Interest Groups and Asylum: How does lobbying influence asylum policy?

Abstract

How do interest groups which lobby for the rights of asylum seekers influence policy? For groups which lack the right to participate in electoral politics, the lobbying channel is a more plausible path to influence. Previous research has dealt with interest groups as a whole, occasionally studying individual or minority lobbying groups, but never asylum rights groups. My research fills this gap, testing the findings of general interest group studies and developing new theories. I use mixed methods in a comparative study of asylum rights groups and related organisations working in Germany and the UK. My first empirical chapter uses autoregressive time series models to measure the relationship between public opinion and asylum policy, finding a significant association in both countries. In Germany, increased salience and more open immigration preferences precede an increase in the rate at which refugee status is granted. In the UK, increased salience and restrictive immigration preferences precede a fall in rates. These results demonstrate how elected officials and asylum caseworkers are more responsive to public opinion than to lobbying. My next two chapters use quantitative text analysis to study German and UK asylum rights groups' lobbying strategies. For the UK, I compare position papers from parliamentary committee inquiries with the resulting inquiry reports. Papers which use similar language to that of the report are more likely to have influenced policy. I find that asylum rights groups are more influential when they have expertise, experience, and more complex arguments. For Germany, I use policy consultation documents to analyse coalition-building strategies. I find that asylum rights groups create homogenous coalitions with like-minded groups rather than business or labour groups, with potential negative consequences for their lobbying outcomes. My final chapter uses elite interviews to study the effects of institutional arrangements on asylum rights groups' work in Germany and the UK. Germany's lobbying system incorporates interest groups into the policymaking process, building trust and productive working relationships. In contrast, the UK's laissez faire arrangements create few insiders and a large number of outsiders, excluding most asylum rights groups from policymaking and limiting their influence. My findings have important implications for the representation of asylum seekers and other minority or disadvantaged social groups. Groups lobbying on their behalf can rely on their strategic abilities to a limited extent, but may struggle to build a broad coalition of support. Instead, the regulation of their work and the support of the public can make a more substantial and lasting difference to how their rights are acknowledged and represented.

Date of Award	31 Dec 2023
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	The University of Manchester
Supervisor	Robert Ford (Supervisor)