Public understanding and attitudes to irregular migration in Italy

Laurence Lessard-Phillips and Giulia Garofalo Geymonat

This report presents the findings of the I-CLAIM survey on public perceptions of irregular migration, conducted in Italy in February 2025 with a nationally representative sample of 1,077 adults. The survey offers novel empirical insights into public understandings of irregular migration in Italy, including how it is defined, the extent of public knowledge, and prevailing attitudes toward irregular migrants, particularly in relation to work.

The findings point to substantial knowledge deficits. A majority of respondents markedly overestimated the proportion of irregular migrants within the foreign-born population. While existing estimates indicate that irregular migrants represent 9.4% of the foreign-born population, respondents consistently reported significantly higher figures. This tendency was especially pronounced among older individuals and those with right-leaning political orientations, although it was also evident among younger respondents and voters of the Partito Democratico.

Knowledge gaps were also apparent in relation to pathways into irregular status. When asked about the processes through which irregularity arises, respondents predominantly associated irregular status with unauthorised border crossings and pending asylum applications, reflecting dominant media and political framings. In contrast, fewer respondents identified routine administrative mechanisms—such as visa overstaying or the loss of residence status following employment changes—which play a central role in the production of irregularity within the Italian context.

Perceptions of irregular migrants and employment were characterised by ambivalence. Respondents identified sectors such as agriculture, construction, cleaning, care work (including childcare and eldercare), food delivery, and hospitality as key areas of irregular employment. In open-ended responses, additional sectors such as street-based vending and sex work were also mentioned.

In hiring experiments, they revealed a pragmatic orientation: respondents tended to favour candidates with longer residence in Italy, positive recommendations, and established family ties in the country, even where irregular status was implied. These preferences, however, were shaped by racialised hierarchies, with candidates from Morocco being less favourably evaluated compared to those from Peru and Ukraine, and women less favourably viewed when they do not have their family and friends in Italy.

Perceptions of integration were primarily shaped by indicators of social embeddedness, notably proficiency in the Italian language and the presence of family and social networks in Italy. Overall, respondents reported relatively low levels of social distance in workplace settings, and even lower levels in commercial and domestic contexts—particularly significant given the prevalence of irregular migrant domestic and care work in private households in Italy.

In sum, the survey demonstrates that public understandings of irregular migration in Italy are fragmented, uneven, and frequently misaligned with empirical realities. Attitudes reflect a combination of suspicion and pragmatism, alongside a degree of openness toward markers of social integration and belonging. These findings underscore the need to address both widespread misperceptions and the broader narrative frameworks that shape public discourse on irregular migration.