The results of this study indicate that in case of Austria, current existing system doesn allow to identify mixed migration flows and routs by which they travel because there is no external border control in Austria with other European Union countries. There is a high possibility that people within the asylum procedure are those who migrated in mixed migration flows and has mixed nature of reasons to leave their country and doesn fall into any existing in Austria legal systems of migration or asylum protection. However, people arriving through air travel or ground movements across the border of other EU countries to Austria are well received at first receiving points. For the air travel, under the Austrian Asylum Act (Section 3: Articles 31-33) that governs a procedure for asylum applications to be submitted at the airport of Austria, the first instance asylum authority operates since 2005 to determine cases for immediate response or for more complex cases to grant entry into the State territory and transfer a case to the regular asylum procedure (UNHCR 2007: p.176). According to the UNHCR expert, Police Stations across the Austrian borders serve as the first instance asylum authority to deal with people aimed to apply for asylum (UNHCR, R personnel interview, November 22, 2012), which indicates well implementation of basic minimum standards of the Geneva Refugee Convention for the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers with no prejudice granting more complementary treatment (UNHCR, the 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol: p.3). A comprehensive border control mechanisms also a crucial measure in preventing irregular migration. However, this is not a case in Austria, where the border controlling aspects of the Ten Point Plan is very well implemented in the federal territory.

Anti-Immigrant Sentiment: Is it a case of the State Sovereignty or Xenophobia at the Political Level?

Understanding of the current Austrian immigration policies requires a look back into history of national political changes and patterns for the last two decades. Along with other several Western European countries, Austria anti-immigrant sentiment have been strongly criticized since its Freedom Party (FPÖ) came into government and gained increasing attention and popularity among local community. (The New York Times, 1999)

This subchapter of the thesis will examine political patterns of Austria between 1999 up-to-date in order to find out whether anti-immigrant sentiments exist on political level and its effects on immigration policies. Moreover, the study looks into attitudes of Austrian society toward ethnic minorities and immigrants to examine whether it has xenophobic characteristics of treatment of migrants and asylum seekers as well as implications on successful integration of immigrants.

Extreme-Right: Anti-Immigrant Parties

Founded in 1956, the Austria Freedom Party (FPÖ) known “as a right-wing, populist party with extremist elements” (Ibid.) under the leadership of charismatic  Haider from 1986 labeled Austrian political history with an extreme anti-immigration ideologies, even pro-Nazi. (Liberty, 2000: 41) Haider ideologies against “over-foreignization” of Austrian society and his extreme praise of the Third Reich “decent employment policy” (Liberty, 2000:41) had an effect on immigration policies in Austria, especially for the period of his coalition with the People Party (VPÖ) advocating for more restricted regulations.

The Extreme-right wing Party found a strong support from Austrian society and broke through political force with its “praise of Nazi employment policy” and “anti-foreigner rhetoric” gaining 42% of the vote in regional elections in Carinthia in March 1999. (Socialism Today, 1999) This victory brought the Freedom Party leader Haider at the heart of Government of the Carinthia state by taking the position of Governor of Carinthia. (Ibid.) Beginning of 2000 was crucial in political arena with developments of this coalition between the People Party (ÖVP) and the Freedom Party (FPÖ). The inclusion of far-right Freedom Party in the Government was highly criticized by the European Union and generated sanctions against Austria. (The Guardian, 2000) As a result, a 14 EU partners had freeze bilateral diplomatic relations with Austria. The EU sanctions were triggered mostly because of “xenophobic or even racist” language that the Freedom Party commonly use in their political activities and public speeches openly promoting “anti-foreigner language” (BBC, 2000b). In the following figure the study shows that the Freedom Party had the most peak of its popularity in 1999 when Parliamentarian Elections gained 26,91% of vote, the biggest share since its establishment.

