From Research to Policy: How Interdisciplinary Migration Research Contributed to Change in Dutch Asylum Procedures
At a time when migration is one of the most contested topics in Dutch society, migration researchers increasingly find themselves working in a highly polarised environment. Research findings are regularly scrutinised through political lenses, and scientific evidence is sometimes dismissed as opinion rather than recognised for what it is. Against this backdrop, demonstrating the societal impact of migration research can be challenging.
Yet recent developments in Dutch asylum policy show that research can still make a meaningful contribution to public decision-making.
A change in the procedure concerning the examination of smartphones and laptops belonging to asylum seekers illustrates how academic evidence can help shape public policy. The research behind this development was conducted by Koen Leurs, Kinan Alajak, Rianne Dekker and Albert Salah, all affiliated with Utrecht University and its focus area Migration and Societal Change[1].
Since 2014 Dutch authorities examined digital devices belonging to asylum seekers in an effort to verify identities, travel routes and personal histories. The practice reflected a broader international trend towards the use of digital technologies in migration governance[2]. However, the team of researchers have increasingly questioned both the reliability of the information obtained through such searches and the proportionality of the intrusion into personal privacy.
In their studies, they found that data extracted from smartphones and other digital devices often provides an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of a person's migration history[1]. The sheer amount of data, and that digital traces always require interpretation and context, can make conclusions spurious and errenous. At the same time, access to personal devices exposes highly sensitive information about private lives, relationships and communications. The researchers concluded that the evidential value of these searches is limited, while the privacy implications are substantial.
The findings have since gained significant policy attention. In May 2026, the Inspectorate of Justice and Security (in Dutch: Inspectie van Justitie en Veiligheid) concluded that the examination of asylum seekers' phones lacked an adequate legal basis and should be discontinued until appropriate legislation is in place[3]. The Inspectorate further noted concerns regarding the collection and use of data obtained through these procedures and questioned whether meaningful consent could be obtained in the context of an asylum application. Therefore, has it become the official position and recommendation of the Inspectorate to stop with these so-called ‘quickchecks’ until the legal basis is clearly defined and the rights of asylum seekers are sufficiently protected. However, it remains to be seen how long smartphone screening will be halted, as very recently a motion to continue with this process while legislation is not yet updated was supported by a majority in the Dutch Parliament (Tweede Kamer)[4].
For the researchers involved, the development demonstrates the continuing importance of independent academic inquiry in addressing complex societal questions. They were able to further contribute to the public debate by sharing their findings in newspaper articles (NRC[5], De Volkskrant[6], Dagblad van het Noorden) and several NPO1 radio appearances[7][8].
While migration research may at times become entangled in political debates, its role remains essential in assessing whether policy measures are effective, proportionate and consistent with fundamental rights. Concretely, the visibility of the research on smartphone screening has led to an invitation to write an academic scoping review on the impact of digitalization on asylum by the Dutch Advisory Council on Migration[9].
The case also highlights the value of interdisciplinary research infrastructures such as Utrecht University's focus area Migration and Societal Change. Complex societal challenges rarely fit neatly within the boundaries of a single academic discipline. By bringing together expertise from in this case the fields of media studies, migration studies, data science, organizational studies and law, the focus area facilitates researchers to generate new insights, strengthen the quality of their work and increase its relevance for society.
The recent change in guidelines serves as a reminder that research impact is still possible. Even in a field characterised by intense public scrutiny and political contestation. Academic work continues to produce evidence that contributes to a significant changes in national policy and public opinion, demonstrating how research informs public debate and policymaking.