Vignette d'image

SOM - Support and Opposition to Migration

Titre du projet
SOM - Support and Opposition to Migration
Description
Support and Opposition to Migration (SOM) is a collaborative project funded by the European Commission as part of the Seventh Framework Programme. The project looks at the politicization of migration in seven European countries. The aim of this comparative project is to determine why and when potential conflicts over migration become politicized, examining both anti-immigration and anti-racist movements. The project will increase knowledge about the political dynamics related to migration, and provide policy-relevant information. The project focuses on the role of four types of actors—the state, political parties, movements, and the media—in politicizing, or depoliticizing, the issue of immigration in seven receiving countries: Austria, Belgium, Britain, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Switzerland.
Chercheur principal
Statut
Completed
Date de début
1 Octobre 2009
Date de fin
30 Septembre 2012
Organisations
Site web du projet
Identifiant interne
14435
identifiant
https://libra.unine.ch/handle/123456789/1401
Mots-clés

Filtres

Réinitialiser les filtres

Paramètres

Voici les éléments 1 - 10 sur 14
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    The Positions Mainstream Left Parties Adopt on Immigration: A Crosscutting Cleavage?
    (2018-6-15)
    Carvalho, João
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
    Immigration is often perceived as a political topic that overlaps traditional ideological cleavages. Much research has focused on the positions of the extreme right, and little research has examined mainstream parties and their public stances on immigration. This shortcoming hampers broader understanding of political competition on this issue. Drawing on a political claims analysis of seven countries between 1995 and 2009, we present the salience, position and overall coherence of claims made by mainstream parties on immigration control and immigrant integration. Mainstream left parties adopt a more positive/expansive position on immigration and exhibit higher levels of coherence than centrist and right-wing parties. We also show that the impact of extreme-right parties on the political claims of mainstream left parties seems to be limited. Our conclusions highlight that immigration does not necessarily constitute a cross-cutting cleavage across mainstream left parties: Their ideological preferences remain aligned with their positive/liberal discourse on immigration control and immigrant integration.
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
    The Politicization of Asylum Seekers and Other Immigrant Groups in a Comparative Perspective
    (Wien: Verlag Manz, 2017)
    Rosenberger, Sieglinde
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
    ;
    Merli, Franz
    ;
    Pöschl, Magdalena
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
    A Cross-Country Comparison
    (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015)
    van der Brug, Wouter
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
    ;
    Berkhout, Joost
    ;
    Cinningham, Kevin
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
    Citizenship regimes and the politicization of immigrant groups
    (2017-4-19)
    Ruedin, Didier 
    Previous research has examined the various ways individuals and organizations react to immigration. This article explores how immigrants and their integration are debated across citizenship regimes, with a focus on ‘voiceless’ groups without formal franchise and a precarious residence status: asylum seekers, refugees, and irregular immigrants. A yearly measure of citizenship regimes is used together with a large-scale claims analysis of newspapers from seven Western European countries between 1995 and 2009 to systematically describe the relative frequency of and frames in different claims by political actors. The debate on immigration and integration varies by citizenship regime, including the way immigrant groups are referred to. Having an ethnic citizenship regime is associated with more claims about voiceless immigrant groups. At the same time, the association between immigrant group size and the extent to which immigrant groups are politicized is moderated by the citizenship regime. Debates on immigrants and their integration vary across citizenship regimes.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    The role of language in the automatic coding of political texts
    (2013)
    Ruedin, Didier 
    Automatic approaches to coding party manifestos and other political texts have become more widespread. This research note addresses the question to what extent the source language of a text affects the results. To do so, Swiss manifestos in German and French are coded automatically, comparing a keyword-based dictionary approach and Wordscores. Because of language differences, both stemming and particularly stop words are important to obtain comparable results for Wordscores. If both are used, the predicted scores are almost identical in both languages. With the right preparations, the challenge of language differences can thus be overcome.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Increasing Validity by Recombining Existing Indices: MIPEX as a Measure of Citizenship Models
    (2015)
    Ruedin, Didier 
    Researchers often reuse existing data and indices even in cases where theory demands different measures. Here, I argue that with little additional effort, it is possible to increase the validity of research by recombining individual indicators of existing indices. This approach is demonstrated by using data from the widely used Migration Integration Policy Index (MIPEX), recombining some of the 148 indicators to approximate Koopmans et al.'s (2005) two-dimensional conception of citizenship models. The recombined MIPEX data match the desired conception of citizenship models and can be applied to all countries covered in the MIPEX. For the first time theoretically predicted ethnic-pluralistic citizenship models (segregationism) are observed.The approach presented can be applied to different data and research questions, leading to research making use of more appropriate data that match specific research rather than relying on what is readily available—thus increasing validity.
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Why Religion? Immigrant Groups as Objects of Political Claims on Immigration and Civic Integration in Western Europe, 1995–2009
    (2017-6-8)
    Berkhout, Joost
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
    Under which circumstances do politicians differentiate among immigrants? When they do, why do they in some countries focus on Muslim immigrants rather than national or other groups? We use claims-making analysis to capture how immigrant groups are differentiated in seven Western European countries. As explanations for variation in claims-making about Muslim immigrants (1995–2009) we consider socio-structural and citizenship-regime differences across countries, the parliamentary presence of anti-immigrant parties, the 9/11 WTC attack and the direct political context in which claims-making occurs. We find that Muslim-related claims-making is associated with the parliamentary presence of anti-immigrant parties and the policy topic under discussion. By contrast, the evidence for policy-oriented and socio-structural explanations is inconclusive. There is a need for further theory development on the effects of the political debate (topics, arguments, actors) on (migrant-)group differentiation in particular and politicization in general.
  • Publication
    Métadonnées seulement
    A Framework for Studying the Politicisation of Immigration
    (Abingdon: Routledge, 2015)
    van der Brug, Wouter
    ;
    D'Amato, Gianni 
    ;
    Berkhout, Joost
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    The Gap between Public Preferences and Policies on Immigration: A Comparative Examination of the Effect of Politicization on Policy Congruence
    (2015-2)
    Morales, Laura
    ;
    Pilet, Jean-Benoit
    ;
    Ruedin, Didier 
    The existence of a gap between public preferences for more restrictive immigration policies and relatively expansive immigration policy in Western democracies has received considerable attention. Sometimes, this gap has been explained by the nature of immigration policies: dominated by elites while the public remained uninterested. In many countries, however, immigration has gained considerable salience among the public. There are competing expectations and accounts relating to whether policy-makers ignore or follow public demands on immigration. In this article we examine the potential drivers of variations in the opinion-policy gap on immigration in seven countries (1995–2010). We analyse the effect of the politicization of immigration on this opinion-policy gap. The strength of anti-immigrant parties is unrelated to the opinion-policy gap on immigration. The salience of the issue and the intensity of the public debate are associated with the opinion-policy gap, and the combination of negative attitudes with extensive media coverage seems particularly conducive to policy congruence.