Figure 1 FPO gains of votes between 1990 and 2008 in Parliamentarian Elections in percentage

Source: European Election Database “ Austria (1990-2012)

Examination of Parliamentarian Elections in Austria shows that the Austrian society fears of cheap labor immigrants from undesired Eastern Europe and third countries as well as growing stereotypes of “asylum system abuse” by economic migrants was successfully manipulated by the Freedom Party and served as the main issue of political debates among key political parties in Austria [1] . Political debates over Austria immigration polices served the Freedom Party as a tool to gain votes in both Federal Elections as well as Parliamentarian Elections since 1990 until up-to-date. (European Election Database, 2012) The politics of FPÖ over the years remained anti-immigrant and during the 2008 election campaign it had a strong advocacy message for deportation of all illegal immigrants, including legal immigrants with criminal records, also expressed discriminative, even xenophobic administrative requirement for all foreigners such as holding a special state issued ID cards, thus putting a label on every single non-national persons residing in Austria (The New York Time, 2008). During the last 2008 Parliamentarian Elections, the FPÖ gained 17,54% of vote, only behind of the Social Democratic Party (SPÖ) with around 30%, and the conservative People Party (ÖVP) with 26%. (European Election Database, 2012) In comparison the FPO popularity since 1990 (see Figure 8), It is apparent from the Figure 9 bellow that the FPÖ again gained a public support after a loss during the 2002-2004 elections due to the split with People Party at that period. However, these findings can be assumed that the Freedom Party has a significant effect on Austria society and their racist perception of immigrants and refugees, encouraging even further racist public opinion in Austrian society.

Figure 2 Austrian Parliamentarian Election 2008 results

Source: European Election Database  Austria 1990-2012

Austrian Freedom Party starting as a small nationalist-liberal party under the leadership of  Haider in 1986 became a major radical right-party in political arena of Austria for the last two decades. A strong evidence of the political power and electoral success gained in both 2008 Parliamentarian (Figure 11) and 2010 Presidential elections (Figure 12), shows undermining democratic values in Austria on the governmental level, failure of the ideologies of multiculturalism, increasing nationalism and violation of basic human rights of immigrants and refugees concerning their ethnic, religious and race differences.

Figure 3 Austrian Federal Election 2010 results

Source: The Federal Ministry of the Interior – Bundespräsidentenwahl 2010

Attitudes to minorities

According to M. R.Haberfellner, A. Koldas, (2001), the xenophobic attitude towards immigrants in Austria had a significant effect on their daily life although it didn reflect in violent racism as in other European countries. However, the xenophobic language concerning religious believes have been widely used by Austrian community, including politicians towards immigrants of other religious.

As it was reported by many media sources, the xenophobic speeches and expressions by politicians have found very common in Austria. As the Migration News Sheet (August 2008) highlighted the one the anti-Muslim statements by Susanne Winter, “In view of the local elections held in Graz on 28 January 2008, Ms. WINTER told a crowd of some 30,000 supporters a week earlier that Islam was a totalitarian system which deserves to be thrown back to where it came from: on the other side of the Mediterranean.”

Extended research by M.R.Haberfellner, A. Koldas (2001) mapping minorities found that “overall, xenophobia was diagnosed to emerge rather in older and in less educated sections of the population and against immigrants from Eastern and South Eastern European countries (Lebhart, Münz 1999). Many of the prejudices against immigrants can be traced back to the period of guest worker immigration and partly even to the social stratification within the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. ”

However, the tendency of unwelcomed Eastern Europeans shifted later towards Muslim community at large due to increasing Turk immigrants. According to the results of an IMAS survey held in 2010, which were publicized and showed that 54% of Austrian respondents agreed with the statement that “Islam poses a threat for the West and Austrian familiar lifestyle.” Moreover, 72% of respondents said that Muslims would not “stick to the rules” when it comes living in Austria. [2]

Analysis: Policy Reforms Relevant to Asylum and Migration in 2011

Addressing to the history of immigration in Austria, it is important to remember that initially the country interest in migration were triggered by its demographic development and economic needs. Taken up from “guest worker” labor migration quotas, today Austria followed an example of key immigration countries such as Australia, Canada or United States. 2011 played a significant role in changing Austria perception of immigration and development of governance mechanism although the system still needs redefinition in some areas.

Amongst several major developments in the country policy regime, 2011 can be marked with establishing a highly-skilled immigration so-called “Red-White-Red-Card” type of residence permit for world qualified talent pool to work and settle in Austria.

