Abstract
In an era when managing the impact of unregulated migration is of growing worldwide concern, I ask why the city of Munich expanded social aid to enhance refugee living conditions and integration opportunities despite broader trends to do the opposite. I find that city policymakers were driven by a locally dominant humanitarian paradigm, which was opposed by a security paradigm favoured by the Bavarian government. Research on ideas and policy often focuses on how taken-for-granted ideas limit policy development. An analysis of city-level refugee policy suggests that ideological conflict strengthens the clarity and salience of ideas, which can increase their impact on policymaking. Ideological conflict between paradigms made it harder for city policymakers to support policies that were not consistent with the humanitarian paradigm.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: 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.
