Attitudes, migration and migrants

This 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.

The International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) commissioned the Migration Policy Centre (MPC) of the European University Institute to provide this report in early 2018, based on the work of the MPC’s Observatory of Public Attitudes to Migration (OPAM). This built on the insight and recommendations of the first EuroMed Migration Communications Study—‘How does the media on both sides of the Mediterranean report on migration?' This second study aims to: • Offer a better understanding of public attitudes to migration in 17 selected countries on both sides of the Mediterranean; • Attempt to explain why attitudes to migration are what they are — with an emphasis on the role of media. The report both summarises previous findings and provides new analyses; • Provide recommendations on how to communicate on migration in a non-polarising manner. Public attitudes; Migration; Europe; Media

In this chapter we consider how and why the dramatic changes in the salience of immigration in recent years have changed European politics. We first combine findings from the literature to produce an original theoretical framework of how salience affects electoral outcomes and ultimately public policy via emotional activation and exposure to information. We then overview variation in the salience of immigration in Europe from 2005 to 2018, showing clear trends according to geography, politics and economics. Next, we produce a further comprehensive theoretical framework to explain these trends in salience, based on the literature, that specifies the respective and interactive roles of public policy, ‘real-world’ migration events and trends, media and politicians, before adducing evidence that supports this framework. We consider how salience—both in terms of the perceived most important issues affecting one’s country and the EU—has affected past European Parliamentary elections, in terms of the percentage of seats won by radical right parties, and what this tells us about future electoral results. Finally, having developed two theoretical frameworks, we offer next steps for policy-makers and researchers of migration, public opinion and European politics.

"This project circles around three core questions: Does assimilation work? Does discrimination vary with exposure to competition? Do public attitudes directly translate into immigrant disadvantage? (1) Assimilation Proofs: Initially, we analyze whether the origin of immigrants and/or their level of assimilation to the host country (birth and naturalization) can explain labor market trajectories. Among the manifold domains in which individuals with a migration background may face disadvantages, we focus on labor market re-integration because it has been proven to be a key factor in fostering long-term social integration into the host country. Although empirical evidence for discriminatory practices by employers is generally difficult to provide with registry data, our design minimizes potential alternative explanations. Our study benefits from a unique dataset combining registry and survey data, which were collected in the Swiss Canton of Vaud among all newly unemployed individuals between February and April 2012. The findings are based on real labor market behavior and show that when controlling for encompassing information on human and social capital and other employability criteria, individuals whose provenience is from outside the European Union face periods of unemployment that are up to 50% (or 3 months) longer than those of Swiss natives. Surprisingly, observable assimilation proofs in the form of naturalization or birth in the host country do not improve labor market re-integration. We explain this finding by employers’ discriminatory hiring behavior. (2) Assimilation Signals: In a related study, we test whether HR managers’ discrimination against candidates with a nonnative background can be counteracted by these candidates signaling assimilation into the host society. In our study, HR managers evaluate descriptions of fictitious CVs in which we vary the nationality of the candidates and different signals of cultural attachment to their migration background or to the host country. The findings reveal that candidates with Polish- and Turkish-sounding names are evaluated worse than candidates with Swiss- or Spanish-sounding names. More interestingly, however, participating in civic engagement within a traditional Swiss volunteering organization increases the opportunities given to individuals with Polish and Turkish backgrounds, while participating in an organization connected to their origin dramatically damages their evaluation by prospective employers. We also show that candidates with Polish or Turkish backgrounds who adjust their CVs to appear native by indicating fluency in only the local language (either German or French) fare much better than those who reveal a language attachment to their country of origin. We conclude that there are limited opportunities to ameliorate the evaluation of a CV by signaling assimilation into the host country; conversely, non-adapted CVs and CVs that convey multiple signals of attachment to one’s culture of origin are heavily sanctioned in the assessment by HR managers. (3) Competition: Subsequently, we want to examine whether the prevalence of ethnic discrimination varies with a discriminator’s exposure to competition. First, we use a representative online survey experiment in Germany in order to ask participants to take over the role as a football manager and to rate players in three different tasks. First results show that participants on average prefer White (rather than Black) and Western (rather than non-Western) players, especially when they need to choose between two candidates. We conclude that discrimination likely occurs when there is pressure to select. (4) Housing: In a related study, we examine ethnic discrimination in the housing market. The progressive increase of housing prices and the depletion of affordable dwellings in Swiss urban centers have brought attention to the population's housing conditions and residential mobility. Recent studies have shown that some precarious groups have a more difficult access to adequate housing, especially lower-income households and foreign-born populations. In Switzerland, where the majority of individuals live in rental units, landlords and rental agencies act as gatekeepers and play an important role in the spatial distribution of precarious populations across neighborhoods and to what type of dwelling they have access to. As a result of the landlords’ decisions, ethnic minorities might have limited choices as for where they live. They might be stuck in more deprived housings or neighborhoods, access relatively overpriced dwellings, experience higher rates of crowding, etc. Consequently, our study proposes to investigate mechanisms of discrimination that might take place in the Swiss housing market amongst landlords, professional agencies, and private persons (renters), each of whom potentially having different incentives to discriminate. (5&6) Attitudes: Do public attitudes directly translate into immigrant disadvantage? We aspire to answer this question with two original studies on the effect of public referenda in Switzerland. Such regularly occurring votes are also directly referring to the country’s position vis-à-vis the international community and immigration and usually are heatedly debated prior to the referendum. We exploit such immigration-related referenda by linking salient public discourses to economic and political outcomes of foreigners living in Switzerland. Concretely, we investigate whether such debates, everything else equal, affect the propensity to find a new job during the months of the most heated public exchanges. We hypothesize that a group being pushed into the spotlight by a referendum experiences detrimental effects on its aggregated re-integration chances. Similarly, we expect local politicians with a foreign-sounding name to have a harder stand if the local election falls in the period prior to such a public controversy. (7) Perception: Eventually, we seek to shed light on the mechanisms of perceived discrimination: Who, among recent immigrants, is more likely to feel discriminated against and report it when asked in a survey? Social scientists typically define discrimination as an observable and unjust difference in the treatment of distinct groups. In order to personally feel discriminated against, people must be aware of the differential treatment and perceive it as unjust. We show that reporting discrimination when asked in a survey depends substantially upon individual traits, including aspects that shape whether discrimination is accepted and whether immigrants feel attached to the host society. Although respondents report less discrimination if their job situation has improved after migration, people more likely report discrimination when they originate from countries in which the national legislature represents ethnic minority groups relatively well. Earlier difficulties related to the migration process and the lack of supporting networks continue to affect the perception of unfair treatment. Moreover, we show that individuals distinguish to a surprising degree between discrimination in and outside the work environment. For instance, when they are proficient in the local language, respondents often report discrimination in the workplace but not in a public environment. This distinction between discrimination in the workplace and discrimination in public also depends strongly upon the immigrant’s origin. We conclude that contemporary individual-level measures and policy recommendations merely approximate discriminatory patterns; we urge future research to consider factors that affect individual perception of discrimination."