In this section the study will address several amendments that took place in 2011 and generated strong public and political debates criticizing the Government for anti-immigration intentions of these amendments.

Amendments to the Aliens Law [3] (Die Presse, 2011) effective from 1 July 2011, established a new immigration system for (highly) qualified workers including their family members, and made a series of changes regarding the German language acquisition as provisional to the immigration. New regulations have been introduced for minors that subject to deportation as well as free legal aid system for asylum seekers made available in the Aliens Police and asylum proceedings. Compulsory attendance so-called “duty to collaborate” for asylum seekers in the first reception center has been made an obligatory during the admissions procedure to the actual asylum procedure (EMN, 2011: p.7).

Institutional Developments at National Level

Significant development towards coherent proceedings for asylum applications and migration regulation in Austria can be emphasized a decision to create a Federal Office for Asylum and Migration aimed to unite all asylum and migration public authorities into a single authority. The existing in cohesive administration procedure for asylum and migration issues carried out by 113 different offices, including district commissions, municipal authorities, federal police headquarters and the Federal Asylum Offices will be performed by the Federal Office for Asylum and Migration starting from 2013 and will be functioning under the Federal Ministry of the Interior (EMN, 2011: p. 11). Decision made by the Council of Ministers on 19 October 2009 became a reality with a strong support of the Social Democratic Party of Austria (SPÖ) and other NGOs, particularly Diakonie has played a crucial role in advocating for creation of a separate authority to asylum and migration regulation issues (EMN, 2010).

Regional Cooperation

Concerns of mixed migration have a lot of reaction in different levels of regulation. At the national level there is a challenge for Governments on how best to deal with mixed migration flows? According to analysis and reports of various international organizations monitoring migration, not every migrant seeks an international protection. In this regard, UNHCR for example advocates establishing two different regimes that available for various needs of the people (S. Okonkwo, personal interview, 3 January, 2013). The field of migration is very complex due to involvement of many different institutions and different approaches addressing different aspects of migration regulation and protection of human rights of migrants and refugees. There is no one way rout or one single approach for governance of such a complex field. Thus, it is crucial fostering co-operation between different actors on all national, regional, and international level to provide better protection of migrants and refugee in receiving State.

One of the efficient mechanisms to address at the national level has been developed in 2004 by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) with regard to protection of victims of human trafficking, who doesn have protection under the Geneva Refugee Convention but needs another form of mechanism. So-called National Referral Mechanisms in a format of handbook provides to Governments guidance on establishing and strengthening multi-agency structures that implement human-rights-based policy and practice on anti-trafficking (OSCE/ODIHR, 2004).

Contradicting Developments

Immigration: German Prior to Immigration for a Better Integration vs. Pretext for Excluding Immigrants

The acquisition of German language is a significant determinant of immigrants social and economic integration according to the Integration Agreement that enables their integration legally settled. [4] In 2011, Austria introduced several amendments to the Aliens Law tightening the regulations on the language acquisition (EMN, 2011: p.11). Accordingly, third-country nationals must demonstrate a basic knowledge of German language, internationally accepted A1 level, while filing first application for a residence title from abroad. Surprisingly, only third-country nationals are subject to prove basic German language knowledge equal to A2 level according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [5] for the admission of long-term residence title, but family members of highly qualified workers and entitled to “EU Blue Card” immigrants are exempted from providing evidence of language skills at any, first application, readmission or long-term residence permit application cases. Moreover, this amendment toughen the requirements on the level of language skills from A1 level, to be obtained within five years for long-term residence permit, to A2 level, to be obtained within two years (BMI, 2011).

