Public understanding and attitudes to irregular migration in Germany

Laurence Lessard-Phillips Markus Rheindorf and Bastian Vollmer

Drawing on nationally representative data from February 2025 (N=1,008), this report presents analyses from the I-CLAIM survey on the public perceptions of irregular migration in Germany to showcase the German public’s knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes toward irregular migration and irregular migrants in employment settings.

Evidence from the survey shows widespread overestimation of irregular migration: 85% of participants placed the share of irregular migrants above the likely estimated range in the country (8.3–9.6% of the foreign-born population). This overestimation was most pronounced among older adults and conservative voters, while younger respondents and Greens voters were more accurate or underestimated slightly.

Participants were likely to link irregular status to scenarios reflecting prevailing and current political and media narratives, such as unauthorised border crossings and asylum procedures. Routes more central to producing irregularity, such as visa expiry, employment-linked residence loss, or bureaucratic delays, were not as often identified as important.
With regard to employment, participants associated irregular migration to the sectors of construction, cleaning, catering and hospitality, healthcare, and agriculture. The survey also measured social distance, revealing that acceptance of irregular migrants was highest in public or commercial contexts (e.g. shops or workplaces) and lowest in private ones (e.g. home or family care). Differences across political affiliation were pronounced: voters of CDU and other parties (including AfD) displayed the greatest social distance, while Green voters expressed the least.

When asked about (hypothetical) hiring scenarios, preferences were expressed for national origin, length of residence, personal recommendations, and location of family in Germany. Regarding national origin: candidates from Ukraine were favoured over candidates from Turkey and Syria.

Perceptions of integration were similarly structured around visible markers of belonging and social integration. German language fluency and having friends or family in Germany were the strongest positive predictors of perceived integration, while having one’s family or friends abroad was associated with lower integration scores. Respondents generally valued practical indicators of settlement and participation over legal status alone.

Findings show that German perceptions of irregular migration are shaped by political and media framings that emphasise border control and asylum, but also fragmented and inconsistent. Attitudes are not wholly hostile; they mix apprehension with practical considerations and display openness to integration through language and social ties.

These findings underscore the importance of addressing both misperceptions and the broader narrative environment that shapes how irregular migration is discussed in Germany. While overestimation and anxiety remain widespread, the survey reveals potential spaces for more balanced discourse – centred on work, contribution, and everyday coexistence rather than fear and control. This research illustrates how public perceptions of irregular migration in Germany are structured less by empirical knowledge than by dominant political and media narratives, while still allowing space for pragmatic and conditional acceptance in everyday contexts.