ArticlePDF Available

Immigrant Presence, Group Boundaries and Support for the Welfare State in Western European Societies

Authors:

Abstract

The intersection of group dynamics and socioeconomic status theories is applied as a framework for the puzzling relationship of immigration and support for the welfare state in Western Europe. Group dynamics theories suggest that how individuals define their group boundaries moderates the impact of immigration on support for the welfare state. Immigrant presence should have the strongest effects for those with exclusive national group boundaries; weaker for those with conditionally inclusive boundaries based on reciprocity; and weakest or non-existent for those with inclusive group boundaries. Group boundaries should interact with material self-interest, leading individuals with less material security who are more likely to face social risks to be more supportive of the welfare state. Using data from the 4th European Social Survey linked to regional and national data, we find that group boundary salience plays a large moderating role in the relationship between immigration and native support for the welfare state, and that this role is intricately linked to material self-interest. Group dynamics should therefore be viewed in conjunction with existing structural welfare state theories as opposed to an alternative or isolated mechanism.
IMMIGRANT PRESENCE, GROUP BOUNDARIES AND
SUPPORT FOR THE WELFARE STATE IN WESTERN
EUROPEAN SOCIETIES
Nate Breznau, Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES)
(breznau.nate@gmail.com) primary contact.
Maureen A. Eger, Department of Sociology, Umeå University (maureen.eger@soc.umu.se)
Forthcoming in Acta Sociologica.
You may download the paper from Nate Breznau’s academic website:
https://sites.google.com/site/nbreznau/publications
ABSTRACT
The intersection of group dynamics and socioeconomic status theories is applied as a framework
for the puzzling relationship of immigration and support for the welfare state in Western Europe.
Group dynamics theories suggest that how individuals define their group boundaries moderates
the impact of immigration on support for the welfare state. Immigrant presence should have the
strongest effects for those with exclusive national group boundaries; weaker for those with
conditionally inclusive boundaries based on reciprocity; and weakest or non-existent for those
with inclusive group boundaries. Group boundaries should interact with material self-interest
leading individuals with less material security who are more likely to face social risks to be more
supportive of the welfare state. Using data from the 4th European Social Survey linked to
regional and national data we find that group boundary salience plays a large moderating role in
the relationship of immigration and native support for the welfare state, and that this role is
intricately linked to material self-interest. Group dynamics should therefore be viewed in
conjunction with existing structural welfare state theories as opposed to an alternative or isolated
mechanism.
... These two 'families of explanations' have been traditionally studied independently, despite academics highlighting the need to analyze the interaction of economic and cultural variables (Mols and Jetten, 2021;Chen, 2020;Halikiopoulou & Vlandas, 2020;Edo et al., 2019;Golder, 2016). Previous works argued how cultural heterogenization derived from the arrival of immigrant populations might affect social trust and cohesion, eroding intergroup solidarity and support for the welfare state as a result (Alesina & La Ferrara, 2002;Breznau & Eger, 2016;Habyarimana et al., 2007;Luttmer, 2001). In this line, we expect that in contexts where immigration implies greater heterogeneity and higher social expense, support for PRRPs will be higher (Schmidt-Catran & Spies, 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
Labor market competition theory has traditionally analyzed the threat perceived by lower and middle class’ natives on competition over jobs with immigrants. However, in this article we focus on the fiscal burden and competition for social benefits generated by unemployed immigrants and its impact on the vote for Populist Radical Right Parties (PRRPs). Combining individual-level data and aggregate unemployment indicators for over 60 regions from 10 EU countries, we show that, on the one hand, upper class natives seem to support PRRPs when migrant unemployment rates are higher, irrespective of migrants’ origin, which is consistent with the fiscal burden model. On the other hand, lower and middle class natives are more likely to support PRRPs only in contexts of higher unemployment rates among non-EU migrants (but not among migrants from other EU member states), pointing towards an interaction between cultural and economic explanations. These findings underscore the need to account for migrant populations’ characteristics and to consider not only labor competition, but also the fiscal burden to better understand how unemployment may impact PRRP voting.
