4
 Recognition Rates

Main citizenships

Over the past three years, the recognition rate—which reflects the percentage of asylum applicants granted refugee status or subsidiary protection—has fluctuated around 40% at first instance, with refugee status usually being granted more frequently than subsidiary protection.

In 2025, the EU+ recognition rate fell sharply, reaching 29% for the year as a whole, the lowest yearly level on record. This decline was driven primarily by a sharp reduction in decisions issued to Syrian applicants, who historically accounted for a large share of positive decisions at EU+ level.

This development is largely the result of procedural factors and the issuance of more decisions to low recognition rate nationalities. In several EU+ countries, the processing of Syrian asylum claims was partially suspended in 2025 pending greater clarity on the security and political situation in Syria. As a result, decisions continued to be taken only in specific circumstances, such as cases where an assessment of current conditions in Syria was not required, including applications from Syrians already granted protection in another EU+ country (e.g., Belgium, Germany). In addition, some Syrian applicants withdrew their asylum applications, which, in certain national statistical systems, is recorded as a negative decision. Given the previously large weight of Syrian cases in overall EU+ decision making, these procedural changes had a disproportionate impact on the overall recognition rate.

More broadly, the EU+ recognition rate is a composite indicator, shaped by differing citizenship profiles and evolving protection needs. Recognition rates vary widely by nationality and tend to remain relatively stable over time. Examples of such relatively stable rates include Bangladeshis who have a 2025 recognition rate of 3%, and Pakistanis at 12%.

Several citizenships, however, have experienced marked changes in recent years, all of which can be seen in the interactive version of Figure 7:

  • Türkiye: a slow but steady decline in the recognition rate, from 54% in 2019 to 13% in 2025

  • Afghans: a strong increase over the past four years, particularly in refugee status which rose from below 20% in 2017 to 68% in 2025

  • Haiti: a dramatic rise in the recognition rate from less than 20% in 2021 to nearly 90% in 2025, with the vast majority of positive decisions granting subsidiary protection

  • Mali: recognition rate increased sharply from less than 20% in 2019 to more than 80% in 2024 and 2025

  • Iraq: a long-term downward trend, reaching 19% in 2025

 

It should be noted that some applicants, especially those from Venezuela and to a lesser extent from Somalia and Pakistan are often granted national (rather than international) forms of protection which are unregulated at the EU level and are therefore considered as negative asylum decisions in these statistics. Also, the recognition rates presented here are based on first instance decisions issued by asylum authorities and thus do not account for cases decided by the judiciary and other authorities at second or higher instance, i.e. in appeal and review.

Across the EU+

The aim of the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) is to foster a harmonised implementation of the CEAS across the EU+, with the objective that an application for international protection would receive the same decision regardless of where it is lodged. Recognition rates, the share of asylum decisions granting refugee status or subsidiary protection, are sometimes cited as an indicator of the degree of such harmonisation across EU+ countries.

It is important to recognise, however, that several factors can lead to variation in recognition rates. For example, the assessment of an asylum application cannot be reduced to a single characteristic such as nationality. Differences in applicant profiles, national jurisprudence, national policies, and the application of specific legal concepts may all influence outcomes and result in observable variation in recognition rates.

For more information, read the EUAA Pilot Convergence Analysis which examines main factors driving differences in recognition rates as well as on measures to achieve greater convergence.

Even under fully harmonised decision-making practices, variation in outcomes would still be expected. This reflects the non-random distribution of asylum applicants across the EU+, as displaced persons often move towards countries where they have family ties, social networks or established migration communities. Applicants originating from similar locations and displacement contexts therefore tend to cluster in specific EU+ countries, reinforcing nationality-specific migration patterns over time. As a result, EU+ countries may process systematically different applicant profiles within the same nationality, leading to different recognition rates even when the legal framework and decision-making standards are applied consistently.

Against this background, Figure 8 illustrates recognition rates across the EU+ for selected citizenships. Within each column, circles of the same colour represent different issuing countries; circle size reflects the number of decisions issued, while vertical position indicates the corresponding recognition rate.

Viewed from the perspective of individual nationalities, three broad patterns emerge from this analysis. First, a small number of citizenships display consistently high recognition rates across the EU+, pointing to broadly shared assessments of protection needs. This is most clearly the case for Eritreans (76%) and Sudanese (70%) whose recognition rates remain high across most EU+ countries.

Second, several citizenships show consistently low recognition rates across the EU+, suggesting widespread assessments that most applicants do not meet the criteria for international protection. This group includes Bangladeshis (3%), Moroccans (4%), Egyptians (3%) Peruvians (3%) and Colombians (5%), whose recognition rates remain low irrespective of where decisions are issued.

A third group of nationalities exhibits rather variable recognition rates across the EU+, with 2025 recognition rates ranging from very low to very high. For Ukrainians, recognition rates in 2025 ranged from above 90% in some EU+ countries to near zero in others. Malians show an even starker contrast, with recognition rates close to 100% in some EU+ countries and around 10% in others. For Iraqis, recognition rates range broadly from around 50–60% at the upper end to below 10% in some cases, while for Somalis they span from around 20–30% in some countries to over 90% in others.

A final nuance concerns what the overall recognition rate in Figure 8 can and cannot show. Even where recognition rates appear similar across EU+ countries for a given citizenship, the composition of decisions may differ substantially. Some EU+ countries grant mainly refugee status, while others grant mainly subsidiary protection. At the same time, negative decisions included in Figure 8 should not be interpreted as implying that applicants receive no protection of any kind, as national forms of protection may be granted following a negative decision for international protection. As a result, the chart can mask two distinct sources of variation: differences in the ratio between refugee status and subsidiary protection among positive decisions, and differences in the extent to which negative international-protection decisions coincide with grants of national protection.

For example, Eritreans are among the nationalities with consistently high recognition rates across the EU+, a pattern that might suggest similar a high degree of convergence in protection outcomes. However, a closer examination of the type of protection granted reveals important differences. In particular, the Netherlands (80% of decisions) and to a lesser extent Germany (20% of decisions) and Switzerland (19%) often grant subsidiary protection, whereas other EU+ countries more frequently grant refugee status. For an interactive chart, click here.

Similarly, Sudanese applicants have consistently high recognition rates across the EU+ but this apparent convergence also conceals differences in the type of protection granted. In several key issuing countries, including Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland, the majority of positive decisions for Sudanese take the form of subsidiary protection, while Greece stands out for granting refugee status in a much larger share of cases. For an interactive chart, click here.

Finally, Afghans also have relatively high recognition rates across the EU+, yet a closer look at the composition of decisions reveals substantial variation in protection outcomes. While refugee status accounts for the majority of positive decisions in several key issuing countries such as Austria, Greece and Germany, other EU+ countries grant subsidiary protection in a much larger share of cases. This is particularly evident in Italy, where subsidiary protection represents half of all decisions and where a non-negligible share of Afghan applicants (16%) are granted a national form of protection. To visualise some of the discussed decision-making practices, click here and to learn more read EUAA Country Guidance on Afghanistan and EUAA Country Focus on Afghanistan.

≤20% Recognition Rates

A new feature of the EU Asylum and Migration Pact is the mandatory border procedure, which as of June 2026 will apply to certain categories of asylum seekers including those coming from countries with low recognition rates for international protection. The aim of the border procedure is to make a quick assessment at the EU's external borders of whether applications are unfounded or inadmissible. People in the asylum border procedure would not be authorised to enter the territory of the EU. For more details read the Asylum Procedures Regulation Art. 42(j) 2024/1348.

In 2025, some 49% of applications were lodged by citizenships who had recognition rates of 20% or less in 2024. This estimation was calculated using EUAA data, plus to ensure statistical reliability, our calculations excluded citizenships that received fewer than 1,000 decisions in 2024. This exclusion is necessary because, when the sample size is small, a few additional positive or negative decisions can dramatically alter the calculated recognition rate, potentially leading to unstable or misleading estimates.

Figure 9 shows the main citizenships that applied for asylum in 2025, separated into whether or not they fall into the category of having a recognition rate of 20% or less in 2024. Applications visualised in the chart capture three quarters (73%) of all applications lodged in 2025.

In the context of asylum, the term 'safe country' refers to countries which generally do not generate protection needs for their people. In April 2025, the European Commission published a proposal of seven countries of origin considered safe at the Union level. A political agreement between the European Parliament and the Council of the EU was reached in December 2025 but a formal adoption is still pending. For an overview of the state of play of safe country concepts currently see EUAA, Overview of the Implementation of Safe Country Concepts, Situational Update Issue No 24 of 23 January 2026.

In practice, the application of this list means Member States will use an accelerated procedure to individually assess asylum applications from nationals of these countries. The proposed list of safe countries of origin includes Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India,  Kosovo, Morocco and Tunisia which together accounted for 16% of all applications lodged in 2025, as well as nationals of all EU candidate countries. Read the EUAA, Overview of the Implementation of Safe Country Concepts, Situational Update No 22 of 24 July 2025, for the state of play of EU+ countries implementing safe country concepts in the processing of asylum applications.