Towards more fairness among states: How Dublin transfers redistribute asylum responsibility

Abstract

Solidarity and fairness in allocating refugee protection responsibilities is a central challenge in European asylum governance. The Dublin Regulation, assigning responsibility primarily to first countries of entry, has been criticised for exacerbating unequal burdens to member states. Yet systematic evidence on how Dublin transfers affect the distribution of responsibilities remains scarce. This article analyses Dublin statistics from 2008 to 2024 using a distribution key based on member states’ size and wealth as normative benchmark. We assess whether Dublin transfers reduce or exacerbate asymmetries between member states. Contrary to common perceptions, Dublin transfers modestly reduce inequitable distribution of asylum responsibilities, resulting from geographic arrival patterns paired with partial implementation. These findings challenge prevailing critiques and offer insights for evaluating the EU's solidarity mechanism.

Keywords

Asylum European Union Dublin responsibility-sharing fairness

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrisketa Uriarte

(2022) The European pact on migration and asylum: border containment and frontline states. European Journal of Migration and Law 24(4): 463–488.

Angeloni

(2019) Improving the distribution of asylum-seekers through a multi-criteria index. European Union Politics 20(2): 328–337.

Bansak

Hainmueller

Hangartner

(2017) Europeans support a proportional allocation of asylum seekers. Nature Human Behaviour 1: 0133.

Council of the European Union (2024, May 14) The Council adopts the EU’s pact on migration and asylum. Press release. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/05/14/the-council-adopts-the-eu-s-pact-on-migration-and-asylum/.

De Bruycker

(2024) The New European Solidarity Mechanism: Towards a Fair Sharing of Responsibility Between Member States? Brussels: Policy Study, Foundation for European Progressive Studies, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and European Policy Centre.

Den Heijer

Rijpma

Spijkerboer

(2016) Coercion, prohibition, and great expectations: the continuing failure of the Common European Asylum System. Common Market Law Review 53(3): 607–642.

Dreyer-Plum

(2020) Dublin revisited: geographic asymmetry and corrective allocation mechanisms. European Journal of Migration and Law 22(3): 386–426.

European Commission (EC) (2015) Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the council establishing a crisis relocation mechanism and amending regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanism for determining the member state responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the member state by a third-country national or a stateless person. European Commission 450 Final, Brussels, 9 September 2015.

European Commission (EC) (2016) Towards a sustainable and fair Common European Asylum System [Press release, May 4th 2016]. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_16_1620/IP_16_1620_EN.pdf.

10.

European Commission (EC) (2020) Commission staff working document: accompanying the proposal for a regulation on asylum and migration management [published Sept. 23^rd 2020]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020SC0207.

11.

European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (2018) To Dublin or not to Dublin? ECRE Policy Note 16.

12.

European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (2024) ECRE comments on the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Asylum and Migration Management, amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1147 and (EU) 2021/1060 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (JRC141980). Available at: https://ecre.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/ECRE_Comments_Asylum-and-Migration-Management-Regulation.pdf.

13.

European Court of Auditors (ECA) (2019) Asylum, relocation and return of migrants: time to step up action to address disparities between objectives and results. Special Report No. 24. European Court of Auditors, Luxembourg. Available at: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR19_24/SR_Migration_management_EN.pdf.

14.

Fratzke

(2015) Not Adding Up: The Fading Promise of Europe's Dublin System. Brussels: Migration Policy Institute Europe.

15.

Gan

(2025) Weighing responsibilities: the allocation of fair refugee quotas. International Theory 18(1): 1–21.

16.

Gibney

(2015) Refugees and justice between states. European Journal of Political Theory 14(4): 448–463.

17.

Grech

(2016) Undesired properties of the European Commission’s refugee distribution key. European Union Politics 18(2): 212–238.

18.

Guild

Costello

Garlick

, et al. (2015) Enhancing the Common European Asylum System and Alternatives to Dublin. Study for the European Parliament, LIBE Committee, PE 519.234. Brussels: European Parliament.

19.