... Soziale Sicherheit wird dadurch zu einem quasikollektiven Gut, das auf der "institutionell abgesicherte[n] Erwartung eines kontinuierlichen Einkommens in ausreichender Höhe, das entweder aus dem Arbeitsmarkt oder aus dem System sozialer Sicherung bezogen wird", beruht (Vobruba 2009, S. 95). Auch hier spricht aus modernisierungstheoretischer Perspektive jedoch einiges dafür, dass die gewachsene Heterogenität spätmoderner Gesellschaften die Vertrauensbeziehungen zwischen unterschiedlichen sozialen Gruppen erschwert hat, wie insbesondere Studien zum Wohlfahrtschauvinismus gezeigt haben (Breznau und Eger 2016). Die wichtigste, der Stabilisierungsfunktion gegenläufige Dysfunktion liegt demzufolge in dem "Diversitätsstress" (Mau et al. 2020), dem spätmoderne Gesellschaften ausgesetzt sind, begründet. ...
Article
Full-text available
Zusammenfassung Der Artikel untersucht den Wohlfahrtsstaat als politische Quelle von Solidarität und fragt nach den Solidarisierungspotentialen von Sozialpolitik. Können derart abstrakte, staatlich organisierte und über Beitrags- und Steuerzahlungen formalisierte Unterstützungsbeziehungen in einer Gesellschaft überhaupt Solidarität hervorbringen und wenn ja, welche Mechanismen sind dafür verantwortlich? Die Analyse beruht auf der Annahme, dass soziale Solidarität in hochgradig differenzierten Gesellschaften auf politische Steuerungsleistungen angewiesen ist, und betrachtet Sozialpolitik als eine wesentliche Voraussetzung für die Entstehung von Solidarität unter Fremden. In der Tradition der klassischen Soziologie wird Solidarität hier als dynamisches und elastisches Konzept gedacht (Abschn. 2). Daran anknüpfend untersucht der Beitrag die Solidarisierungspotentiale moderner Wohlfahrtspolitik aus institutionalistischer Perspektive. Abschn. 3 stellt die zentralen institutionentheoretischen Annahmen vor und arbeitet drei solidaritätsrelevante Wirkmechanismen heraus: die Kompassfunktion (normative Ebene), die Stabilisierungsfunktion (interpersonelle Ebene) und die Scharnierfunktion (organisationale Ebene). Aus institutionentheoretischer Sicht strukturieren sozialpolitische Institutionen in ihrem dynamischen Zusammenspiel aus Leitideen, Institutionen und Organisationen das Bewusstsein und Verhalten und prägen mittel- und langfristig deren individuelle Präferenzen und Einstellungen (bspw. in Bezug auf Umverteilungspräferenzen oder Gerechtigkeitsvorstellungen). Entsprechend stellt der Wohlfahrtsstaat einen wesentlichen Produktions- und Reproduktionsfaktor von Werten, Handlungspraktiken und horizontalen wie vertikalen gesellschaftlichen Beziehungen dar. Das Theoriemodell wird anschließend anhand der Sozialgeschichte und Funktionsweise des deutschen Sozialstaates beispielhaft angewendet, obgleich nicht in einem hypothesentestenden, sondern empirisch plausibilisierenden Sinn unter Zuhilfenahme der soziologischen und sozialhistorischen Wohlfahrtsstaatsforschung. Die Analyse erlaubt es, ambivalente bis krisenhafte Sozialstaatsdeutungen und widersprüchliche gesamtgesellschaftliche Zeitdiagnosen wie Polarisierung vs. neue Solidaritäten besser einordnen und aufeinander beziehen zu können.
... However, given their higher economic status, they are unlikely to perceive immigrants as a threat personally, and research shows that indeed many business owners and managers are likely to perceive at least labour migration as a net-economic positive (Walter 2010). Paradoxically, higher-educated voters with an interpersonal work logicthe socio-cultural professionalswho have a similar level of education but a lower income than managers (Engler and Zohlnhöfer 2018), are more likely to perceive immigration as a positive enhancement to society both culturally and economically, and relish the richness of multiculturalism and globalised societies (Breznau and Eger 2016;Häusermann and Kriesi 2015). ...
Article
At the extremes of the transnational cleavage in Western European democracies, voters for far-right and green parties tend to hold polarising immigration attitudes. Yet, the extent to which immigration concerns divide mainstream left and right voters, and drive vote-choice at the ballot box for mainstream parties, is under-researched. In this article, I disentangle both immigration attitudes and mainstream electorates to answer these questions. I show that immigration issues divide electorates within the mainstream left and right along educational lines. Yet, the divide between low-educated and highly-educated voters, in particular regarding their cultural immigration concerns, is larger for the mainstream left. Secondly, turning to the drivers of vote choice, I find that cultural immigration issues explain voting for the mainstream right, particularly for lower educated voters, whereas economic concerns are associated with voting for the mainstream left, despite education level. The paper contributes to ongoing debates about immigration issues and voting by recalibrating the academic focus towards mainstream party electorates and internal divisions therein.
