Overburdened? How refugee dispersal policies can mitigate Nimbyism and public backlash

Bibliographic Data

ID6289059
AuthorsOmer Solodoch (0000-0003-0347-5434, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume31
Issue9
Pages2455-2482
Publication date2024-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of European Public Policy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1350-1763 • E-ISSN: 1466-4429
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/13501763.2023.2191271
OpenAlexW4366758848
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited40

With growing numbers of forcibly displaced people and their tendency to spatially cluster, destination countries around the world consider dispersing them over their territory. While the egocentric not-in-my-back-yard syndrome (NIMBYism) predicts that dispersion will spark a public backlash, sociotropic considerations and appeals to civic fairness predict the contrary. I theorise that the institutional set-up determines which force prevails. Although the local proximity of refugees triggers public opposition, it can be substantially countered by tighter regulation on refugee dispersion. Setting clear guiding rules, such as an upper limit or proportional allocation can enhance both burden-sharing in the accommodation of refugees and public support for their incorporation. Evidence from survey experiments conducted in Norway and Israel supports these theoretical accounts. The findings have implications for understanding how countries can mitigate public backlash against immigrants and refugees while maintaining their admission and integration

Accommodation · Backlash · Development economics · Economics · Immigration · Opposition (politics · Political economy · Political science · Refugee · Relocation · Sociology · Law · Migration and Labor Dynamics · Migration, Refugees, and Integration · Populism, Right-Wing Movements · Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access