IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cxt/phelrj/v4y2024i1p184-194.html

Latvian policy towards Ukrainian refugees in 2022 as the example of EU temporary protection

Author

Listed:
  • Artem Kokosh

Abstract

Latvian policy towards Ukrainian refugees and their social conditions in 2022 passed through the period of wide financial support in the end of the winter and spring as well as attempts to decrease financial aid in the summer and autumn. Being the part of EU policy of temporary protection, however, Latvian experience of support for Ukrainian citizens presented how such a little state could be one of those that provided the most aid to Ukraine having spent 1 % of the GDP in 2022. Offering almost the same rights for Ukrainian citizens staying in the country as for its residents, Latvia covered all the necessary costs of refugees’ living. Having compared the experience of Latvian policy towards refugees with other EU states, particularly with Poland, the article is the attempt to define all advantages and disadvantages of temporary protection for Ukrainian refugees. Due to the terms of Russo-Ukrainian war the policy became the attempt to integrate refugees into society and to decrease the state outcomes making refugees to be responsible for their social conditions

Suggested Citation

  • Artem Kokosh, 2024. "Latvian policy towards Ukrainian refugees in 2022 as the example of EU temporary protection," Philosophy, Economics and Law Review Articles, Philosophy, Economics and Law Review, vol. 4(1), pages 184-194, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cxt:phelrj:v:4:y:2024:i:1:p:184-194
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.63341/2786-491X-2024-1-184-194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://phelr.com.ua/web/uploads/pdf/article_KOKOSH.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.63341/2786-491X-2024-1-184-194?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

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cxt:phelrj:v:4:y:2024:i:1:p:184-194. 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: Philosophy, Economics and Law Review (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://phelr.com.ua/ .

    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.