IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/devpol/v44y2026i4ne70087.html

Securitization of migration policy in Europe: Institutional stakeholders' perspectives in a Polish policy system in statu nascendi

Author

Listed:
  • Brygida Solga
  • Diana Rokita‐Poskart
  • Anna Bryniarska

Abstract

Motivation The past decade has brought unprecedented migration crises to the European Union, transforming member states' migration policies. While securitization of migration has been extensively studied in Western Europe, research on Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries remains limited, particularly regarding states constructing their migration management systems from scratch (in statu nascendi, referring to a system in its early, formative stage). Poland presents a compelling case: rapidly transforming from an emigration to an immigration country while simultaneously facing migration instrumentalization at its eastern border and the largest refugee influx since the Second World War. Purpose This study identifies institutional stakeholders' preferences regarding Poland's emerging migration policy, examining the extent to which these preferences reflect a security‐oriented framing of migration policy. Three research questions guide the analysis: (1) What migration policy model dominates the preferences of institutional stakeholders in Poland? (2) How do respondents from different types of institution (government, local authorities, NGOs, business, or academia) differentiate the selection of migration policy objectives and values? (3) Which policy instruments are most salient among stakeholders: restrictive, economic, integrative, or settlement‐oriented? Approach and methods Research was conducted as a quantitative survey in 2024 among representatives of institutional entities directly or indirectly involved in migration processes in Poland, including government and local administration, social and international organizations, business entities, and educational institutions. Findings The results indicate that stakeholder preferences reflect a model that combines security with economic, social, and humanitarian priorities rather than exclusive securitization. Security was most frequently selected (68.7% among maximum three values), but human rights (59.2%), social cohesion (55.9%), and economic prosperity (54.0%) retained substantial support. Institution type significantly differentiates preferences. Stakeholders favour pragmatic, short‐term instruments (qualification recognition, labour rights protection) over long‐term settlement mechanisms. Policy implications CEE migration policy, in particular Poland's, requires balancing security with humanitarian values through multi‐institutional dialogue mechanisms. The preference for short‐term economic instruments over settlement policies risks social segmentation and “parallel societies,” necessitating strategic integration approaches beyond labour market utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Brygida Solga & Diana Rokita‐Poskart & Anna Bryniarska, 2026. "Securitization of migration policy in Europe: Institutional stakeholders' perspectives in a Polish policy system in statu nascendi," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 44(4), July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:44:y:2026:i:4:n:e70087
    DOI: 10.1111/dpr.70087
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.70087
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/dpr.70087?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:44:y:2026:i:4:n:e70087. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/odioruk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.