These data must be interpreted with caution because on one hand, the reform concerning prior to immigration proficiency in German and evidence of language skills to be proved before entering Austria, is explained by the Federal Ministry of Interior as crucial for immigrant social and economic integration, but on the other hand, it creates unsolvable barrier for immigrants. According to the Section 21a of the Settlement and Residence Act, the evidence of basic German language skills, required for the first application for a residence title “Red-White-Red Card Plus”, “Family Member”, “Settlement Permit”, “Settlement Permit gainful employment excluded” or “Settlement Permit Dependant” must be provided only from the following institutions [6] :

Austrian Language Diploma German (ÖSD) [7]

Goethe-Institut e.V. [8]

Telc GmbH [9]

Austrian Integration Fund (AIF) [10]

This requirement in many cases for a third-country national applying for the first application for a residence title from abroad would be simply not possible to meet. This reform takes into consideration very limited group of immigrants, who has a possibility to provide language evidence from the required institutes but completely exclude those, who does not have a possibility to provide the acknowledged language diploma or a course certificate from required Austrian or German institutes, which could be related to various geographical, financial, or bureaucratic systems in the country of origin reasons. Moreover, considering the fact that, (STATISITCS) a large number of aliens residing in Austria are coming from EU countries who are not subject to the language acquisition requirement but only nationals of third-countries and migrants (Integrationhaus, 2011). This new regulations have been strongly criticised by the NGOs, particularly by Verein Project Integrationhaus as socially discriminative, however Austrian government justify the reform as a crucial aspect of immigrants integration and compatible participation in labour market.

An aspect that can be criticized strongly with this policy amendment is a fact that proficiency in German language has to be achieved and evidenced before entering the country, which results in intolerable burdens and even in the separation of families. In order to obtain a permanent authorization of establishment, people need to have a command of German at the B1 level, which many people who are not used to studying simply cannot reach in the periods laid down in the policy. (Integrationhaus, 2011)

Permit to Stay

Amongst the recent policy developments, Austria established a new type of residence permit, so-called “Bleiberecht Permit to stay”. However, the condition for this permit to stay is quite contradicting, which requires that the person applying for this permit should not be illegal migrant and not asylum seeker. Accordingly, if this “stay permit” is not for those category of people, who are the most vulnerable and have many reasons, different then criteria for any current existing legal migration status, then for whom this permit to stay residence is created and how it will improve the regulation of illegal migration?

The paradox of this regulation is that, once a person stops asylum application, it becomes illegal and will be immediately deported, so in between, there is no chance to apply for permit to stay residence. Moreover, the application for this permit requires a prove t for the period of stay, there is somebody to support a person, and that person must to show no less than 5000 euro in bank account, which makes impossible to prove. This regulation is more a political tool, in order to gain the credit in from of EU that Austria legal framework created possibility for anybody to stay legally.


Austria long asylum tradition has faced many legislation changes for decades, but particularly amendments made for the recent years have been alarming and triggering strong public and political debates. Changes in Asylum Law and Alien Law (EMN, 2011) proposed by the Federal Ministry of the Interior raised concern by UNHCR and NGOs.

Compulsory Attendance

Along with complimentary developments on migration regulation policies, the Federal Ministry of the Interior introduced in 2011 ambiguous for asylum seekers amendments in the field of international protection (EMN, 2011: p.17). Initially, proposed in 2010 a “compulsory attendance” for asylum seekers in the first reception centers requires asylum applicants to stay at the first reception center for a period of time up to 7 days, which while the admission procedure to the actual asylum procedure is on-going (EMN, 2010: p.19). According to policy makers, entered into force in July 2011 these amendments to Aliens Law as well as to the Asylum Act is part of the so-called “duty to collaborate.” As the People Party (ÖVP) Interior Minister Dr. Maria Fekter explained that “this measure aimed at preventing individuals from absconding and to clarify whether Austria is responsible for the respective application for international protection.” (BMI, Presse, 22 February, 2011). This proposal provoked a strong criticism by UNHCR and NGOs and has been accused as promoting the image of asylum seekers as being criminals (Austrian Times, 2010).

Austria claims that annual rate of asylum applications is disproportionately large along with other Member States of the EU and that this is the main reason of the country denial to participate in the Relocation Programme of the EU [11] (EU, 2009). Contrary to this statement, the following figure (Figure 13) shows number of asylum applications received by Austria is not high in comparison to selected EU counties with highest record of asylum applications in 2000 and 2007. This demonstrates that Austria reaction on the rate of asylum applications as disproportionately large is quite overreacting to the existing reality in EU. According to Eurostate source of data on asylum applications in EU, provided figures in the following chart includes all applications applied individually for asylum or similar protection, including legal or illegal arrivals. Referring to this chart, it is important to consider that the methods of collecting data from different countries may differ and may not be a very precise.

