IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v56y2018i1p63-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Refugee Burden†Sharing Initiatives Fail: Public Goods, Free†Riding and Symbolic Solidarity in the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Eiko Thielemann

Abstract

Traditionally, differences in states’ refugee protection contributions have been attributed to the variation in countries’ structural pull†factors such as their geographic location. However, policy choices, such as Germany's decision to open its borders for Syrian refugees in 2015, can also have a significant impact on the number of arrivals and constitute a puzzle that traditional approaches struggle to explain. This paper demonstrates that viewing refugee burden†sharing through the lens of public goods theory can provide significant insights about refugee protection dynamics in the EU, in particular in the context of a sudden mass influx of migrants that threatens internal security. By highlighting how free†riding and burden†shifting dynamics can undermine the provision of collective goods during a refugee crisis, a public goods approach can advance our understanding of why countries sometimes accept disproportionate responsibilities for forced migrants and how the effectiveness of EU refugee burden†sharing instruments can, and should, be strengthened.

Suggested Citation

  • Eiko Thielemann, 2018. "Why Refugee Burden†Sharing Initiatives Fail: Public Goods, Free†Riding and Symbolic Solidarity in the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 63-82, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:56:y:2018:i:1:p:63-82
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12662
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.12662?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Niu, Bingcheng, 2024. "Government environmental protection expenditure and national ESG performance: Global evidence," Innovation and Green Development, Elsevier, vol. 3(2).
    2. Philipp Lutz & David Kaufmann & Anna Stünzi, 2020. "Humanitarian Protection as a European Public Good: The Strategic Role of States and Refugees," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 757-775, May.
    3. Veshi Denard, 2020. "The EU Regulatory Competition in Asylum Law," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 19-30, June.
    4. Gerasimos Tsourapas & Sotirios Zartaloudis, 2022. "Leveraging the European Refugee Crisis: Forced Displacement and Bargaining in Greece's Bailout Negotiations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 245-263, March.
    5. Petros Xepapadeas & Ioannis Mourtos, 2022. "Refugee allocation mechanisms: theory and applications for the European Union," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 4557-4584, September.
    6. Danilo Di Mauro & Vincenzo Memoli, 2021. "The Role of Public Opinion in EU Integration: Assessing the Relationship between Elites and the Public during the Refugee Crisis," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(5), pages 1303-1321, September.
    7. Alexia Katsanidou & Ann-Kathrin Reinl & Christina Eder, 2022. "Together we stand? Transnational solidarity in the EU in times of crises," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(1), pages 66-78, March.
    8. Daniele Archibugi & Marco Cellini & Mattia Vitiello, 2019. "Refugees in the European Union: from emergency alarmism to common management," Management Working Papers 17, Birkbeck Department of Management, revised Feb 2021.
    9. Kwon-Sik Kim & Seong-ho Jeong, 2019. "Free Riding without Dead Weight Losses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-15, September.
    10. Silvia Angeloni, 2019. "Improving the distribution of asylum-seekers through a multi-criteria index," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(2), pages 328-337, June.

    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:jcmkts:v:56:y:2018:i:1:p:63-82. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    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.