Migration is a key topic to consider taking a new stance on in the next decade. Not only has it become a significant issue in the European Union (E.U.), but it has also become a worldwide phenomenon. This topic has long predated the European Syrian and Ukrainian crises, with economic migration from Africa and Eastern Europe dominating pre-2010 waves. For example, in the early 2000s, Southern Europe had already become a key entry point due to its proximity to Africa and the Balkans. Consequently, this led to hosting significant numbers of migrants from Algeria, Morocco, and Albania. As these historical patterns set the stage, the E.U.’s eastward expansion further intensified migration flows, particularly along the Mediterranean route, which became synonymous with migrants seeking economic opportunities and safety. However, E.U. responses largely prioritized border control over integration, revealing systemic issues in migration governance. Despite frameworks like the Dublin Regulation aiming at managing asylum claims, systemic failures have progressively become evident in the South. This regulation disproportionately burdened frontline states like Italy, Spain, and Greece, creating inequities in how Member States (M.S.) handled migration and exposing the need for unified and long-term E.U. solidarity mechanisms.

The failure to support the Southern M.S. struggling to meet the demands of the increasing influx and citizen expectations puts everyone at a disadvantage. Conversely, the M.S. of Northern Europe, such as Germany and the Netherlands, benefit from their geographical position and robust migration laws. This disjointed approach between North and South has fueled institutional mistrust and perpetuated public discontent in the South, further entrenching migration as a divisive issue. Therefore, we must preface the need to address these historical failings since they are critical in shaping a more equitable and effective migration policy framework. These different outcomes and approaches perhaps demonstrate the importance and influence of policy formulation and citizen agency in migration management.

This topic is crucial given the new “questionable” procedures the E.U. is using to manage migration. Recent E.U. discussions focus on a new form of management for migration through agreements with third countries deemed safe, such as Albania, to process asylum seekers or establish return hubs. This mechanism should allow for a smoother transition in case their asylum request gets rejected while they wait for an answer in Albania. Critics argue that these measures prioritize efficiency over human rights, undermining core E.U. principles such as solidarity and shared responsibility outlined in Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Concerns about power imbalances, lack of accountability, and over-reliance on E.U. funding highlight potential legal and ethical implications of these new practices, particularly for third countries with limited capacity to protect migrants. This approach should be seen as a temporary solution in managing migration since the burden remains in the South. In summary, the inability to uphold the principle of solidarity continues to erode trust in E.U. institutions.

Migration cannot be ignored or hidden; it is a reality shaped by historical, social, and environmental forces. Sam Miller emphasizes in Migrants that the movement of people is integral to human history and increasingly so in the face of climate change and global inequities. Furthermore, future migration will be driven by rising sea levels, desertification, and resource scarcity, making it a pressing issue. Thus, we need to change our perception of migration as an inevitable aspect of the global landscape. Moreover, in this report, we want to grasp how the legislation we write potentially shapes citizen perceptions regarding migration.

This report addresses first the historical aspects of culture and law in the North and then in the South of Europe to better comprehend how cultural and legal factors shape differing approaches to migration policy. Finally, it examines the reason for the resurgence of right-wing politics as a reaction to ineffective policies in migration and the lack of citizen agency.

We will examine the key components of the gaps in migration policy leading to its failure. Many Southern E.U. M.S. have stated a lack of institutional trust and citizens’ inability to be involved in a civic engagement context. Firstly, we will define and understand the attainment of these concepts to better comprehend the contrast between North and South E.U. The theory is that citizens give institutional trust to government entities when they believe they are conducting their duties fairly, transparently, and honestly. However, research by Alessandro et al. (2021) demonstrates that transparency alone is not enough to establish governmental trust, suggesting potential additional components are necessary to build trust effectively.

