Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/240322 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2021
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
Working Paper Series No. 05
Verlag: 
University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality", Konstanz
Zusammenfassung: 
Asylum policy-making in advanced democracies frequently faces the accusation that prejudice and stereotyping lead to erroneous decisions. The model of taste-based discrimination suggests that the biases of decision-makers or their peers against certain groups of applicants influence the evaluation of an asylum claim. Conversely, the concept of statistical discrimination implies that a dearth of information forces impartial decision-makers to resort to stereotypes. We examine both forms of discrimination, evaluating whether they shape asylum-seekers' chances to receive protection in Germany, currently a key recipient country. Our empirical examination of a representative refugee survey in Germany confirms that asylum decisions are subject to tastebased discrimination: males, Muslims, and applicants assigned to regions with a conservative population or government are less likely to obtain asylum or other forms of protection. Conforming to the theory of statistical discrimination, stereotyping against male or Muslim applicants' manifests most pronouncedly if decision-makers suffer under high workload or possess little information. However, high information costs do not alter stereotyping in more conservative regions. Altogether, our study reveals that extra-legal reasons in the form of prejudice and stereotypes considerably undermine what should be the key criterion in assessing an asylum claim: the credibility of an individual's need for protection.
Schlagwörter: 
Asylum recognition
principal-agent models
federalism
immigration attitudes,Germany
discrimination
JEL: 
F22
H83
J16
K37
K38
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
1.19 MB
602.9 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.