Figure 4 Number of Asylum Applications in EU countries with the highest rate of asylum seekers 2000-2007

Source: Eurostat, 2013

Access to Legal Aid

Along with above explained administrative reforms for asylum, a new free legal aid scheme was introduced by the Austrian Court in 2010 (ECRE, 2010: p.26). Considering the complex and sophisticated legal procedures that asylum seekers go through, it is important to provide access to legal assistance and lawyer for asylum seekers. In Austria, it is obligatory for relevant authorities to provide legal aid “Flüchtlingsberater” for asylum seekers as part of its general national legal aid (ECRE, 2010: p.26), however the research findings leads to the fact that NGOs fill this gap providing legal consultations to migrants and asylum seekers (K. Milositz, personal interview, January 2013)

Policy Gaps – Research Findings

It is not a co-incidence, that among the wide-range of activities of the UNHCR, it continues advocating the accession to the 1954 and 1961 Statelessness Conventions [12] by Austria along with many EU countries, which would facilitate the government “to identify stateless people, and promote the development of national identification mechanisms and solutions” (UNHCR, 2012). According to recent study of the European Migration Network (2012) in Austria, one of the major challenges for policy makers in both asylum procedure and in the system to implement forced return is establishing identify of asylum seekers for international protection (EMN, 2012).

Lack of Efficiency of Asylum Procedures

Another major lack of the Austrian legal system for asylum is that the asylum procedure takes inevitably long time. The procedure of waiting for decision can be frightening because while the asylum applicants in the procedure, they have no rights for education or employment, and very limited rights regarding the freedom of movement. According to the practices in the past, the decision making procedure may take up till 9 years.

Human Rights Concerns of Asylum Seekers

Research findings show that one of the strongest problem asylum seekers faces is a trauma. Most of the people who migrate within mixed flows experiences psychological trauma during their movements or carry devastating psychological experiences they had in their home countries. Most of the times the trauma comes from the hazardous routs such as smuggling or human trafficking of which they became a victim along the way of travel. One of the common cases among refugees arriving to Austria are those Afghan refugees fleeing the war who had to reach Austrian territory through Greece, which is recognized as the most difficult place for many years with no 6yadequate first-instance for receiving refugees (E. Freithofer, personal interview, 29 November, 2012). In addition to hazardous journey through Greece border crossing conditions exposed to violation of their basic human rights for safety and security, including cases of death, asylum seekers by arrival to Austrian territory are deprived from previously existed rights to be transferred to asylum shelters while asylum procedure will make a decision. In Austria main policy developments in 2011 concerning international protection and the asylum procedure resulted in amendments to Aliens Law, including the Federal Asylum Act that entered into force in July 2011. The new amendment forces asylum seekers to stay at first reception centers up till 7 days, which before comprised maximum 48 hours with following transformation to asylum organizations, where they receive accommodation and basic welfare support. (EMN, 2011: p.17) Proposed in 2010 by the Federal Ministry of Interior this so-called a “compulsory attendance” for asylum seekers regarding the first reception centre would not allow asylum seekers to leave the first reception centre during the admission period before the actual asylum procedure. This amendment triggered a strong criticism from NGOs identifying it as an act of “promotion of prejudice against refugees” and involved a lot of public and political debates (Agenda Asyl, 12 July, 2010). According to Austrian policy makers, this measure is necessary to avoid complications such as escape or illegal actions of individuals but also to wait for response of relevant authority whether the individual case is a subject for international protection in Austria. In case of rejection, the asylum seekers will be sent back with having no psychological assistance or proper conditions to basic human needs they suffered along the rout of destination to Austria to repeat, the same potentially hazardous and dangerous routs to way back home.

