Abstract

ABSTRACT One of the most significant European policy developments of the past decade has been the proliferation of mandatory immigrant civic and language integration requirements. The primary intention of these policies is to facilitate immigrant integration, but do they also improve public support for immigration by fulfilling the type of deservingness criteria many hold for benefits or status? Or do such integration requirements contribute to growing mass anti-immigration sentiment through signalling cultural distance? We contribute to this ongoing debate by examining whether mandatory integration fosters or diminishes public support for immigration. In doing so, we first use biennial data across 14 Western European countries between 2007 and 2014 and second implement an original survey experiment in the UK. Our unique contribution across these two studies reveals that neither mandatory language nor civic integration requirements appear to meaningfully affect public support for immigration. Rather, we identify immigrant origin as the deciding line between open and antagonistic immigration attitudes. Further, we find these patterns persist regardless of integration target, policy measurement, requirement difficulty, or analytical strategy. We thereby conclude mandatory integration of immigrant communities appears to do little in terms of reducing widespread anti-immigration sentiment.

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 call

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.