Other researchers elude to citizen agency being a key component in fostering trust in institutions and legislation. The research posits that this component can be embedded within civic society, which comprises networks and structures where citizens have other forms of engagement with democracy, such as participatory initiatives or localized decision-making processes, potentially influencing institutional trust. Further research indicates that civic education enhances institutional trust and promotes social order by equipping individuals with knowledge about their roles and rights within a democracy. Additionally, this kind of education gives a toolkit to the younger generation of citizens to attempt to diminish corruption and ensure transparency. Through these mechanisms, civic education empowers individuals to actively engage in policy-making and hold governments accountable, strengthening institutional trust. Examining these definitions demonstrates the potential importance of civic education and trust in institutions to ensure the longevity and efficiency of a policy.

Research by Ekerim-Akbulut et al. (2020) suggests that institutional trust relates to psychological factors influencing ingroup and outgroup perceptions. These dynamics, rooted in social identity theory, explain how individuals categorize themselves and others into groups, fostering solidarity within the ingroup while often perceiving outgroups as potential threats. This research found that perceptions of threat and dissimilarity contribute to prejudice and reduced trust toward outgroups, which in turn undermines institutional trust in diverse societies. Similarly, Timotijevic and Breakwell (2000) highlight that migration often triggers identity threats, particularly in contexts where cultural heritage is deeply valued. In summary, this aspect indicates that a psychological element is relevant for institutional trust and for reducing the ingroup versus outgroup attitudes observed between migrants and citizens in receiving member states.

Civic education is a cornerstone of governance in France and Germany, equipping citizens with the knowledge and skills necessary for effective participation in democratic processes. These programs empower individuals by teaching them their rights, governance structures, and community problem-solving, fostering agency and trust in institutions. Furthermore, research by Jasinskaja-Lahti et al. (2012) demonstrates that civic education reduces perceived outgroup threats. By promoting inclusion and understanding, this education alleviates fears associated with cultural differences, fosters social cohesion, and reduces prejudice toward migrants.

Germany extends this commitment by preparing its citizens and the migrants they receive. Through integration, courses emphasize linguistic, cultural, and civic knowledge to ensure migrants understand societal norms and rights. This dual approach, targeting both citizens and newcomers, reflects an acknowledgment of the need for mutual understanding and respect in diverse societies. These programs seem to intend to smooth the path to integration and strengthen institutional trust. In summary, Northern Europe’s commitment to civic education may have strengthened institutional trust. Such efforts aim to counter xenophobic tendencies and reinforce societal values of fairness and inclusivity, essential for cohesive governance.

Building on the foundation of civic education, the Northern E.U. also prioritizes transparency as another key component in fostering trust in institutions. For instance, in Sweden, the concept of “offentlighetsprincipen” allows citizens constitutional access to government records, ensuring transparency in public administration. Denmark’s citizen panels and participatory budgeting processes exemplify transparency and citizen involvement in action. These participatory initiatives directly engage citizens in decision-making, such as allocating public resources, which fosters a sense of ownership and strengthens confidence in institutional actions. A study in Denmark by Kalogeraki (2012) highlighted the importance of participatory governance, demonstrating that it can reduce skepticism, as individuals feel their voices and concerns matter through inclusivity. These initiatives also translate into transparency, which helps reduce xenophobia by showing fairness in governance. By empowering citizens through transparency and civic engagement, Northern Europe builds institutional trust and fosters societal harmony, setting a benchmark for just policymaking.

Transparency and citizen agency seem to be key components in the migratory integration process for Northern Europe. According to the research, this is beneficial because creating inclusivity and long-lasting policies should ensure a smooth process. However, as we have seen in the past years, these measures are not without limitations. In Northern Europe there has been a significant increase in migrant aversion; this highlights that even progressive policies require constant adaptation to maintain societal cohesion.

Southern Europe, including its strongest economies, faces a significant historical legacy of corruption, perceived inefficiencies, and identity-based fears that could exacerbate xenophobia and skepticism toward governance. The issues stem from a lack of transparency and ingroup versus outgroup attitudes, which foster sentiments of cultural erosion and reduce citizen agency.