Recommendations for more Coherent Asylum System in Austria

Findings of this study suggest strengthening legal framework for asylum system and migration regulation for better governance in the following areas of policy concern:

Access to Education

Asylum seekers under the procedure have no legal rights for German classes or preliminary, high school or University degree education. Voluntarily organized by NGOs classes of German or English language, computer literacy or other professional classes [13] are the only available education possibilities for asylum seekers during their application admission, which as mentioned earlier may take up till ten or more years. However, not all NGOs provide such educational possibilities and only very limited amount of asylum seekers out of luck can have access to such education while they are waiting for asylum decision. The allocation of asylum seekers with access to basic educational opportunities is imbalanced. Some of the asylum seekers have a possibility to access language classes according to availability in their geographical location or at the shelter. In case for independent attempt to access education outside of the region, town to which asylum seekers were assigned, it may bring a loss of their legal protection and could be considered as illegal action against the asylum procedure.

Access to labour market

According to this study, the main challenge in asylum system in Austria is a conflict of interests between asylum seekers and the State. Asylum seekers demand for the right to work during the asylum procedure [14] while the State opposes to justify its right for sovereignty.Thus, Austria refuses asylum seekers to grant with work permits during the asylum procedure. The Austrian current Interior Minister Johanna Mikl-Leitner responded to the protest Interior Minister “Austria’s treatment of asylum seekers compared well with other European countries and there would be no structural changes.” [15] NGOs working in Austria on protection of rights of asylum seekers urge that the need for access to labour market for asylum seekers comes as priority after the access to education (E. Freithofer, personal interview, 29 November, 2012). The advocacy for governance of migration and asylum regimes, which should be based not only on migration and asylum policies itself but incorporated with other policies such as labour, trade and development increasingly challenges many States (OECD, 2001). In Austria, the right for access to labour market for asylum seekers is strongly supported by the NGOs [16]

A quicker decision on Asylum procedure

The tension between two extremes, asylum seekers demand for the right to work and the Austria opposition to protect its right for the State sovereignty is in fact causes by “unbearably slow asylum procedure”, which takes in practice up till 13 years. And the questions arises here, “How should asylum seekers deal with around ten years of waiting for decision and having no civil rights for basic life activities in Austria?” This question could be investigated more for the future research.

Need for a change in perception of refugees and asylum seekers within the Austrian population

Negative perception of refugees and asylum seekers still remain among Austrian population. In this regard UNHCR had led “Match”campaign (2009) on public awareness rising to downgrade the public ignorance about asylum seekers. International organizations urge, that there is a need for public education on a bigger scale. To achieve better results towards shifting people perception about immigrants and refugees, international organizations must cooperate together and put efforts on educating public. In this regard, media plays an important role and influence to the local population, which needs to be involved.

Discourse of discriminative political propaganda against foreign individuals in Austria

The evidence from this study suggests that there is a need for significant discourse of discriminative political propaganda against immigration and asylum. As the investigation shows that many politicians, particularly members of the Austrian Freedom Party (FPO) leads xenophobic political debates over immigration for many years, in fact receives a strong support from the public. The Party was found one of the most successful extreme-right parties in EU, gaining political power in elections.

However, the study suggests that there is a need for more action to a very clear discourse of an existing strong discriminative propaganda from Politicians. It is a fact that rumors made in a context that “Austria cannot save the world and accept all the refugees of the world” by some extreme-right politicians, surprisingly received well and with a loud applause from the public. A solid proportion of local community shares such views of extreme politicians, while it is not reasonable. As Figure 13 shows Austria is a seventh country among EU Member States with a big proportion of asylum applications, which is still not an indicator of providing refugee status to all since the countries of origin of these applications are mainly from third-countries but not war or other relevant to refugee protections legal criteria.

In fact, a very small part of refugees reach European Union, in case of thesis, Austria at all. Most of the refugees move within their neighbour countries and set camps there, and majority of those accepting countries are poorer countries. In this regard, Austria economically developed and one of the wealthiest Western European countries which has capability to receive more refugees and provide them decent acceptance and life conditions.

