Knowledge as Practice: Producing Decisional Certainty

Abstract

AbstractMuch uncertainty inheres in refugee status determination and particularly credibility assessments. This chapter deals with how asylum caseworkers attempt to overcome such uncertainties in order to reach enough decisional certainty for categorising asylum seekers into one of four legal categories: refugee with asylum, refugee with temporary admission, non-refugee with temporary admission and non-refugee without temporary admission. I argue that decision-makers’ explicit “country knowledge” as well as their implicit know-how of how to carry out their tasks and their “gut feeling”—which building on Reckwitz (Zeitschrift für Soziologie 32:4: 282–301, 2003) I conceptualise as professional-practical knowledge—plays a crucial role thereby. Furthermore, this chapter shows how basing negative asylum decisions on non-credibility rather than non-eligibility to refugee status serves as a means for overcoming uncertainties inherent in asylum decision-making, leading to the (re-)production of the so-called “culture of disbelief” in asylum administration.