The study, conducted in the context of the PRIME project led by the EUI's Migration Policy Centre, surveyed 20,000 people across five European countries. Respondents were presented with various policy options that offer or restrict rights to social welfare, labour protections, and healthcare for irregular migrants, alongside so-called "regularisation programmes" that provide pathways to legal status.
In every one of the five countries surveyed, there was a preference for policies that offer irregular migrants a route to legal status —under specific conditions, such as a minimum length of stay and a clean criminal record— over those that did not.
When it comes to rights, there is a clear differentiation. The study found that access to primary health care for irregular migrants is generally preferred to offering low-income support. However, public support for providing primary healthcare varied across countries: respondents in the UK were least supportive, and respondents in Italy were most supportive. Similarly, while respondents in most countries opposed giving irregular migrants low-income support, Italian respondents were more ambivalent, showing no strong preference for or against this policy.
The role of prior legal status and economic contribution also plays a significant part in shaping preferences. People are more inclined to support regularisation and rights protections for irregular migrants who have worked legally in the host country, particularly in essential roles such as elderly care.
Professor Martin Ruhs, Deputy Director of the Migration Policy Centre, said: “Our results show that EU residents don’t default to blunt and one-sided policies —like blanket opposition to irregular migrants ever being awarded legal status. Instead, people are selective and prefer policies that distinguish between different types of rights that should be given to irregular migrants. (…) This does not mean that our survey respondents want to offer unconditional legal status and access to rights to all irregular migrants. Instead, what our study indicates is that the public has more nuanced views on how migration should be managed than policymakers generally give them credit for.”
Interestingly, respondents show that policies that combine rights with immigration control tend to generate broader public acceptance. For example, measures that integrate access to legal rights with some form of migration enforcement (such as reporting duties for healthcare providers) are generally more acceptable, though this varies depending on the specific policy and country.
The research highlights that with an estimated 2–3 million irregular migrants in Europe, policymakers are faced with the challenge of balancing migration enforcement with protecting irregular migrants’ basic rights. As European governments continue discussions on migration reform, this study provides timely evidence that pragmatic, well-designed policies toward irregular migrants can gain public approval while upholding fundamental rights.
Access the study.
“Protecting Irregular Migrants in Europe (PRIME): Institutions, Interests and Policies” is a project funded by the European Union through the ‘Horizon Europe’ research funding programme. PRIME analyses the conditions of irregular migrants in Europe and is run through a consortium of seven research institutions across Europe, led by the Migration Policy Centre (MPC) at the European University Institute.