How Misinformation and Rumors Shape Refugees’ Access to Fundamental Rights

• In Event: Methodological Innovations in Refugee and Migration Research

Abstract

Few persons fleeing armed conflict actually claim international protection upon arrival in Europe, even though the benefits of legal protection are significant. Indeed, the global refugee regime represents one of the few generous commitments governments offer to outsiders (Betts 2009; Betts 2011; Benvenisti 2013). Asylum seekers’ decision to remain informal is particularly puzzling in light of the risks it entails; so why do they selectively exercise their legal rights? Existing theories highlight bureaucratic obstacles and push-pull factors, such as attractive onward destinations, to explain the significant gap between formal protections and actual rights access. These factors ignore migrants’ cost-benefit analysis and how uncertainty influences their ability to adjudicate between options. In this paper, we argue that migrants’ decision to apply for asylum and exercise their rights is influenced by how they access, sort, and interpret information. The content of the information they receive, the source that delivers this information, and how often this information is repeated are critical to how migrants perform cost-benefit analysis. To address these factors, we leverage a mixed-methods research program that combines ethnographic and interview-based research with quantitative data drawn from anonymous online rumor trackers. We develop a theoretical explanation that captures how asylum seekers collect information and use it to inform their decision-making.

Authors

• Katerina Linos, University of California, Berkeley

• Melissa Anne Carlson, University of California, Berkeley

• Laura Jakli, UC Berkeley