Abstract
In this paper, I show that political opposition to immigration can arise even when immigrants bring economic prosperity. I exploit exogenous variation in European immigration to US cities between 1910 and 1930 induced by World War I and the Immigration Acts of the 1920s, and instrument immigrants’ location decision relying on pre-existing settlement patterns. I find that immigration triggered hostile political reactions, such as the election of more conservative legislators, higher support for anti-immigration legislation, and lower public goods provision. Exploring the causes of natives’ backlash, I document that immigration increased natives’ employment and occupational standing, and fostered industrial production and capital utilization. Even in occupations highly exposed to immigrants’ competition, there were no employment or wage losses among natives, suggesting that political discontent was unlikely to have economic roots. Consistent with this interpretation, I provide evidence that natives’ backlash was increasing in the cultural differences between immigrants and natives. These results indicate that diversity might be economically beneficial but politically hard to manage.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.