Sangam: A Confluence of Knowledge Streams

No recourse to public funds: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Show simple item record

dc.creator Jolly, A
dc.creator Singh, J
dc.creator Lobo, S
dc.date 2022-03-01T12:37:46Z
dc.date 2022-03-01T12:37:46Z
dc.date 2022-03-02
dc.date.accessioned 2022-05-26T21:09:12Z
dc.date.available 2022-05-26T21:09:12Z
dc.identifier 1747-9894
dc.identifier http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18865
dc.identifier 10.1108/ijmhsc-11-2021-0107
dc.identifier.uri http://localhost:8080/xmlui/handle/CUHPOERS/228896
dc.description <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>This study aims to outlines the findings of the first qualitative evidence synthesis of empirical research on the impact of the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) rule which prevents most temporary migrants from accessing social security benefits in the UK.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title> <jats:p>The review used the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol guidelines. Data were analysed by using Thomas and Harden’s (2008) thematic synthesis methodology. An initial 321 articles were identified from 13 databases, of which 38 studies met the inclusion criteria.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title> <jats:p>The key insights were that NRPF causes destitution and extreme poverty and has a disproportionate impact on racialised women. Studies found that support services were underdeveloped, underfunded, inconsistent and had a culture of mistrust and racism towards migrants. Migrants were often fearful of services due to concerns around deportation, destitution and state intervention around children.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Research limitations/implications</jats:title> <jats:p>The review focussed on qualitative research. Future empirical and theoretical research is needed in the following areas: NRPF as a practice of everyday bordering, the role of the Home Office in creating and sustaining the policy; differing gendered experiences of NRPF; and a broader geographical scope which includes all four UK nations and takes an international comparative approach.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title> <jats:p>Despite an estimated 1.4 million people in the UK with NRPF (Citizens Advice, 2020), there is little policy or theoretical discussion of the experience of having NRPF or the implications of the rule. This lack of analysis is a significant gap in both our understanding of the landscape of poverty in the UK, and the ways in which immigration policies create extreme poverty. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first systematic qualitative review on NRPF, bringing together the research evidence on how NRPF negatively affects outcomes for migrants, local authority and voluntary sector responses to NRPF and theoretical perspectives on NRPF.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
dc.language en
dc.language en
dc.publisher Emerald
dc.relation ISSN:1747-9894
dc.rights 2022-03-04
dc.rights Not known
dc.title No recourse to public funds: a qualitative evidence synthesis
dc.type Journal Article


Files in this item

Files Size Format View
NRPF+Qual+Evidence+Synthesis+-+211118.pdf 366.0Kb application/pdf View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse