OXFORD, England — There are no easy solutions to Europe’s refugee crisis. In a world of fragile states and increasing mobility people will continue to come, irrespective of whether they neatly fit the legal definition of a “refugee.” Europe needs a clear strategy on who it wants to protect, and where and how to assess people’s asylum claims.

The European Union’s agreement earlier this week centered on a quota system to relocate 120,000 Syrian, Iraqi and Eritrean refugees across member states — most likely from transit centers in Greece and Italy. The plan has several flaws: It was passed without political consensus, it has no mechanism to ensure that people remain in the countries assigned to take them, and it does not say how those denied asylum will be treated.

The biggest problem, though, is that the plan does nothing to stop people from embarking on perilous journeys to Europe. In order to claim asylum under this plan, refugees would still have to arrive in Europe through clandestine means. This has been the direct cause of tragedy and chaos, with people dying on Europe’s roads and drowning at sea. The greatest strain has been at key border areas from Hungary to the Greek islands.

The way to avoid this would be to provide an alternative, legal means for asylum seekers to travel to Europe through “humanitarian visas.” Small consular outposts could be created outside the European Union, in places like Bodrum in Turkey or Zuwara in Libya. As migratory routes change over time these posts could be relocated. At these transit points people could be quickly screened and those with a plausible asylum claim would be allowed access to Europe. They could then simply fly to Europe or take a scheduled ferry at their own expense.