Selecting, disentitling, or investing? Exploring party and voter responses to immigrant welfare dependence in 15 West European welfare states

Abstract:

Academics have long predicted the tension between immigration and welfare to lead to the erosion of redistributive institutions, but empirical studies have found little evidence for that prediction.

This paper argues that concerns about immigrant welfare dependence are more likely to lead to one or more of the following three responses: (1) changes to admission policies aimed at attracting those immigrants who are least likely to turn to the state for financial support; (2) restrictions on immigrants’ access to social programmes and benefits; and (3) extensive integration services and immigrant-targeted labour market programmes.

Combining a content analysis of party manifestoes and secondary analysis of cross-national survey data, this paper maps the views of parties and voters on these possible strategies in 15 Western European welfare states. The analysis reaches three main conclusions. First, the currency these responses enjoy differs strikingly from one country to another. Second, ideological affiliation helps to explain some of the variation within countries. Third, by and large the views of voters and the position of political parties seem to be in line with each other, albeit with important exceptions.