Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Local Socio-Economic Integration in Italian Asylum Adjudications

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Past and Present Migration Challenges

Abstract

This chapter explores if judges’ final decisions in granting humanitarian protection actually consider asylum seeker’s level of integration into the society of residence. More precisely, analyses focus on the appeal stage and, therefore, consider asylum applications rejected at first instance by Territorial Commissions and reexamined by Italian Civil Courts. Adopting a mixed-method approach, the chapter aims to understand if, and to what extent, asylum seekers’ level of integration is a potential determinant in favouring judges to grant humanitarian protection at the appeal stage. Findings reveal that, by and large, factors of integration are deeply considered by Italian judges in the decision to grant humanitarian protection, but employment status and language proficiency seem to be more important than other factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Dublin Regulation, which indicates the state responsible for examining the application and clarifies the rules governing the relations between states; and the EURODAC Regulation, which assists the Member State responsible under the Dublin Regulation in establishing an EU database of fingerprints of asylum applicants.

  2. 2.

    To give an idea of the relevance of the appeal phase, it is sufficient to recall that, in 2021, around 65,100 asylum seekers in the EU received positive final decisions based on an appeal or review.

  3. 3.

    86 asylum seekers waiting for the appeal sentence were excluded from the analysis since they did not show up at the hearing.

  4. 4.

    Predictive margins were estimated with all other covariates fixed at their means.

  5. 5.

    In the other 26 hearings, the lawyer was present without the asylum seeker. In those occasions, when lawyers declared they were not able to contact the asylum seeker, the judge usually decided to conclude the appeal procedure and decide on the case (mostly negatively). If the asylum seeker’s absence was due to personal reasons (work, health problems, etc.), the judge postponed the hearing.

  6. 6.

    One judge did not consent to participate in the research.

  7. 7.

    A careful reading of the data shows the existence of some inconsistencies between, on the one hand, age at arrival in Italy and age at the appeal stage and, on the other hand, days passed between the first arrival and the final decision. For example, according to age, Pakistanis get the final decision after 5 years from their arrival in Italy, whereas if one considers days between arrival and final decision, they have to wait “only” 4 years and 3 months. These discrepancies are due to missing data variability across variables.

  8. 8.

    Models were run considering one variable at a time due to multicollinearity.

  9. 9.

    Predictive margins were estimated with all other covariates fixed at their means.

References

  • Acierno, M. (2018). La protezione umanitaria nel sistema dei diritti umani. Questione Giustizia, 2, 99–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2004). Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Indicators of Integration: Final Report. Home Office Development and Practice Report, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, R. (2014). Time and the Migrant Other: European Border Controls and the Temporal Economics of Illegality. American Anthropologist, 116(4), 795–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asylum National Commission (2015). Circolare prot. 00003716 del 30.7.2015. Available online at: https://briguglio.asgi.it/immigrazione-e-asilo/2016/febbraio/circ-comm-naz-asilo-30-7-2015.pdf

