Links
Next content
Read more
The political assimilation of immigrants: migrant-to-native differences in western Europe
This paper documents the migrant-to-native gap in political preferences towards redistribution, restriction on gay rights, European integration, immigration policy, and political trust using repeated cross-sectional data from the European Social Survey. At the country...
This article looks globally at the motivations behind attitudes to immigration. Such motivations have been typically conceptualised by academics either in terms of the ‘economic competition’ or ‘cultural threat’ that immigrants are perceived to pose to the individual or their ‘in-group’. We propose and test a third possibility: that support for or opposition to immigration is determined by one’s perceptions of immigration’s effects on social conflict. Using the 2017–2020 World Values Survey (WVS) for forty-nine countries, we show that: in most countries, globally, citizens are more likely to agree than disagree that immigration leads to social conflict; levels of concern about the effects of immigration on social conflict are higher than those regarding unemployment or culture in sixteen—disproportionately economically developed—countries; concern about social conflict is conceptually and distributionally distinct; belief that immigration leads to social conflict predicts immigration policy preferences; but, uniquely, is positively predicted by higher education. Our findings highlight the importance of institutional conflict resolution capacity, including those related to integration, for the politics of migration.