PAPER PRESENTATION

Presenters

Atembe Roland is currently a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Innsbruck. His research focuses on opportunity creation, business development, and transformation economy. Roland has published peer-reviewed academic journal articles on entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, new venture creation, and the impact of digital innovation and financing options for SMEs.

Joy Ibifuro is a PhD candidate at the Department of African Studies, University of Vienna. She has a master degree in European Union Studies from the  University of Salzburg, and a Master of Arts in Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Innsbruck. She has held management and consultancy positions at several NGOs.

Research Summary 

The EU is increasingly deploying Migration Information Campaigns (MICs) to curb illicit migration from third countries. MICs target potential migrants before they leave their home or transit countries. Although campaigns take diverse forms, they often highlight the risk, vulnerabilities and challenges associated with irregular migration. In actuality, these campaigns are designed for anti-migration purpose. 

A considerable amount of literature has been published on the EU and its Member States funded MICs. Among others, these studies observed that migrants overwhelmingly view awareness campaigns as ‘inaccurate’, ‘biased’ and ‘untrustworthy’. MICs are not out of genuine concern for its targeted audience but are deployed as a tool for preventing immigrants perceived as ‘unwelcome’ by the receiving States. 

In this study, we examined the efficacy of MICs between 2015 till 2022. Drawing on the Social Network Theory and through focus group discussions our study examined how migrants receive, filter and manage information about destination countries. Our study focused on asylum seekers and migrants with refugee status  between ages 20 – 40 in Austria, Germany and Italy.

What  can EU policymakers and migration agencies learn from this study? Our findings reveal that social ties play a pivotal role in migratory information search, destination choice, as well as travel patterns. Migrants mostly rely on information emanating from ‘diaspora bubbles’, rather than dissuasive campaigns from institutional sources. Furthermore, Information campaigns are not an effective tool for restricting irregular migration because migration decision-making are guided by perceived benefits in the destination countries rather than risks. 

MICs fall short because migrants are enticed by diaspora success stories; they pay little attention to the doom and gloom narratives presented in MICs. Furthermore, campaigns do not deter migrants because the conditions in their home or transit countries are sometimes more gruesome than the dangers of irregular migration. Consequently, MICs were found to have little or no impact on migration decision making.

Keywords: Migration Information Campaigns, Africa-EU Migration, Irregular Migration, Diaspora in Europe