2026/02/27 by Stephanie Schneider · 1 voice
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · #Emotional Labor in Professions #History of Emotions Research #Migration, Refugees, and Integration
paper · doi:10.1332/26316897y2026d000000094
openalex publication_date 2026/02/27 · openalex created_date 2026/02/28 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/22
Asylum decision making in state bureaucracies is not only an administrative process but also a practice infused with emotions, with profound consequences for asylum applicants and for the perceived legitimacy of state practices around the governing of migration. How the responsible authorities deal with the emotions of applicants and their employees in a changing political environment is of critical relevance for concerns around administrative violence and the quality and fairness of procedures. Based on interviews with asylum caseworkers and fieldwork conducted within the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) in 2013/14, this article demonstrates how notions of professionalism had become contested terrain, with normative expectations concerning emotion regulation at their core. In the context of trends involving more direct political influence, a managerial restructuring of procedures and a steady devaluation of decision makers in terms of their status and autonomy, the BAMF had begun to incorporate elements of more recent notions of professionalism, such as greater reflexivity or empathy with applicants. However, this was selective and partially contested among staff. A large part of emotion work remained unregulated and implicit, and remnants of past administrative practices continued to feed into interviewees’ notions of professional asylum casework. The analysis highlights the relevance of the organisation of emotions in efforts at disciplining caseworkers and safeguarding relative bureaucratic autonomy amid external political pressures. In light of more recent developments, the findings point to the dangers of shallow forms of emotionalisation that contribute to a smoother functioning of procedures while further veiling issues of accountability and justice.