... Similarly, the increasing conditionality of welfare provision across Western Europe has been shown to spurn tighter moral boundaries of deservingness (van Oorschot, 2006;Watkins-Hayes and Kovalsky, 2016). Deservingness is also a central means of classification in assessing the claims and worthiness of migrants and refugees (Casati, 2018;Vandevoordt and Verschraegen, 2019;Dingeman-Cerda et al., 2016), and there is a strong link between deservingness tropes in both areas (but see Breznau and Eger, 2016). Moral notions and social classifications are embedded in state action from policy instruments to welfare regimes (Fourcade et al., 2013;Ingram and Schneider, 1993;Lascoumes and Le Gales, 2007;Schneider and Ingram, 1993 This is also visible in the use of symbolic boundaries in political appeals. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
How cleavages are structured on the level of identities is a central but neglected part of cleavage theory. The contribution theorizes the identity level of cleavages and makes the case for studies of symbolic and moral boundary making to complement existing research. A first part presents a definition of the sociocultural element of cleavages as a set of antagonistic group categories endowed with moral force and pervasively deployed in everyday classifications of the self and others. It is then shown how certain aspects of this cleavage element are underrepresented in current research. Drawing on work in cultural sociology, it is suggested that the study of symbolic boundaries can help fill this gap. Concretely, it is shown how boundary making is at play in an important contemporary form of cleavage transformation, i.e. the formation of a new divide over national closure and societal liberalization, expressed by parties of the Populist Radical Right and the New Left and rooted in postindustrial class alignments.
Article
A theory of rational attitude formation suggests public perceptions that income differences are too large should lead to demands for income redistribution. Public opinion scientists irregularly observe this at best. It is possible that the instruments we use to observe support for income redistribution are ineffective. We suggest at least part of the inconsistently observed linkages are due to unobserved confounding of government heuristics. We hypothesize that government affect provides a heuristic cue for survey respondents to answer questions on their preference for the government engaging in income redistribution. The greater the valence or quantity of reasons for a survey respondent to have negative government affect, the more perceptions of inequality and support for redistribution are decoupled and apparently inconsistent. To test this, we measured government affect at the country-time level using trust, corruption perceptions, and economic performance. We executed tests of moderation using slopes-as-outcomes regressions with ISSP data from 36 countries in 102 country-time points. Given the difficulty in fitting complex theories of society and politics into a limited number of macro-comparative cases, we ran a multiverse analysis of alternatively plausible models. There is a consistent negative moderation effect across models suggesting that our theory of government affect as opinion expression on a survey is worthy of further consideration. The findings also suggest more qualitative cognitive survey interviews to better understand this process.
Article
Does becoming poorer always cause people to shift their attitudes towards higher demand for redistribution? Through a systematic review of the literature on this question, we reveal five important themes in existing research: a person’s current income, their future expectations, their expectations about redistribution benefits, their income in early life and their attitudes towards beneficiaries. Identifying these themes helps explain why responses to economic hardship are variable and heterogeneous, and can very usefully guide future research.
Article
Full-text available
This research paper examines the effectiveness of social welfare policies in managing mass immigration in Norway and Canada. With increasing global migration, countries face the challenge of integrating immigrants while sustaining their welfare systems. Norway emphasizes state-centered support, facilitating immigrants' rapid integration through comprehensive social welfare programs. This approach promotes socio-economic well-being and labor market participation, fueled by a commitment to social solidarity and inclusive group boundaries. Additionally, Norway invests in education and language training, ensuring immigrants' long-term self-sufficiency. Canada, on the other hand, employs an inclusive approach, providing equal access to a range of welfare programs tailored to immigrants' needs. This strategy fosters a sense of belonging and self-reliance among immigrants, reducing their reliance on government assistance. While both nations offer unique insights, their approaches achieve success through different avenues: Norway prioritizes rapid integration and social cohesion, while Canada focuses on fostering self-sufficiency and reducing welfare dependence. The study underscores the need for evidence-based policy decisions that strike a balance between immigrants' needs and sustainable welfare systems. By understanding the successes and challenges of mass immigration policies, policymakers can create comprehensive and effective strategies that promote integration, social cohesion, and economic well-being.
