Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the determinants of immigration from European Neighborhood (EN) and new member states to the EU core countries over the period 2000-2010. Apart from income differentials, unemployment rates and other standard variables hypothesized to determine immigration, the paper focusses attention on welfare-chasing as well as measures to enforce immigration policy. Using a variant of the gravity model, the paper investigates whether tests of these hypotheses are robust with respect to spatial misspecification.

The determinants of migration from the European Neighborhood and new member states to the EU core countries is estimated using a spatial variant of the gravity model. The methodology is used for both multilateral and spatial flows. Gravity model estimations are presented for immigration into the EU core destinations using standard, non-spatial econometrics, as well as spatial econometrics for single and double-spatial dynamics.

Immigration to EU core countries varies directly with the change in social spending per head in the destination. This result stands out in all the models, both OLS and spatial. Immigrants are attracted by economic inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient. However, in this case it is the level that matters rather than its change. No evidence is found that the threat of apprehension at the destination deters migrants from the European Neighborhood and other countries.

The authors assume multilateralism is spatial. This means that everything else given, destinations are closer substitutes the nearer they are, and that immigration shocks are likely to be more correlated among origins the closer they are. This implicit assumption is restrictive because multilateralism is just spatial.

While immigration to EU core countries varies directly with the change in (not level of) social spending per head. If a given country becomes more benevolent it attracts more immigration. The results suggest that if during 2000-2010 social spending per capita grew by 1 percent, the immigration rate increased by between 1 and 2 percentage points relative to the number of foreign-born in 2000. This is a large demographic effect.

Uniquely, this paper does not assume immigration flows are independent and stresses their spatial and multilateral nature. A series of new non-spatial and spatial (single and double-spatial lag) models are used to empirically test hypotheses about the determinants of immigration to the EU core countries.

In June 2016, a clear majority of English voters chose to unilaterally take the United Kingdom out of the European Union (EU). According to many of the post-Brexit vote analyses, the single strongest motivating factor driving this vote was “immigration” in Britain, an issue which had long been the central mobilizing force of the United Kingdom Independence Party. The chapter focuses on how – following the bitter demise of multiculturalism – these Brexit related developments may now signal the end of Britain's postcolonial settlement on migration and race, the other parts of a progressive philosophy which had long been marked out as a proud British distinction from its neighbors. In successfully racializing, lumping together, and relabeling as “immigrants” three anomalous non-“immigrant” groups – asylum seekers, EU nationals, and British Muslims – UKIP leader Nigel Farage made explicit an insidious recasting of ideas of “immigration” and “integration,” emergent since the year 2000, which exhumed the ideas of Enoch Powell and threatened the status of even the most settled British minority ethnic populations – as has been seen in the Windrush scandal. Central to this has been the rejection of the postnational principle of non-discrimination by nationality, which had seen its fullest European expression in Britain during the 1990s and 2000s. The referendum on Brexit enabled an extraordinary democratic vote on the notion of “national” population and membership, in which “the People” might openly roll back the various diasporic, multinational, cosmopolitan, or human rights–based conceptions of global society which had taken root during those decades. This chapter unpacks the toxic cocktail that lays behind the forces propelling Boris Johnson to power. It also raises the question of whether Britain will provide a negative examplar to the rest of Europe on issues concerning the future of multiethnic societies.

The chapter analyses the anti-immigration political parties in the European Union (EU) as a challenge for the EU values such as human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, rule of law, and human rights. As the main constituents of the political groups in the European Parliament, the single elected body of the EU, the parties in the member states require a special scrutiny. In this context, the study aims at understanding and exposing how anti-immigration political parties in the EU discursively construct immigration as a threat. Taking into consideration their salient rise in the 2019 European election, it focuses on the discourses of the relevant parties delivered during the debates of the first half of the ninth (2019–2024) parliamentary term by using critical discourse analysis as its theoretical and methodological framework. The main argument of the study is that these political parties securitize immigration within three main discourse topics: immigration as a security threat, as an economic threat, and as a cultural threat.

Economic theory predicts that unemployment benefits may increase expected income and reduce its volatility, thereby attracting immigrants to countries which implement such programs. This article aims to explore whether and how changes in countries’ unemployment benefit spending (UBS) affect immigration.

Data are collected for 19 European countries over the period 1993‐2008. The relationship between immigration flows and UBS is first tested using the OLS technique. Instrumental variable (IV) and generalised method of moments (GMM) are then used to address reverse causality.

While the OLS estimates suggest the existence of a moderate within‐country welfare magnet effect for the inflows of non‐EU immigrants, the IV approach reveals that the impact is substantially smaller and statistically insignificant when GMM techniques are implemented.

Since information on the immigrants’ country of origin is not available, it is not possible to exclude that for immigrants coming from certain areas, unemployment benefits constitute a strong incentive to immigrate. This hypothesis awaits further research, once detailed data is available.

This paper complements previous literature on immigration and welfare by exploring the endogenous nature of welfare spending. The empirical results provide insights into the interaction between immigration and welfare policies.

The rapid growth of immigration in past decades and the consolidation of economic blocks have brought to the foreground “old concerns” over the effect of immigration on native workers’ wellbeing. The “old concerns” present “new characteristics” which have led to the introduction of “multiculturalism” into the debate over immigration. Considers efficiency gains from immigration taking into consideration the “cultural diversity” involved in any immigration phenomena. In this light, examines the effect of the policies supported by the proponents of a “multicultural education” understood as an “amorphous syncretism” in the economic development of the recipient countries.

Norway is a small nation state on the northernmost coastline of Western Europe, integrated in the Western world economy. For centuries Norway's integration in the world economy had been based on exports of raw materials such as fish and timber, as well as shipping services. In the early 20th century, furnace-based metals (made possible by cheap hydropower) were added to this export basket. Just as the world economy entered an increasingly unstable phase in 1970s, another natural resource was discovered in Norway: petroleum – that is, oil and natural gas from the North Sea. This chapter analyses the challenges and possibilities inherent in the Norwegian strategy of developing an oil economy in a world economic situation influenced by new and stronger forms of international integration through the four decades between 1970 and 2010.

This article aims to highlight the dark side of the restrictive immigration policies, undertaken both at European and national level, paying special attention to the negative effects that these policies can cause.

In particular, the article focuses on two of the main aims stated by these migration policies: the organization of legal immigration and the control of the illegal immigration.

The paper demonstrates how the repressive instruments, today put into practice, not only have not been a solution, but they have produced destructive effects, such as: the increasing of illegal immigration and the consequential increasing of the exploitation of immigrants – making the borders between smuggling and trafficking more and more transitory – the strengthening of the more and more professionalized criminal organization and finally the enlargement of the black market's borders, of which the European single market feeds itself.

The paper offers insights into the dark side of European immigration policy.