This project compares the experiences of Muslim minorities in three contexts: France, Quebec, and English Canada. The objective is to assess the extent of integration of Muslim minorities in each setting, to identify key similarities and differences, to find the most important reasons for any differences, and to relate findings to previous research and public discourse in each setting. The three-way comparison helps illuminate a number of issues of significance to current debates on immigration and multiculturalism, including the role of public attitudes, national integration ‘models’ and advantages of traditional ‘nations of immigration’ over recent European experience, and language and culture. The theoretical framework takes account of four sets of factors: minority characteristics, mainstream attitudes and debates, institutional structures, and public policies, and draws upon inter-disciplinary perspectives. Both quantitative and qualitative data are used. On the quantitative side, for France the new government-mandated “Trajectories and Origins” (TeO) survey conducted in 2009 (over 21000 interviews) overcomes many limitations in existing statistics for identification of ethnic minorities. The comparable Canadian source is the monumental “Ethnic Diversity Survey” conducted in 2002 by Statistics Canada (over 42000 interviews). Excellent collaboration is available in use of the French data; I have already published a major book on the Canadian data. The project also will conduct a series of specially designed focus-group sessions involving structured encounters between Muslims and non-Muslims conducted in Paris, Montreal and Toronto. The project will be facilitated by CADIS in Paris where I build on a strong institutional foundation. It will produce a major book to be submitted to the MacMillan Palgrave series on migration, and papers for international conferences. A conference and workshop also will be held.