  • Atfield, G., Brahmbhatt, K., & O’Toole, T. (2007). Refugees’ Experiences of Integration. Refugee Council and University of Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergeron, J., & Potter, S. (2006). Family Members and Relatives: An Important Resource for Newcomers’ Settlement? Canadian Issues: 76–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betts, A., & Collier, P. (2017). Refuge: Rethinking Refugee Policy in a Changing World. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biondi dal Monte, F. (2020). I richiedenti asilo e i diritti dell’integrazione. Diritto Costituzionale, 2, 113–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bissell, D. (2007). Animating Suspension: Waiting for Mobilities. Mobilities, 2(2), 277–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodkin, E. Z. (2021). Street-Level Organizations at the Front Lines of Crises. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 23(1), 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumat, L., Geddes, A., & Pettrachin, A. (2021). Making Sense of the Global: A Systematic Review of Globalising and Localising Dynamics in Refugee Governance. Journal of Refugee Studies, 35(2), 827–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, A., & Peel, M. (2001). Health Needs of Asylum Seekers and Refugees. British Medical Journal, 322(7285), 544–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campesi, G. (2018). Seeking Asylum in Times of Crisis: Reception, Confinement, and Detention at Europe’s Southern Border. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37(1), 44–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campomori, F., & Ambrosini, M. (2020). Multilevel Governance in Trouble: The Implementation of Asylum Seekers’ Reception in Italy as a Battleground. Comparative Migration Studies, 8(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, S. Y., & Phillimore, J. (2013). Social Networks, Social Capital and Refugee Integration. Sociology, 48(3), 518–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiaromonte, W., & Federico, V. (2021). The Labour Market Needs Them, But We Don’t Want Them to Stay for Good: The Conundrum of Migrants, Refugees and Asylum Seekers’ Integration in Italy. In V. Federico & S. Baglioni (Eds.), Migrants, Refugees and Asylum Seekers’ Integration in European Labour Markets: A Comparative Approach on Legal Barriers and Enablers (pp. 193–212). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chiswick, B. R. (1991). Speaking, Reading, and Earnings Among Low-Skilled Immigrants. Journal of Labor Economics, 9, 149–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. (2007). Shadowing: And Other Techniques for Doing Fieldwork in Modern Societies. Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallara, C., & Lacchei, A. (2021). Street-Level Bureaucrats and Coping Mechanisms. The Unexpected Role of Italian Judges in Asylum Policy Implementation. South European Society and Politics, 26(1), 83–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallara, C., Lacchei, A., & Verzelloni, L. (2022). Up-Scaling Innovation in Asylum Adjudication: The Case of the Migrantes Project in Sicily. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dustmann, C. (1994). Speaking Fluency, Writing Fluency and Earnings of Migrants. Journal of Population Economics, 7, 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dustmann, C., & van Soest, A. (2002). Language and the Earnings of Immigrants. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 55(3), 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ecker, A., Ennser-Jedenastik, L., & Haselmayer, M. (2020). Gender Bias in Asylum Adjudications: Evidence for Leniency Toward Token Women. Sex Roles, 82(1), 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Entzinger, H. (2000). The Dynamics of Integration Policies: A Multidimensional Model. In R. Koopmans & P. Statham (Eds.), Challenging Immigration and Ethnic Relations Politics: Comparative European Perspectives (pp. 97–118). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Federico, V., & Baglioni, F. (2021). Migrants, Refugees and Asylum Seekers’ Integration in European Labour Markets: A Comparative Approach on Legal Barriers and Enablers. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Federico, V., & Pannia, P. (2019). Migrants’ Legal Statuses in Contemporary Italy: First attempts of Conceptualization. Percorsi costituzionali, 1(18), 17–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein, S., Poleacovschi, C., Drake, R., & Winters, L. A. (2022). States and Refugee Integration: A Comparative Analysis of France, Germany, and Switzerland. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 23(3), 2167–2194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, A. (2021). Governing Migration beyond the State: Europe, North America, South America and Southeast Asia in a Global Context. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, N., & Good, A. (2019). Asylum Determination in Europe. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, N., Hoellerer, N., Allsopp, J., Burridge, A., Fisher, D., Griffiths, M., & Vianelli, L. (2022). Rethinking Commonality in Refugee Status Determination in Europe: Legal Geographies of Asylum Appeals. Political Geography, 98, 102686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grzymala-Kazlowska, A., & Phillimore, J. (2018). Introduction: Rethinking Integration: New Perspectives on Adaptation and Settlement in the Era of Super-Diversity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(2), 179–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D., & Lawrence, D. (2016). When Lives Are Put on Hold: Lengthy Asylum Processes Decrease Employment among Refugees. Science Advances, 2(8), e1600432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamlin, R. (2014). Let Me Be a Refugee: Administrative Justice and the Politics of Asylum in the United States. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heckmann, F., & Schnapper, D. (2003). The Integration of Immigrants in European Societies: National Differences and Trends of Convergence. Lucies & Lucius.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, G. (2001). On the History of the International Protection of Refugees. International Review of the Red Cross, 83(843), 727–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jann, B. (2014). Plotting Regression Coefficients and Other Estimates. The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata, 4, 708–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khosravi, S. (2014). Waiting. In B. Anderson & M. Keith (Eds.), Migration: A COMPAS Anthology (pp. 66–77). COMPAS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosyakova, Y., & Brenzel, H. (2020). The Role of Length of Asylum Procedure and Legal Status in the Labour Market Integration of Refugees in Germany. SozW Soziale Welt, 71(1–2), 123–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristjansdottir, E., & Dis Skaptadottir, U. (2018). “I’ll Always Be a Refugee.” The Lived Experiences of Palestinian Refugee Women of Moving to a Small Society in Iceland. Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, 17(3), 389–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht, E., & Bethlehem, D. (2003). The Scope and the Content of the Principle of Non-Refoulement: Opinion. In E. Feller, V. Türk, & F. Nicholson (Eds.), Refugee Protection in International Law: UNHCR’s Global Consultations on International Protection (pp. 87–177). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, B. N., & Ruffer, G. B. (2015). Adjudicating Refugee and Asylum Status: The Role of Witness, Expertise, and Testimony. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mendola, D., & Busetta, A. (2018). Health and Living Conditions of Refugees and Asylum-Seekers: A Survey of Informal Settlements in Italy. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37(4), 477–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of the Interior (2020). Quaderno statistico dal 1990 al 2020. Available online at: http://www.libertaciviliimmigrazione.dlci.interno.gov.it/sites/default/files/allegati/quaderno_statistico_per_gli_anni_1990_2020.pdf

