Paradox of Passports Privileges and Prejudices: Unfolding the Socio‐political Dimensions and Typology of Global Discrimination Across Nationalities, Identity, Status, and Power

This article reviews how passport discrimination affects Asian passport holders’ travel, economic opportunities, immigration experiences, visa processing, and social integration.

Introduction

This study examines how passport discrimination affects Asian individuals living in Western countries who hold passports from India, Afghanistan, China, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. Passport discrimination refers to differential treatment based on the passport a person holds, which may include restrictions on travel, barriers to educational and employment opportunities, and impediments to social integration. Drawing on Social Identity Theory and Self-Categorization Theory, the author argues that passport discrimination arises because people categorize themselves and others into social groups, often favoring perceived in-groups while discriminating against perceived out-groups. 

Passports have evolved beyond travel documents to become markers of legal status, international mobility, and access to rights and protections, such as consular assistance. They also vary considerably in “strength,” or degree of visa-free or visa-on-arrival access they provide. Holders of strong passports often encounter fewer barriers and restrictions to international travel restrictions, whereas travelers with weaker passports often face visa requirements and other restrictions that take additional time, resources, expense and administrative effort.

Ayesha Ali, PhD, is a scholar of higher education, public policy, and governance who earned her doctorate from the University of the Punjab. Her research focuses on strengthening social and human capital through sustainable higher education governance, evidence-based policy making, and institutional capacity building.

Methods and Findings

The author conducted a focus group of 20 Asian individuals who (1) held a passport from an Asian country, (2) had traveled or lived in a Western country within the previous five years, (3) had experienced passport discrimination, and (4) were willing to discuss those experiences. Using semi-structured interviews, participants described their experiences, and the interview transcripts were analyzed thematically to identify common themes and patterns.

The analysis identified six forms of passport discrimination: 

1. Systemic Partiality: Governments and private actors treat Asian passport holders differently through government-imposed travel restrictions, unequal access to services, or discriminatory treatment in accommodations and other settings. 
2. Procedural Partiality:  Immigration enforcement officials subject Asian passport holders to heightened scrutiny, including invasive airport screenings and extensive questioning at customs, even when their documentation is complete.
3. Academic and Professional Partiality:  Employers and educational institutions in Western countries may favor applicants with passports from more economically developed countries because they perceive Asian passports as creating additional administrative burdens. 
4. Financial Partiality: Asian passport holders may receive lower wages, poorer working conditions, and fewer opportunities for promotion because employers perceive them as temporary workers based on their visa status. International students may also face higher tuition costs and limited post-graduation employment opportunities, forcing many students to return to their home countries.
5. Economic Partiality: Study participants described difficulties accessing banks and financial institutions in Western countries. Visa status was often treated as a risk factor, resulting in excessive surveillance in financial transactions, difficulty opening bank accounts, and limited access to credit.
6. Behavioral Partiality: Asian passport holders were frequently stereotyped as being more likely to engage in illegal behavior solely on the basis of their nationality, contributing to social stigma and hindering social integration.

These findings also highlight the intersectional nature of passport discrimination. For example, many participants reported experiencing both anti-immigrant sentiment and racial discrimination alongside passport-based discrimination, with these experiences further shaped by factors such as gender, class, and disability. 

Based on the findings, the author makes a series of policy recommendations for relevant stakeholders, including:

1. Reforming international travel policies to ensure fair and inclusive access and treatment, regardless of passport, nationality, or socioeconomic status.
2. Incorporating awareness of passport discrimination into organizational hiring and recruitment processes to reduce visa-related barriers and discrimination to employment and social integration.
3. Expanding the capacity of non-governmental organizations serving immigrant communities to assist with access to academic institutions, banks and financial services, and healthcare providers, while also raising public awareness about passport discrimination and its broader, multifaceted harms. 

Conclusions

Overall, this study demonstrates that passport discrimination extends far beyond differential treatment based on visa status. It shapes individuals’ employment opportunities, educational experiences, financial inclusion, and social integration. These findings provide advocates and policymakers with evidence that can inform ways to counter passport discrimination, improve access to public services, and promote equitable treatment of people regardless of nationality or socioeconomic status.