Senior Policy Analyst
Susan Fratzke is a Senior Policy Analyst with MPI’s International Program, where she conducts comparative research on asylum policy, forced migration, and refugee resettlement and complementary pathways.
Ms. Fratzke has authored or contributed to numerous reports assessing the role of refugee pathways and sponsorship in addressing humanitarian needs and displacement. She served as a lead researcher on a 2018 report for the European Commission that proposed an EU approach to the role and development of refugee private sponsorship in Europe. Her work conceptualizing the role of sponsorship in developing humanitarian pathways has been widely cited internationally in research and policy documents.
She also leads work on national asylum systems and the role of international and regional cooperation in maintaining access to protection in response to cross-border humanitarian displacement. She manages an MPI-Robert Bosch Stiftung initiative that is examining ways to strengthen national asylum systems worldwide. She has also been a core contributor to MPI’s longstanding work on the Common European Asylum System (CEAS).
Ms. Fratzke has worked for the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration in Brussels and Washington, DC, and as a coordinator for an adult literacy program serving resettled refugees in Minnesota. She holds an MA in German and European studies, with a concentration in European migration policy, from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. She also earned a certificate in refugees and humanitarian emergencies from the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown.
World leaders convened two summits in New York last week focusing on multilateral responses to the growing challenge of refugee crises and unmanaged migration flows, which have surged to the top of the agenda at the highest levels of government around the world. While score cards for these types of events are difficult to keep, it is clear that the summits offered reasons for both disappointment and hope.
With the reality that a sizeable share of refugee situations can continue for many years, if not decades, there is growing focus on ways to better integrate refugees into countries of first asylum, particularly by ensuring they have access to livelihoods and economic opportunities. This report explores the pitfalls and promise of livelihood programs.
Although in theory refugees are already eligible to move beyond the circumstances of their displacement through a variety of legal channels, in reality pathways are often blocked by practical, technical, and political obstacles. This report explores existing tools and innovative new ideas to open additional opportunities to refugees, whether in first-asylum countries or via migration elsewhere.
Global displacement reached a new high with nearly 60 million people worldwide displaced internally or externally in the greatest number since record-keeping began. The trend continued in 2015 as conflicts in places such as Central African Republic, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, and Yemen drove millions of people to leave their homes and seek refuge in other communities or across borders.
As Europe struggles to reach a consensus on how to respond to the refugee crisis, the seemingly unending flow of migrants and refugees arriving on its shores is bringing national asylum systems to their breaking point. This article analyzes the context of the crisis, discussing the root causes of the flows, why they are spiking now, and growing protection challenges.
Using previously non-public refugee admissions data from the State Department, this analysis finds that even as refugees come to the United States from increasingly diverse origins and linguistic backgrounds, some arriving with very low native-language literacy and education, most integrate successfully over time. The report examines refugees' employment, English proficiency, educational attainment, income and poverty status, and public benefits usage.
The European Union's Dublin Regulation, the mechanism to assign responsibility to Member States for processing individual asylum claims, has been the subject of intense political debate since its inception. This report examines the key criticisms of the Dublin system on asylum, evaluates the potential of the recently adopted recast, and recommends topics for consideration during the scheduled 2016 review of the system.