The moral conflict underpinning public perceptions of fairness in asylum decision-making
| dc.contributor.author | DRAŽANOVÁ, Lenka | |
| dc.contributor.author | RUHS, Martin | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-04-15T09:08:27Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2025-04-15T09:08:27Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The regulation and perceived (un)fairness of asylum policies have become highly contentious in European politics. Yet, little is known about how people decide whether an asylum decision-making process is fair or unfair, and how and why this varies between individuals within and across countries. To address this gap, this paper explores the moral foundations underpinning public conceptions of fairness in this policy domain. We argue that individuals’ fairness evaluations of asylum decision-making are shaped by two competing moral orientations: ‘individualising’ moral foundations (such as care and equality) which emphasise procedural fairness vis-à-vis asylum seekers, and ‘binding’ moral foundations (such as loyalty and authority) which prioritise distributive fairness that safeguards the host community’s interests. We thus expect that variations in public fairness evaluations of asylum decision-making processes are fundamentally related to how different individuals evaluate and resolve any conflicts between their individualising and binding moral foundations. Our empirical analyses draw on data from an original conjoint survey experiment conducted in Germany and Italy with a sample of approximately 1,300 respondents per country. Our findings confirm that respondents with high levels of individualising moral foundations of ‘care’ are more likely to view procedural safeguards as enhancing fairness, while those endorsing binding moral foundations, such as ‘loyalty’, prioritise distributive fairness that aligns with national interests. Importantly, we show that fairness perceptions are shaped by how individuals balance competing moral considerations when evaluating asylum policies. These findings advance our understanding of the fundamental sources of public responses toward asylum and refuge protection policies, with important implications for public debates and policy-making. | en |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1028-3625 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1814/78296 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en |
| dc.orcid.upload | true | * |
| dc.publisher | European University Institute | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | EUI | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | RSC | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | Working Paper | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | 2025/11 | en |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | Migration Policy Centre | en |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en |
| dc.rights.license | Attribution 4.0 International | * |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | * |
| dc.subject | Moral foundations | en |
| dc.subject | Fairness perceptions | en |
| dc.subject | Asylum decision-making | en |
| dc.subject | Conjoint experiment | en |
| dc.title | The moral conflict underpinning public perceptions of fairness in asylum decision-making | en |
| dc.type | Working Paper | en |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| person.identifier.orcid | 0000-0001-8699-1914 | |
| person.identifier.orcid | 0000-0001-6376-2414 | |
| person.identifier.other | 35809 | |
| person.identifier.other | 42877 | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication | 2e116123-f418-497d-a755-bea4f8e4c8f0 | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication | edf8cbb6-2c9a-4ddf-9b1e-39b5477d5aaf | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | 2e116123-f418-497d-a755-bea4f8e4c8f0 |