Article
Welfare chauvinism and welfare populism as characteristic features of radical right parties’ welfare stances have become challenges to the welfare state. However, in order to understand how these claims may indeed affect welfare politics, it is essential to study whether welfare chauvinism and welfare populism attract voters beyond the radical right, especially among the mainstream right or even parts of the left. Results based on original public opinion data in eight Western European countries show that, contrary to widespread assumptions, welfare chauvinism and welfare populism divide the right more than the left. Electorates of not only green, but also most social democratic and radical left parties are consistently most opposed to discriminating welfare rights between natives and immigrants, although this opposition is weaker among left working-class voters than among left middle-class voters. Even voters of most mainstream right parties show only moderate support for welfare populism and welfare chauvinism, leaving the fervent support of radical right voters for welfare chauvinism and populism unmatched by any other electorate. These findings have important implications for the strategic situation of left parties and for understanding how welfare chauvinism and welfare populism may challenge welfare states.
Article
The article studies the social relationships of natives in the destination countries of migrants. Specifically, the article estimates the share of non-natives in natives’ friendship opportunity pools (FOP) and its correlation with natives only having native friends. Danish data is used due to a unique possibility of linking register information, allowing the establishment of an objective measurement of FOP at various levels, and survey information, allowing the measurement of natives’ friendship composition, at the individual level. In our sample, 55 per cent of the natives have a migrant friend, and it is found to be strongly correlated with FOP. In line with Blau’s macro-sociological framework and assimilation theory, we thereby find support for a transformation of the ‘weak’ friendship ties of natives in destination countries. The FOP effects are found to be stronger for older respondents and those with negative attitudes toward immigration. The effects are found across measurement at the neighbourhood-, parish – and municipal level and after control for general attitudes toward immigration. In models with three levels simultaneously included, the effects are present at the neighbourhood and municipal level, but absent at the parish level.
Article
Full-text available
The increasing popularity of radical right parties in Western Europe has received widespread attention. Despite a rather large literature on parties with explicitly anti-immigrant platforms, there is surprisingly little consensus about the underlying political ideology of this party family and its supporters. Particularly lacking is cross-national research that maps party positions in two-dimensional political space over time. Using Manifesto Project Data (1970–2010), we analyse election platforms of parties the literature has identified as radical right and show that they have qualitatively changed between 1970 and 2010. Current parties differ fundamentally from their predecessors in that nationalist claims are paramount. We use the European Social Survey (2002–2010) to confirm that voters’ attitudes are consistent with contemporary parties’ platforms. Our results point to a coherent political ideology, which may partially explain these parties’ recent electoral successes. Based on our combined analyses, we conclude that contemporary anti-immigrant parties constitute a new and distinct party family, which we term neo-nationalist.
Book
The birthplace of the nation-state and modern nationalism at the end of the eighteenth century, Europe was supposed to be their graveyard at the end of the twentieth. Yet, far from moving beyond the nation-state, fin-de-siècle Europe has been moving back to the nation-state, most spectacularly with the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia into a score of nationally defined successor states. This massive reorganisation of political space along national lines has engendered distinctive, dynamically interlocking, and in some cases explosive forms of nationalism. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu and the 'new institutionalist' sociology, and comparing contemporary nationalisms with those of interwar Europe, Rogers Brubaker provides a theoretically sophisticated and historically rich account of one of the most important problems facing the 'New Europe'.
Article
This book advances a political argument for poverty. This argument is developed from explaining cross-national and historical variation in poverty across affluent democracies since the late 1960s. Specifically, institutionalized power relations theory is proposed as an explanation to counter the individualism that prevails in contemporary poverty scholarship. The book also develops arguments for how poverty should be conceptualized and measured, and offers a comprehensive study of poverty in affluent democracies. A variety of analyses are conduced to explain variation in poverty and to represent institutionalized power relations, liberal economic, and structural theories of poverty. Ultimately, the welfare state and Leftist politics emerge as the most influential forces on poverty. The book contends that poverty scholarship should focus less on the individual characteristics of the poor and more on the politics of poverty and equality. Rather than viewing poverty as the unfortunate by-product of labor markets or demography, poverty should be understood as a result of the power relations of collective political actors and the extent to which egalitarianism is institutionalized in the welfare state.
Article
In this paper, I extend the concept of observer effect into the realm of country-level secondary data analysis. When analyzing what appear to be the same secondary data using the same methods, macro-comparative researchers arrive at different results. I argue that this is a product of idiosyncratic variation directly or indirectly produced by the researchers. Even when this bias produces only small perturbations in results, the consequences may be very large. Using an influential study by Brooks and Manza I analyze this secondary observer effect (SOE). Two seemingly identical replications of their data by different researchers produced surprising variations. Reanalysis of these divergent values produces similar but not identical results. A rough calculation of the size of the SOEs suggests that they are about .32 standardized standard deviations across variable scores. Simulations of this size of error show that significant changes in findings occur as a result.