The European challenges in the field of migration have an impact on society, since the division between them opposed to newcomers and welcoming them has been continuously increasing. The project addresses the perceptions of the Belgian and European population about refugees/migrants and vice versa as well as their interactions with the policy agenda of asylum and migration with a European comparative perspective and a specific focus on Belgium. As Europe face important migratory challenges and political difficulties we have seen an increase of the public opinion’s polarisation regarding asylum and refugees, it is important to address this question. Including teams from our project will analyse this polarisation and its links to policies, as it is necessary for a better understanding of the current debate on migration in Europe and Belgium. The 2015 asylum crisis will be considered as indicative of the general European and Belgian citizens’ reactions about migration. The focus is then on attitudes, representations, discourses and practices about refugees, on the interactions at the local level between the majority populations and newly arrived migrants. The project will follow two objectives. First studying public opinion towards asylum seekers and refugees with a European cross- national perspective but also how these groups perceive Belgium, its asylum system and its reception policies. The second objective is to analyse the polarisation of the public opinion by focussing on pro and anti-refugees’ actions at the local level. This will allow understanding the links between public opinion and the implementation of asylum and reception policies. In order to fulfil these objectives, our project is based on 5 Work Packages that each focus on a specific dimension. The first two ones aim at developing a European comparative perspective on perceptions towards migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. This then includes a quantitative analysis of public opinion’s perceptions towards new immigration flows as well as a comparison of 5 European case studies (Sweden, Italy, Grece, Hungary and Germany). The three other work packages aim at a deep analysis of the Belgian situation. First, they consist of understanding actions and reactions towards asylum seekers and refugees at a local level. This implies to study the opposite reactions with an in-depth analysis of their content, justifications and determinants but also to focus on interactions between social groups (pro vs. anti migrants groups; ional citizens & refugees) as well as the interactions between the population’s reaction and the implementation of asylum and receptions policies. Second, studying the Belgian situation implies to analyse asylum seekers and refugees perceptions regarding the country’s asylum and reception policies. Lastly, it implies to realise a policy evaluation of those policies. The aim of this project and the main questions it addresses focus more on the relations and on the dynamics existing between the citizens and the migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Hence, we propose to broaden the scope of what is usually done by extending the focus on actors that are often not implied in migration studies: the majority population and the impact of new migration waves on social cohesion. The expected results concerns: 1) an in-depth and comparative knowledge of attitudes towards migrants and refugees in Europe; 2) an analysis of the factors influencing the attitudes of rejections, disregards and support; 3) an in-depth analysis of the specificities of the current wave of migration compared to the last ones; 4) an in-depth analysis of citizens’ and migrants’ discourses, representation and practices and of their reaction on social cohesion at a local level;

"Theoretical background and objectives This project comprises two studies that use two different data sets to examine the influence of ethnic diversity on interethnic contacts and attitudes towards immigrants by drawing on insights from group threat and inter-group contact theory. The project advances over earlier research by a) opening the black box of the mediating mechanisms via which ethnic diversity – operationalised as the population share of immigrants – affects citizens' immigration policy preferences and interethnic contacts as well as b) testing competing propositions derived from contact and group threat theory at different individual and contextual levels of analysis. In the first study, we examine which role the size of the immigrant population plays in explaining immigrant derogation within and between European regions and consider the following question: does a larger size of immigrant population increase perceived group threat and thereby lead to greater immigrant derogation? Or does it increase intergroup contact and thereby ameliorate immigrant derogation? In the second study we derive competing hypotheses on the role the size of the immigrant population plays for explaining the anti-immigrant attitudes of Dutch citizens. Research design and methodology The first study uses regionalised European Social Survey 2002 and official data, which were analysed by means of multilevel structural equation modelling. The second study uses structural equation modelling with robust standard errors on nationally representative Dutch survey data enriched with official municipality-level statistics. Findings Both studies converge in demonstrating that ethnic diversity exerts dual effects in promoting interethnic contact, but also to produce prejudice. Perceived group threat is associated with immigrant derogation. However, intergroup contact reduces perceived group threat and thereby amends such derogation of immigrants. Between regions, our findings show that a larger size of the immigrant population increases both greater perceived group threat and intergroup contact. At the same time, the effects of perceived group threat and intergroup contact on immigrant derogation resemble those found within regions. In sum, these results lend evidence to the generalisability of both group threat and contact effects."

"After more than half a century of mass immigration to Europe, the consequences of increasing ethnic diversity in Europe are far from clear. More specifically, one of the prominent questions on today’s research agenda is how ethnic diversity affects social cohesion and attitudes towards immigrants. This project aims to contribute to answering this question. Recently, ample attention has been paid to the relation between ethnic diversity and social cohesion in the neighbourhood. Putnam (2007), for example, claims that in the short run, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce solidarity and social capital. Several scholars report that ethnic diversity affects social cohesion (Lancee & Dronkers 2011; Letki 2008; Tolsma, Van der Meer & Gesthuizen 2009; Putnam 2007; Gijsberts, van der Meer & Dagevos 2011; Alesina & La Ferrara 2000)and attitudes towards immigrants (Schlueter & Scheepers 2010; Pettigrew & Tropp 2006). To date, little longitudinal research has been done on the relation between ethnic diversity and social cohesion in Germany. The objective of this project is to carry out longitudinal analyses with the German Socio-Economic Panel Survey (GSOEP) and neighbourhood data on the zip code level. In short, I will examine the relation between neighbourhood diversity and indicators of social cohesion and attitudes toward immigration."