Log in
Of the over 300,000 applicants seeking asylum in the European Union each year, 85% enter the EU through Greece. A landmark legal case relied on EU-wide research, the UK component of which was led by University of Glasgow, to show that Greece was not implementing minimum EU standards in processing asylum claims. The research and the Judges' finding challenged the assumption, made by the UK and other states, that asylum applications were treated in an equivalent manner across the EU and the requirement, based on that assumption, that applicants make their claim only in the country through which they entered the EU. The findings and the legal action shaped widespread calls for asylum reform in Europe, leading to an `Action Plan on Greece' from the EC's European Asylum Support Office.
This case study covers two research projects undertaken at the University of Manchester (UoM) which had unprecedented access to the immigration appeals system, both impacting on asylum policy. The first project focused on family visitor appeals and showed that the introduction of a fee was not a significant deterrent to accessing the appeals process. The second project on asylum appeals made a number of recommendations concerning the handling of appeals by the Tribunal, and the reporting of its decisions.
The research on family visitor appeals was the basis for a Ministry of Justice consultation paper in 2010, and was directly cited by the government when introducing fees for immigration appeals. The research on asylum appeals has influenced policy and thinking within the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), with particular regard to the Tribunal's management of its country guidance system. More recently, following a presentation of this research to Tribunal members, a new `Guidance Note' on the reporting of cases was produced.
Through engagement by Ministerial invitation as a member of successive UK Government advisory groups on Country Information (IAGCI) from 2007 to 2013 and based on expertise arising from research conducted at City University London, Dr Christopher McDowell has contributed to the acknowledged improvement in the quality of asylum decision-making. He has guided the UK Home Office Country of Origin Information Services (COIS) in developing academically-rigorous research and review procedures. The adopted methodology based on his research has contributed to the generation of more accurate, up to date and fully referenced human rights information that forms the basis of the legal determination of asylum and human rights claims. The United Nations, the UK's Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency and the British Red Cross agree that as a result of the work of the IAGCI the UK now has the most accountable and robust Country Information system in the EU, achieving fairer decisions and providing a model which is likely to be replicated across EU member states.
In recognition of his expertise on the socio-economic and cultural dimensions of involuntary resettlement occurring as a result of infrastructure development projects and land acquisition, Dr McDowell has also led or participated in several international evaluations of shelter and resettlement operations; and made recommendations for improvement in policy and practice. This includes his engagement as an International Resettlement Specialist by the Inspection Panel (IP) of The World Bank to investigate the social and resettlement aspects of a highly-controversial, multimillion dollar landfill project in Accra, Ghana. As a result of this engagement, The World Bank, accepting the IP's findings that both the pre-construction impact studies and community consultations with residents were insufficient, froze the project loan, enabling time for full consultations and impact assessments. The investigation resulted in an important new World Bank requirement that comprehensive Zone of Impact Assessments are undertaken in all future projects as part of loan preparations.
The multi-media exhibition and publication Border Country (2007-2010 and 2007) by photographer Melanie Friend, with its research focus on the experience of asylum-seekers at the point of their incarceration in UK Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs), have contributed to national and international public understanding of standards of well-being and human rights in relation to asylum detention, challenging assumptions about national detention practices and their impact on individual detainees. It has also informed campaigning materials and training sessions for immigration centre visitors and lawyers working with immigrants and detainees. Border Country's impact is on-going: its images and text continue to be shown six years after the first exhibition.
Essex research on understanding the vulnerability of displaced persons has changed the practice of organisations that work with asylum seekers and refugees. Professor Renos Papadopoulos' research has focused on the resilience and strengths of the individual, rather than seeing him/her as a passive `victim'. This approach has informed two instruments that are used to assess vulnerability: the Trauma Grid and ASPIS. These instruments have been adopted by a number of organisations throughout the world and Papadopoulos has produced a training manual and provided training programmes for frontline and management staff. The examples provided here document his work with organisations based in the UK, Greece, Colombia and Sudan.
The research has changed the conceptualisation among policy-makers and practitioners of the nature of the right to asylum (from a right of states to grant it to a right of individuals to receive it). The research has led to a change in the law and policy of the United Nations and of the European Union in this field. According to UN data, an estimated 441,300 asylum claims were lodged in industrialised countries in 2011, representing an increase of 20% in relation to the previous year. In 2012 more than 45.2 million people were in situations of forced displacement, the highest figure in the last 18 years. Hence, the reach of the impact is global and its significance lies in strengthening human rights protection in situations of forced displacement.
A series of projects which examined judicial reception of evidence and enabled development and uptake of guides for best practice in asylum determination has contributed to international good practice in a field where it is difficult to ensure objective and fair decision making. The projects included analysis of: gender guidelines; medical evidence; Country of Origin Information (COI); and best practice where children are subject to the asylum process, including COI and evidence relating to age assessment. The research has stimulated and contributed to debate among practitioners. Further, medical evidence guidelines proposed by the research team have been adopted by the International Association of Refugee Law Judges (IARLJ) affecting judicial activity internationally. In addition, research into reception of evidence surrounding COI led to a position on an Advisory Board and development of a further best practice guide.
The research was undertaken in response to growing concerns about the impact of age disputes on the protection and welfare of separated asylum-seeking children. It identified considerable procedural variations in the assessment of age and an over-reliance on physical appearance and medical techniques with wide margins of error. The research has led to a significant reduction in the number of age disputes in the UK through improvements to professional standards, guidelines and training for lawyers and social workers, and has informed policy and practice relating to procedures for the assessment of age in the UK, Europe and Australia.
Dr Eiko Thielemann is Director of the LSE's Migration Studies Unit (MSU). His research into asylum policy in the EU has shown that certain key policies have undermined efforts to share responsibility for the over six million asylum seekers that have entered Europe over the past two decades. MSU's policy recommendations and Thielemann's involvement in the policymaking process have helped shift the debate away from an over-reliance on EU policy harmonisation towards the adoption of new burden-sharing instruments. By providing robust analysis in an emotive policy area, the MSU's research has contributed to the development of more equitable and effective policies that have helped some of the world's most vulnerable individuals to find protection from persecution.
University of Huddersfield research into the history of mental health care has encouraged a broad range of stakeholders and individuals to challenge their values and beliefs about people who live with mental health issues and the services they use. The work has contributed to modern-day policy, practice and perceptions through a series of collaborations with health officials and practitioners, third-sector organisations, service users and the wider public, including museum exhibitions, online engagement and bespoke teaching and learning materials. Beneficiaries have credited the research with helping to "break down the barriers and stigmas" that surround mental health and with developing positive attitudes towards the issue.