Article
There has been great interest in the relationship between immigration and the welfare state in recent years, and particularly since Alesina and Glaeser's (2004) influential work. Following literatures on solidarity and fractionalization, race in the U. S. welfare state, and anti-immigrant sentiments, many contend that immigration undermines public support for social policy. This study analyzes three measures of immigration and six welfare attitudes using 1996 and 2006 International Social Survey Program (ISSP) data for 17 affluent democracies. Based on multi-level and two-way fixed-effects models, our results mostly fail to support the generic hypothesis that immigration undermines public support for social policy. The percent foreign born, net migration, and the 10-year change in the percent foreign born all fail to have robust significant negative effects on welfare attitudes. There is evidence that the percent foreign born significantly undermines the welfare attitude that government "should provide a job for everyone who wants one." However, there is more robust evidence that net migration and change in percent foreign born have positive effects on welfare attitudes. We conclude that the compensation and chauvinism hypotheses provide greater potential for future research, and we critically consider other ways immigration could undermine the welfare state. Ultimately, this study demonstrates that factors other than immigration are far more important for public support of social policy.
Article
This paper examines the validity of predominant assumptions about popular support for the welfare state. These presuppositions include the notion that support for the welfare state varies in different types of regimes (be they ‘liberal’ or ‘social democratic’ or ‘conservative’), the idea that different social groups (for example, the middle and working classes and the unemployed) have different interests with respect to the welfare state, and the view that political alignments have a strong influence on attitudes to welfare. To investigate these issues we analyze the 1990 International Social Survey Programme Role of Government Survey and compare it to the findings of an analysis we conducted on the 1985 survey. The aim therefore is to examine the relationship between mass attitudes and specific types of welfare state regime and the social and other correlates of mass opinion.
Book
Many economic and social surveys are designed as panel studies, which provide important data for describing social changes and testing causal relations between social phenomena. This textbook shows how to manage, describe, and model these kinds of data. It presents models for continuous and categorical dependent variables, focusing either on the level of these variables at different points in time or on their change over time. It covers fixed and random effects models, models for change scores and event history models. All statistical methods are explained in an application-centered style using research examples from scholarly journals, which can be replicated by the reader through data provided on the accompanying website. As all models are compared to each other, it provides valuable assistance with choosing the right model in applied research. The textbook is directed at master and doctoral students as well as applied researchers in the social sciences, psychology, business administration and economics. Readers should be familiar with linear regression and have a good understanding of ordinary least squares estimation.
Article
Written by one of the preeminent researchers in the field, this book provides a comprehensive exposition of modern analysis of causation. It shows how causality has grown from a nebulous concept into a mathematical theory with significant applications in the fields of statistics, artificial intelligence, economics, philosophy, cognitive science, and the health and social sciences. Judea Pearl presents and unifies the probabilistic, manipulative, counterfactual, and structural approaches to causation and devises simple mathematical tools for studying the relationships between causal connections and statistical associations. The book will open the way for including causal analysis in the standard curricula of statistics, artificial intelligence, business, epidemiology, social sciences, and economics. Students in these fields will find natural models, simple inferential procedures, and precise mathematical definitions of causal concepts that traditional texts have evaded or made unduly complicated. The first edition of Causality has led to a paradigmatic change in the way that causality is treated in statistics, philosophy, computer science, social science, and economics. Cited in more than 5,000 scientific publications, it continues to liberate scientists from the traditional molds of statistical thinking. In this revised edition, Judea Pearl elucidates thorny issues, answers readers’ questions, and offers a panoramic view of recent advances in this field of research. Causality will be of interests to students and professionals in a wide variety of fields. Anyone who wishes to elucidate meaningful relationships from data, predict effects of actions and policies, assess explanations of reported events, or form theories of causal understanding and causal speech will find this book stimulating and invaluable.
Article
Researchers in comparative research increasingly use multilevel models to test effects of country-level factors on individual behavior and preferences. However, the asymptotic justification of widely employed estimation strategies presumes large samples and applications in comparative politics routinely involve only a small number of countries. Thus, researchers and reviewers often wonder if these models are applicable at all. In other words, how many countries do we need for multilevel modeling? I present results from a large-scale Monte Carlo experiment comparing the performance of multilevel models when few countries are available. I find that maximum likelihood estimates and confidence intervals can be severely biased, especially in models including cross-level interactions. In contrast, the Bayesian approach proves to be far more robust and yields considerably more conservative tests.