Symposium on trends and advances in the comparative politics of immigration: Taking stock [post-print]

Up until the 1980s immigration-related subjects were largely ignored by comparative political scientists. It was only when they were politicized during the 1990s that political science scholarship on these subjects proliferated. The essays in this symposium expand upon the progress comparativists have made in comprehending and explaining the phenomena of mass immigration and immigrant settlement. Specifically, they explore several recent currents within their respective research streams, including issue salience, radical Right political parties, the domestic politics of immigration policy making, and national immigration regimes. All are intellectually indebted to the scholarship of Gary P. Freeman and Martin A. Schain to whom we dedicate this symposium

"Opposition to immigration: Self-interest or public interest?"

Why do some Europeans feel threatened by immigrants more than others? Some studies have suggested that there is a pattern of negative attitudes toward immigrants which rises according to the size of immigrant population. This follows accounts of electoral behavior; extreme-right parties such as the French FJ tend to do best in areas of high immigrant concentration. Others have suggested that the feeling that there were too many immigrants might be strong even in countries where the proportion of immigrants is relatively high. Although much has been written about "immigration thresholds," how immigrant size translates into immigrant rejection remains unclear and ambiguous. This paper attempts to uncover these contradictions by disentangling the effects of personal concerns from societal consideration and by looking at the different motivations underlying peoples' assessment. It argues that people tend to separate their personal concerns from broader judgments about societal threat when thinking about immigration. It suggests that while immigrant numbers matter, it may only be in contest of other threats (i.e., security, European integration) that they fully make sense

The Immigration-Security Nexus: A View from the European Parliament

Utilizing data from our surveys of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in 1992-93 and 2003-04, this paper offers an attitudinal portrait of the degree to which European elites have successfully navigated the contradictions posed by the increasing securitization of immigration after September 11th. We specifically asked to what degree MEPs: view immigration as a salient and multi-dimensional security threat; support greater rights for immigrants; and prefer an EU over a national policy making venue to regulate immigration policy. Our analysis of the data yielded mixed results. On the one hand, a majority of contemporary MEPs concluded that immigration was “very important,” favored increasing economic immigration, and rejected the suggestion that immigration poses a cultural threat. On the other hand, and contrary to our expectations, MEP support for the extension of immigrant rights declined from 1993 to 2004 and, most surprising, MEPs were less inclined in 2004 than in 1993 to look to Europe in order to resolve immigration-related dilemmas. Although a robust majority agreed that a European immigration policy is more urgent after September 11th, it is fair to conclude on the basis of the aggregate data that MEPs in 2004, as in 1993, were not especially inclined to view immigration through the prism of national or European security

“The Role of Non-State Actors in the Movement of People: Promoting Travel and Controlling Migration in the European Union”

This paper investigates ways that the liberal states of the EU (with comparative references to the U.S.) reconcile efforts to control the movement of people with those to promote free borders, open markets and liberal standards. It identifies the proliferation and diversification of ‘non-state actors,’ defined as a diverse group of collective actors who have the economic and/or political resources to facilitate or curtail travel, migration and return. The paper particularly focuses on the role of airline and travel carriers as private actors who serve as agents of the state-an extension of “remote control immigration policy.” The implications of these non-state actors for theories of state sovereignty and regional integration are assessed

Actors and Venues in Immigration Control: Closing the Gap between Political Demands and Policy Outcomes

This account reviews the state of the literature on migration since the West European Politics special issue on migration was published in 1994. Particular attention is dedicated to the theme of immigration control and the critical question of policy gaps between immigration policy goals and outcomes. Regarding policy gaps, we identify three dimensions of this thesis that are addressed in some form by the contributors to the volume. These include: the disjuncture between public opinion and policy elites at the decision-making and implementation stages; the relationship between principals (states) and agents; and the dynamic between international and domestic arenas of policy-making. Offering a comparative analytical framework to empirically map the variations that exist across countries and policy stages and levels, this essay disaggregates the various components and actors involved in migration policy-making. It suggests that in order to test the gap thesis, a more nuanced empirical analysis of an expanded migration policy field composed of multiple actors and venues is warranted