Luxembourg as an Immigration Success Story: The Grand Duchy in Pan-European Perspective

The literature on comparative immigration policy is full of studies of policy disasters. Such works show policymakers what to avoid, yet those individuals responsible for formulating and implementing immigration laws often lack examples of what they should be doing instead. That said, although about 64 percent of the labor force and 44 percent of the population of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is composed of non-citizens, public support for immigration is the highest in the European Union outside of Scandinavia, anti-immigrant violence is rare, and no politically influential anti-immigrant, far-right political party exists. Luxembourg as an Immigration Success Story: The Grand Duchy in Pan-European Perspective, by Joel S. Fetzer, provides an in-depth examination of Luxembourg\u27s impressive success in this particular arena. Based on personal interviews with Luxembourg\u27s government officials, immigration scholars, ordinary immigrants, and human-rights activists. Fetzer first documents the Grand Duchy\u27s praiseworthy integration of the foreign-born, and then compares Luxembourg\u27s situation with that of other European Union countries in order to test corresponding explanations for this success. The study concludes that Luxembourg\u27s enviable experience with immigration can be primarily explained by its robust economy, relatively egalitarian income distribution, cultural similarity between native Luxembourgers and the predominately Portuguese and Italian immigrants, low levels of residential segregation, and pro-immigration consensus among the country\u27s leaders.https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/polscibooks/1002/thumbnail.jp

The Evolution of Public Attitudes toward Immigration in Europe and the United States, 2000-2010

Improving EU and US Immigration Systems' Capacity for Responding to Global Challenges: Learning from experiencesThis paper documents and analyzes trends in immigration-related public opinion over the past decade in the major North Atlantic countries of the EU-15 and US. Opening with a summary of the international social-scientific literature on the roots of immigration attitudes, the essay next documents changes in the average European’s and American’s views on migration since 2000 using such polls as the Eurobarometer, European Social Survey, World Values Survey, International Social Science Programme, and American National Election Study. A third major section employs over-time statistical models to examine the (minimal) impact of the current economic crisis on such attitudes. Finally, the paper describes the scholarly literature on the relationship between public opinion and immigration policy in Europe and the United States and speculates on how likely the current global recession is to alter immigration laws and their enforcement

Public Attitudes toward Immigration in the United States, France, and Germany

Public Attitudes Toward Immigration in the United States, France, and Germany explores the causes of public opposition to immigration and support for anti-immigrant political movements in the three industrialized Western countries. Combining sophisticated modeling of recent public-opinion data with analysis of the past 110 years of these nations\u27 immigration history, the book evaluates the effects of cultural marginality, economic self-interest, and contact with immigrants. Though analysis partly confirms each of these three explanations, the author concludes that being a cultural outsider usually drives immigration-related attitudes more than economics or contact do.https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/polscibooks/1021/thumbnail.jp

Open Borders and International Migration Policy: The Effects of Unrestricted Immigration in the United States, France, and Ireland

Although philosophers debate the morality of open borders, few social scientists have explored what would happen if immigration were no longer limited. This book looks at three examples of temporarily unrestricted migration in Miami, Marseille, and Dublin and finds that the effects were much less catastrophic than opponents of immigration claim.https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/polscibooks/1016/thumbnail.jp