Part 1: Introduction This report analyses the role of the European Migration Network (EMN) in migration evidence engagement, with a particular focus on the EMN Platform on Statelessness (hereafter: the Platform). Initiatives taken around migration forecasting and preparedness are dealt with in D1.3. In the context of examining evidence engagement, it is important to note that there is no clear consensus on the definition of 'evidence' and 'evidence-based policymaking' beyond the vague concept of information-supported arguments (Cairney, 2017; Godfrey, Funke & Mbizvo, 2010). While some consider evidence to include only scientific research, others believe that it can include a variety of sources and knowledge, including expert knowledge, indigenous knowledge, or even public opinion Godfrey, Funke & Mbizvo, 2010). As the EMN is not an academic research institution, but a network specialized in facilitating the exchange of information between different stakeholders active in the field of migration and asylum, 'evidence' in the context of this report (unless otherwise specified) does not refer to scientific research, but to knowledge and information generated on migration more broadly, including statistics, legal frameworks, or practitioners' insights. Given the EMN’s position as a key network in information exchange on migration and asylum-related topics in the EMN Member States and Observer Countries, it is crucial to examine the factors that can incentivize evidence engagement and identify room for potential future development. In addition, the EMN Platform on Statelessness, established in 2016 as one of the EMN's expert groups, serves as a forum for exchange of good practices among Member States. While its working methods are largely aligned with those of the broader EMN, the Platform has a distinct mandate: to raise awareness of statelessness and contribute to its reduction, as well as to address related discrimination in EMN Member States (EMN, 2018). As such, its objective goes slightly beyond the EMN's general agenda of mapping and facilitating information exchange. This particular role makes the Platform an interesting case for examining how it deals with evidence, what evidence needs are expressed by its participants, and how it promotes awareness of statelessness. However, given the significant overlap in working methods and staffing between the EMN and the Platform, an understanding of evidence engagement within the EMN as a whole was considered essential to contextualize the role of the Platform. Accordingly, this report addresses the following overarching research question: How do the EMN and the Platform on Statelessness contribute to evidence engagement? Sub-questions guiding the research included: • What drives evidence engagement in the EMN and the Platform? • What are the barriers to evidence engagement in the EMN and the Platform? 4