At the micro level, the report highlights the intersectionality of different types of vulnerabilities based on the personal accounts of protection seekers, in that their experiences related more generally to how certain situations impacted each of them during the asylum process and not simply to their distinct personalities. Conceiving vulnerability through an intersectional lens allowed us to better grasp how a combination of different factors (most commonly, gender, age and health) may increase the vulnerability that protection seekers experience at different points in the migratory path (country of origin, migratory road, country of arrival). At the meso level, the study underlines many types of the vulnerabilities the asylum seekers experience that the asylum process itself “favoursâ€, and possibly also produces or maintains. These vulnerabilities arise for numerous reasons ranging from the length of the procedure to possible information and communication gaps between the protection seekers and the authorities (mostly resulting in feelings of loneliness and real disempowerment). At a macro level, the research reveals different tensions around the way vulnerability is approached and dealt with by the Belgian asylum system. Most notably, it questions the capacity of the asylum system to account for the different types of protection seekers’ vulnerabilities (and their particular needs) consistently and systematically, given that vulnerabilities are often assumed to crop up as a matter of “chance†or “coincidenceâ€. It also highlights some dissent among the asylum bodies on the weight given to the vulnerability of protection seekers in designing the asylum process (as an exceptional procedural guarantee to be granted in specific cases or as a minimum standard/basis to apply to all protection seekers by default).