According to Transparency International, public perception of transparency in Southern Europe scores between 50 and 60 out of 100 in recent years, reflecting a lower average compared to the European mean of 65. This reality affects trust in institutions and their ability to manage and implement policies, particularly regarding migration. For example, in Greece, authorities struggled to coordinate responses, leaving local municipalities to address immediate needs without adequate support from the central government. The absence of a unified asylum system resulted in delays, overcrowded facilities, and inconsistent handling of applications. These systemic inefficiencies worsened the humanitarian crisis and deepened public skepticism toward government capabilities.

Moreover, citizens often perceive that needs of migrants are prioritized over their own needs, reinforcing negative stereotypes and resentment. Research highlights that sudden increases in immigration can create societal anxiety, especially in economically strained regions where migrants are viewed as competitors for scarce resources. This perception is amplified by beliefs that migrants receive preferential treatment, as noted in the European Commission’s foresight report. Additionally, public frustration is further exacerbated by the uneven distribution of E.U. funding, with many communities feeling neglected by both national and E.U.-level institutions. Research on E.U. funding, particularly the European Structural and Investment Funds, often reveals regional disparities, leaving underfunded areas feeling neglected. The Joint Research Centre of the European Commission has documented these disparities and their impact on public trust. Addressing these institutional shortcomings is crucial to rebuilding trust and counteracting the increase in xenophobia in these regions. Therefore, we should focus here on fostering transparency and equitable policies, which encourage both local and migrant populations to incentivize social cohesion and restore confidence in governance.

Timotijevic and Breakwell’s (2000) research argues that migration can trigger identity threats, particularly in societies where cultural preservation is deeply ingrained. They found that cultural identity plays a significant role in perceptions of migration and trust in Southern Europe, demonstrating that communities with strong attachments to traditional values view migration as a threat to their cultural heritage. In their study, migration in Greece was perceived as a threat to Orthodox Christian values, leading to public opposition to integration policies. Similarly, in Italy, migration often triggered fears of cultural erosion, where communities viewed migrants as threatening traditional family structures and social norms. For example, resistance was particularly evident in smaller Italian towns, where conservative values dominate, leading to a backlash against policies perceived as prioritizing migrant needs over local traditions. Spain’s complex interplay between national and regional identities also adds another layer of complexity to migration attitudes. A study conducted by Ros and Morales (2015) demonstrated that regions like Catalonia and the Basque Country, with distinct cultural identities, express concerns about how migration might affect their cultural autonomy, amplifying tensions with national policies. These dynamics underscore how deeply cultural identity influences public attitudes toward migration in Southern Europe. These strong traditional values, while fostering community and cohesion, can also heighten fears of cultural loss, creating a fertile environment for an increase in xenophobia in Southern Europe.

Moreover, the absence of civic education and engagement mechanisms further erodes institutional trust. Unlike Northern Europe, where participatory governance fosters citizen involvement, Southern European countries often struggle to create avenues for meaningful public engagement. This results in a lack of citizen agency, and the disconnect between citizens and institutions perpetuates feelings of exclusion and disempowerment.

Finally, Petrovic (2021) highlights how the absence of cohesive integration programs has left municipalities to navigate migration challenges independently, leading to inconsistent outcomes and public dissatisfaction. This equates to citizens feeling overlooked by the state and eroding their trust in it. Ultimately, the solution to support and empower areas receiving larger numbers of migrants may be to enhance civic education, unify European approach and transparency, and aid individuals in becoming active participants in the policy process.

Over the past decade, Europe has experienced a rise in right-wing ideals, observable in northern and southern M.S. In the North, political erosion has driven widespread dissatisfaction and poor management of various issues that have impacted the population despite its more significant mechanisms for citizen agency and governmental transparency. For instance, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally has gained support in rural and economically challenged areas by presenting migration as a threat to French identity. This narrative follows the ingroup vs. outgroup theory, which fuels fears of losing identity and culture. Le Pen’s rhetoric emphasizes the economic challenges associated with migration, linking it to unemployment and pressure on public services. She also portrays migrants as incompatible with French cultural values, framing them as threats to the nation-state.

In Northern Europe, far-right parties such as the Sweden Democrats and Alternative for Germany (A.f.D.) have successfully addressed public dissatisfaction with migration policies. The Sweden Democrats leverage anti-immigrant rhetoric by framing migration as a cultural and economic threat, while the A.f.D. exploits fears of increased social spending on migrants. The rise of these parties reflects public frustration with the discrepancy between migration policies and the realities citizens face, including job shortages and housing.

In the South of Europe, Italian Vice President Matteo Salvini’s League has portrayed migration as a national crisis and a factor undermining Italy’s security and stability. Salvini’s “closed ports” policy, which blocked N.G.O. ships carrying migrants from docking in Italian harbours, resonated deeply with citizens who felt abandoned by E.U. solidarity mechanisms and national governance. This policy was framed as necessary to safeguard Italian resources and communities.

Vox, a political party in Spain, has also associated migration with national identity, sovereignty, and economic challenges. Alongside the Partido Popular and Ciudadanos, Vox appealed to disaffected voters by framing migration as a threat to Spanish cultural values and economic resources. These parties consistently exploit ingroup vs. outgroup dynamics, voicing the frustrations of those most affected by a lack of citizen agency and government transparency. In summary, one of the factors key to the new wave of anti-migrant policies could be the needs unmet by the population generated by political erosion (North E.U.) or historical legacies (South E.U.).

However, for the North it was not just political erosion that led to change; this direction has also been propelled by a lack of citizen agency, impacting trust in institutions. For example, Denmark’s citizen panels and participatory budgeting initiatives, which once allowed direct public involvement in decision-making, have seen declining engagement. This erosion could be due to perceived inefficacy, as citizens feel their input does not lead to meaningful change. In Sweden, similar disengagement has been observed, with citizens increasingly disillusioned by the government’s inability to balance migration policies with public concerns.

Additionally, the decline in transparent migration policies has also played a significant role. Germany’s rising intake of migrants from non-E.U. countries and within the E.U. creates tensions over resource distribution and social integration. This may lead citizens to feel excluded from understanding or influencing migration-related decisions, which could potentially exacerbate friction; this possibility should be further researched.

Lastly, the erosion of political and government trust is another critical issue not only impacting the North but the whole of the E.U. Recent governmental instability across Europe underscores the fragile state of institutional trust. Spain’s prolonged struggle to form a government, Germany’s coalition difficulties, and France’s widespread protests illustrate profound mistrust between citizens and their leaders. Restoring trust needs clear migration policies, inclusive governance and a long-term plan.

As stated at the beginning of this report, migration has reshaped Europe’s political landscape and societal fabric, underscoring the urgent need for equitable and sustainable governance. Historical migration waves from Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East exposed systemic challenges in managing migration flows. While Northern Europe has demonstrated effective mechanisms through civic education, transparency, and citizen agency, Southern Europe continues to grapple with institutional mistrust, limited citizen inclusion, and unified coordination. This disparity, coupled with governance inefficiencies across the union, has fueled the rise of right-wing populism, which capitalizes on public frustrations and exacerbates societal divides.

Parties like Marine Le Pen’s National Rally, Matteo Salvini’s League, and the Sweden Democrats have framed migration as a governance failure, leveraging economic insecurities and cultural fears. These dynamics highlight the critical importance of government transparency and citizen inclusion in countering divisive narratives and rebuilding institutional trust. Effective legislation must address public concerns while promoting fairness and equity for migrants and citizens alike.

Legislation has the potential to catalyze societal cohesion. While policies like Denmark’s participatory budgeting and Germany’s integration programs are commendable, they remain insufficient in addressing the complexities of migration governance. Expanding citizen involvement in legislative processes can help bridge the gap between public sentiment and policy implementation. By creating mechanisms that ensure citizen input is meaningful and impactful, governments can restore trust and develop durable solutions.

Migration is a shared reality that cannot be treated as a temporary issue or shifted onto others. The geopolitical landscape and the looming climate crisis serve as reminders of migration’s inevitability and the need for sustainable governance. Inclusive, transparent policies must prioritize both migrant integration and citizen welfare, ensuring societal cohesion and resilience in the face of future challenges.

To address the challenges of migration governance, further research is needed to explore how the lack of citizen agency drives political sentiment and polarization. Statistical analyses can uncover the relationship between legislation, transparency, and public perceptions, providing actionable insights for policymakers. By evaluating existing frameworks and identifying inefficiencies, researchers can help design strategies that align governance with public needs while fostering trust and equity.

Migration offers an opportunity to redefine governance and strengthen societal cohesion in Europe. Addressing the root causes of political discontent and institutional mistrust will not only enable better migration policies but also strengthen democratic values. Through transparency, collaboration, and innovation, policymakers can amend one of the most pressing challenges of our time, creating a future where migration is managed equitably and sustainably.

Bibliography

Alessandro, M., Lagomarsino, B. C., Scartascini, C., Streb, J., & Torrealday, J. (2021). Transparency and trust in government. Evidence from a survey experiment. World Development, 138, 105223.

Aliu, A. (2012). International migration and the European Union relations in the context of a comparison of Western Balkans and North African countries: Controlling migration and hybrid model.

Ardanaz, M., Otálvaro-Ramírez, S., & Scartascini, C. (2023). Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust? World Development, 162, 106132.

Aru, S. (2023). ‘Battleship at the port of Europe’: Italy’s closed-port policy and its legitimizing narratives. Political Geography, 104, 102902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2023.102902

De Bruycker, P., & Tsourdi, E. (2016). The Bratislava Declaration on migration: European irresponsibility instead of solidarity. Eumigrationlawblog.eu.

Ekerim-Akbulut, M., Selçuk, B., Slaughter, V., Hunter, J. A., & Ruffman, T. (2020). In two minds: Similarity, threat, and prejudice contribute to worse mindreading of outgroups compared with an ingroup. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 51(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022119892625

European Commission. (2020). Foresight report: Migration trends in the EU. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu

European Commission. (2021). European Structural and Investment Funds and regional disparities. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu

Hakhverdian, A., & Mayne, Q. (2012). Institutional trust, education, and corruption: A micro-macro interactive approach. The Journal of Politics, 74(3), 739–750.

Haste, H. (2010). Citizenship education: A critical look at a contested field. Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth, 161–188.

Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2016). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108595841

Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Mähönen, T. A., & Ketokivi, M. (2012). The dynamics of ethnic discrimination, identities, and outgroup attitudes: A pre–post longitudinal study of ethnic migrants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(7), 904–914. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1880

Joint Research Centre of the European Commission. (2021). Impact of EU funding on public trust in institutions. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu

Kalogeraki, S. (2012). Migrant-related attitudes and perceived ethnic threats between in-groups and out-groups. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 2(3), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10202-011-0034-5

Milán-García, J., Caparrós-Martínez, J. L., Rueda-López, N., & de Pablo Valenciano, J. (2021). Climate change-induced migration: A bibliometric review. Globalization and Health, 17(1), 74.

Miller, S. (2016). Migrants. London: C Hurst & Co.

Petrovic, N. (2021). Rifugiati, profughi, sfollati: Breve storia del diritto d’asilo in Italia. FrancoAngeli.

Timotijevic, L., & Breakwell, G. M. (2000). Migration and threat to identity. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 10(5), 355–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.584

Transparency International. (2023). Corruption perceptions index 2023. Retrieved from https://transparency.org

https://migrant-integration.ec.europa.eu/country-governance/governance-migrant-integration-germany_en#integration-programme