Challenge of Social Identity of Immigrants, including second generation

Among the policy related challenges, which this thesis has addressed through empirical research, it also found a major challenge affecting immigrants in Austria, which always were a challenge and still remain. It is a challenge of identity. A specially, it has a strong impact on second generation of immigrants. Children of immigrants who were born in Austria and who have never experienced cultural touch to their ethnic identity because of lacking cultural experience of their origin but it rather fulfilled with only Austrian culture in which the second generation was raised. However, this study explored the attitude of host community towards immigrants and found that it is rather has racist characteristics and that the local community is not yet ready to respect and accept the concept of multiculturalism and cultural difference without prejudice and discrimination. The social integration difficulties triggers confusion and identity challenge for children of immigrant, and the psychological struggle towards understanding where the second generation of immigrants have to relate themselves. Especially, it was found difficult cases, when children born in mixed families, with parents of Austrian ethnicity and second parent with another, dominant in colour of skin or face features ethnicity, when children of such families constantly asked a question where are you from?’ Such cases of mixed identities cause a lot of psychological disorders and depression among young people of second generation of immigrants. According to Fr. Patric Kofi Kodom, majority of children placed in Jugendamt crisis centre in Vienna with psychological disorders or difficulties are mainly children form immigrant families.

Thus, there is a need for psychological integration of immigrants, because the identity issue becomes very serious psychological imbalance for people who ethnically uprooted and not welcomed by host society. There should be created a social support for children of immigrants including second generation of immigrants.



This study has been unable to demonstrate that the Government of Austria has a need to address the mixed migration as it is proposed by the UNHCR Ten Point Action Plan due to the country has already established a strong legal framework around the topic of migration and asylum in accordance to international standards of human rights concerns for asylum [17] and migration regulation (R. Schoffl, UNHCR, personal interview, 22 November 2012).

However, the results of this study indicate that there are gaps within both migration regulation and asylum system in Austria, which needs more coherent governance that international organizations and NGOs have been advocating for recent years. Emphasizing those gaps this paper explained each aspect of the topic that was found within this study.

This thesis has investigated the relationship between mixed migration flows and irregular migration coming from Greece through Turkey and Eastern Europe borders to find policy gaps that creates a possibility for illegal migration. It can be highlighted that the current legal system forces people to become criminal, once migrants get in the country through illegal means and routs, and abuse the system in order to survive.

Contribution to knowledge

The findings in this thesis contribute to a better understanding of the mixed migration, especially in co-relation to irregular migration. Policy analyses of migration issues have been increasing over the past two decades in Austria. However, growing disparities between the global North and South affects migration at large and changing migration trends encourage States to modify constantly their policies.

Future research

(i) Pastor Theology of Migration and the Role of Religion for Migration and Integration

This research has raised many questions and subjects in need of further investigation. Amongst the underexplored subjects, a further study could assess Pastor Theology of migration. In addition to political, economical aspects of migration, there is an also religious aspect of immigration that needs a closer examination, especially in the context of successful integration. Pastor Theology deals with religious aspect of migration. Considering the diversity of catholic community in Austria, which divine into several others with regard to their native language like for example African catholic community divided within into English speaking, or French or Swahili is one of the examples. In fact there are many other different communities sharing the same religious believe and religious institution but the difference in language has a direct impact to their interaction or social behavior. Religion is strongly related to culture and language thus pastor theology deals with religious, cultural aspects of migrants. However, the role of religion in immigration issues is somehow ignored or not given significant importance. It is crucial to take into consideration the role of religious values in daily lives of immigrants and to assess aspects of religion, which would help people to integrate better. It is important to highlight the issue of integration of migrants with regard to pastor theology, because this study can bring a mechanism to find ways how to help this people to maintain their ethnicity culture and still be open to host country (Austria) religious culture. This is where the pastor theology aspects come in for assistance to integration, in its real means.

(ii) Implementation of 10-Point Plan of Action in case of Greece

Based on findings of this thesis, another further research might explore the implementation of 10- Point Plan of Action in case of Greece in order to examine its current legal framework and gaps that needs to be improved significantly, in order to address mixed migration flows coming to EU through the sea and provide an adequate treatment, and prevent violation of their basic human rights. It is crucial improving asylum acceptance conditions in Greece. Thus, as an extension of this study, future research should therefore concentrate on the investigation of best practices of Austrian legal framework for asylum protection and measure preventing irregular migration, which can be applied in Greece.

(iii) Impact of Highly-Skilled Immigration in Austria

Impact of Highly Skilled Immigration to Austrian society, economic development and cultural life: Did highly skilled immigrants have a positive influence in change of Austrian stereotypes about foreigners?