socialisation, perceived discrimination, religiosity and politicisation. Findings In the first study about the association between structural integration and religiosity, an inverse relation is only found in Berlin, the context where Islam as a minority religion is least accommo­dated. In all other contexts that offer varying degrees of institutional support for Islam, there is no association between structural integration and religiosity. The second study shows that, not surprisingly, parental mosque visits and the attendance of Koran lessons outside school hours during one's youth predict increased religiosity in young adulthood. However, the effects of religious socialisation are mediated by acculturation orientations, particularly the wish to maintain one's heritage culture. Thus, religious socialisation increases the orientation towards the heritage culture (note that by and large it does not, however, reduce orientation towards host culture adoption), which in turn stimulates religiosity in young adulthood. Regarding identity multiplicity, distinct identification patterns are found across different intergroup contexts and these relate mainly to differential levels of perceived discrimination and ensuing derogation of the majority population on the part of the second generation. Thus, where the second generation reports more discriminatory experiences, they value the majority population less and their religious and ethnic identities are more often in conflict with national and city civic identities. In terms of the politicisation of Muslim identity, the comparison across different intergroup contexts shows that support for political Islam and collective action are distinct and only weakly related aspects of politicised Muslim identity. Members of the Turkish and Moroccan second generation who support political Islam, but are not inclined to engage in collective action to defend the interest of Islam, perceive relatively little discrimination. On the other hand, those who perceive more discrimination (which is associated with higher levels of education) are most likely to engage in collective action, but are less likely to support political Islam."

This report presents the findings of field research in Kenya under the KNOW RESET project, which maps and analyses legal and policy frameworks as well as practices related to resettlement to European countries. The research in Kenya was a component of this broader project, which included research in 27 EU member states and three countries of first asylum: Kenya, Pakistan and Tunisia. Research was carried out in Nairobi and Kakuma refugee camp between June and October 2012 and involved interviews with refugee and resettlement actors, including those participating in resettlement to European countries. The report broadly explores and presents Kenya’s resettlement landscape, the positions, roles and practices of European resettlement countries within that landscape, and the perspectives and experiences of refugees around resettlement.