Holányi

(2025) Unpolitics, domestic pressures, or else? The opposition of Visegrád Group countries to the EU’s pact on migration and asylum. Journal of European Integration: 1–22. DOI: 10.1080/07036337.2025.2519043.

20.

Ippolito

Velluti

(2011) The recast process of the EU asylum system: a balancing act between efficiency and fairness. Refugee Survey Quarterly 30(3): 24–62.

21.

Küçük

(2016) The principle of solidarity and fairness in sharing responsibility: more than window dressing? European Law Journal 22(4): 448–469.

22.

Lutz

Karstens

(2021) External borders and internal freedoms: how the refugee crisis shaped the bordering preferences of European citizens. Journal of European Public Policy 28(3): 370–388.

23.

Lutz

Kaufmann

Stünzi

(2020) Humanitarian protection as a European public good: the strategic role of states and refugees. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 58(3): 757–775.

24.

Lutz

Stünzi

Manser-Egli

(2021) Responsibility-sharing in refugee protection: lessons from climate governance. International Studies Quarterly 65(2): 476–487.

25.

Maiani

(2016) ‘The Reform of the Dublin III Regulation’, PE 571.360, Brussels: Study for the European Parliament's Committee on Civll Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

26.

Maiani

(2017) The reform of the Dublin system and the dystopia of ‘sharing people’. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 24(5): 622–645.

27.

Moreno-Lax

(2012) Dismantling the Dublin system: M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece. European Journal of Migration and Law 14(1): 1–31.

28.

Nieswandt

(2025) The intra-EU relocation scheme of 2015: a test run for a Dublin reform. International Migration 63(6): e70112.

29.

Noll

(2003) Risky games? A theoretical approach to burden-sharing in the asylum field. Journal of Refugee Studies 16(3): 236–252.

30.

Siruno

Leerkes

Hendow

, et al. (2024) MIrreM working paper on irregular migration flows. MIrreM Working Paper No. 9. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10702228.

31.

Statewatch (2024) ‘Migration Pact ‘will engender a proliferation of human rights violations’ and must be rejected': 9 April 2024.

32.

Takle

Seeberg

(2015) All European countries are not the same! The Dublin Regulation and onward migration in Europe. NOVA Report, NOVA: Oslo.

33.

The Guardian (2024) EU passes asylum and migration pact after eight years of deadlock. theguardian.com, 10 April 2024.

34.

Thielemann

(2003) Between interests and norms: explaining burden-sharing in the European Union. Journal of Refugee Studies 16(3): 253–273.

35.

Thielemann

(2018) Why refugee burden-sharing initiatives fail: public goods, free-riding and symbolic solidarity in the EU. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 56(1): 63–82.

36.

Thielemann

Armstrong

(2013) Understanding European asylum cooperation under the Schengen/Dublin system: a public goods framework. European Security 22(2): 148–164.

37.

Trauner

(2016) Asylum policy: the EU's ‘crises’ and the looming policy regime failure. Journal of European Integration 38(3): 311–325.

38.

Trauner

Lutz

Stutz

(2025) Towards a fairer EU asylum policy: lessons from the Dublin system for the EU’s Solidarity Mechanism (Discussion Paper, European Migration and Diversity Programme). European Policy Centre.

39.

Vaagland

Chmiel

(2024) Parochialism and non-co-operation: the case of Poland’s opposition to EU migration policy. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 62(5): 1332–1350.

40.

Vink

Meijerink

(2003) Asylum applications and recognition rates in EU member states 1982–2001: a quantitative analysis. Journal of Refugee Studies 16(3): 297–315.

41.

Woeffray

(2023) Implementation leeway in the Dublin system: evidence from Switzerland. Journal of European Public Policy 31(9): 2937–2959.

42.

Zaun

(2018) States as gatekeepers in EU asylum politics. explaining the non-adoption of a refugee quota system. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 56(1): 44–62.

43.

Zaun

(2022) Fence-sitters no more: Southern and Central Eastern European Member States’ role in the deadlock of the CEAS reform. Journal of European Public Policy 29(2): 196–217.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

1.93 MB

0.01 MB

0.00 MB

12.08 MB