The conveyance and effect of the asylum abuse policy narrative in direct- democratic campaigns David Kaufmanna & Laurent Bernhardb a KPM Center for Public Management, University of Bern,
[email protected] b Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences (FORS), University of Lausanne,
[email protected] Abstract In public and policy debates, asylum seekers are often portrayed as ‘bogus’ refugees or economic migrants who are accused of trying to abuse the country’s generosity and protection. We make use of the Policy Narrative Framework to systematize this accusation. We study the conveyance of the abuse policy narrative by political elite actors and the effect of this narrative on citizens’ opinion formation in the three most recent direct-democratic campaigns on Swiss asylum policies (2006, 2013, and 2016). We conducted and statistically analyzed over 108 structured interviews with all relevant campaign managers to analyze the conveyance of the abuse policy narrative and we analyzed post-vote surveys to examine the effect of this narrative for citizens’ opinion formation. We find that the more to the right a political organization is, the more this organization relies on the abuse policy narrative but only in referendums about tightening of asylum policies. We find similar results for citizens’ opinion formation as the asylum abuse policy narrative is crucial in tightening reforms for citizens from the center, the moderate right and was well the radical right. This conceptualized asylum abuse policy narrative can be used to study public debates about asylum policies beyond referendum campaigns and the findings offers clues about the use and the effect of the asylum abuse policy narrative in wider political debates.