  • Mood, C. (2010). Logistic Regression: Why We Cannot Do What We Think We Can Do, and What We Can Do About It. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E. (2005). Bogus Refugees? The Determinants of Asylum Migration to Western Europe. International Studies Quarterly, 49(3), 389–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noll, G. (2005). Proof, Evidentiary Assessment and Credibility in Asylum Procedures. Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Petrovic, N. (2020). Storia del diritto di asilo in Italia, 1945–2020: le istituzioni, la legislazione, gli aspetti socio-politici. FrancoAngeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillimore, J. (2021). Refugee-Integration-Opportunity Structures: Shifting the Focus from Refugees to Context. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34(2), 1946–1966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotter, R. (2016). Waiting in the Asylum Determination Process: Just an Empty Interlude? Time and Society, 25(1), 80–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruokolainen, H., & Widén, G. (2020). Conceptualising Misinformation in the Context of Asylum Seekers. Information Processing & Management, 57(3), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salvo, T., & de Williams, A. C. (2017). “If I Speak English, What Am I? I Am Full Man, Me”: Emotional Impact and Barriers for Refugees and Asylum Seekers Learning English. Transcultural Psychiatry, 54(5–6), 733–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schenner, J. K., Cavanna, P., & Ollus, N. (2019). Asylum-Seekers and the “Hyper-Precarity Trap” in Austria, Finland and Italy. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 25(1), 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. (2011). The Migration Debate. The Policy Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S., & Charsley, K. (2016). Conceptualising Integration: A Framework for Empirical Research, Taking Marriage Migration as A Case Study. Comparative Migration Studies, 4(18), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNHCR. (2001). Chapter 2.6: Fostering Independent Communication: Language Training Programs for Adult Resettled Refugees. In UNHCR (Eds.), Refugee Resettlement: An International Handbook to Guide Reception and Integration (pp. 121–140). UNCHR.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNHCR Executive Committee. (1977). Addendum to the Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. General Assembly, Official Records: Thirty-Second Session, Supplement No.12A (A/32/12/Add.1). New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vianelli, L., Gill, N., & Hoellerer, N. (2022). Waiting as Probation: Selecting Self-Disciplining Asylum Seekers. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 48(5), 1013–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. (2012). Using the Margins Command to Estimate and Interpret Adjusted Predictions and Marginal Effects. The Stata Journal, 12(2), 308–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wren, K. (2007). Supporting Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Glasgow: The Role of Multi-Agency Networks. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(3), 391–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zorzella, N. (2021). La nuova protezione speciale introdotta dal d.l. 130/2020. Tra principio di flessibilità, resistenze amministrative e problematiche applicative. Diritto, immigrazione e cittadinanza, 2, 129–154.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political and Social Science, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Alice Lacchei, Cristina Dallara & Debora Mantovani

Authors
  1. Alice Lacchei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cristina Dallara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Debora Mantovani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Debora Mantovani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Francesca Fauri

  2. Department of Political and Social Science, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Debora  Mantovani 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lacchei, A., Dallara, C., Mantovani, D. (2023). The Role of Local Socio-Economic Integration in Italian Asylum Adjudications. In: Fauri, F., Mantovani , D. (eds) Past and Present Migration Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39431-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39431-7_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39430-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39431-7

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation