The study, published in European Union Politics, analysed more than half a million transfers of asylum seekers between European member states between 2008 and 2024. The researchers benchmarked those transfers against an EU reference distribution based on countries’ population size and economic capacity.
The findings show that transfers contributing to a fairer distribution occurred roughly twice as often as transfers that increased inequality.
According to political scientist Philipp Lutz, the Dublin system has largely been judged on how it was designed to work, rather than on its actual outcomes. “When you look at what really happened over sixteen years, a different picture emerges from the conventional wisdom,” he says.
A more balanced system despite the rules
The Dublin Regulation states that the first EU country an asylum seeker enters is responsible for processing the asylum application. Southern border countries such as Italy and Greece have therefore long been seen as carrying a disproportionate burden.
The study shows that this pressure was partly eased because countries and asylum seekers did not always comply with the rules. Asylum seekers often moved on from their country of first arrival, while the Dublin transfers indended to return them only partially succeeded.
According to the researchers, this gap between rule and practice produced a more balanced distribution of responsibilities within the EU. Strict enforcement of the rules would have placed far greater pressure on southern European countries, while the complete absence of such rules would likely have shifted the burden more heavily toward northern Europe. "The findings point to an uncomfortable trade-off," Lutz adds. "Stricter enforcement of first-entry rules and fairer responsibility-sharing pull in opposite directions."
Warning for the EU’s new migration pact
The findings are relevant as the European Union prepares to introduce its new Pact on Migration and Asylum on 12 June 2026. The pact will replace the Dublin Regulation but will maintain the principle that the first country of entry remains responsible.
At the same time, the EU plans to enforce transfer rules more strictly and introduce a solidarity mechanism to support member states facing high migratory pressure.
The researchers warn that this combination may create new imbalances. If transfers are enforced more rigorously while solidarity measures remain limited and are applied only selectively, the new pact could institutionalise the shifting of responsibilities onto a smaller group of countries.
The study therefore argues that European asylum policy should be evaluated not only on political intentions, but also on its real-world outcomes. More transparent reporting on transfers between member states, the researchers say, could help ensure the system delivers the fairness it promises.