Abstract
This article draws on the idea that welfare systems and institutions are based on normative assumptions about justice, solidarity, and responsibility. Even though the literature on welfare deservingness has highlighted the connection between ideas of solidarity and the support to, for instance, people with different ethnic backgrounds, there is very little research on the interconnections of different welfare state models and ideas on how migration should be governed. This article suggests that there is a link between the welfare state models suggested by Esping‐Anderssen and different discourses on migrant welfare deservingness. The article explores the interlinkages of three welfare state models—liberal, socialdemocratic, and continental‐corporative—and four discourses on welfare deservingness of migrants in respect to social welfare—labourist, ethno‐cultural, residential, and welfarist (see Carmel & Sojka, 2020). It is suggested that the normative foundations embedded in different welfare systems lead to dissimilar ways of approaching migrants and migration.
Highlights
Several authors have remarked on the fact that differ‐ ent types of welfare states are loaded with different normative ideas on justice and fairness, and on who is considered to be “deserving” of wel‐ fare
Carmel and Sojka (2020) have suggested that the cur‐ rent way of describing ideas which govern migrants’ social rights are insufficient. They distinguish between two paradigms—the literature on welfare chauvinism and research on migrant welfare deservingness—and propose “four distinct ‘rationales of belonging’ that mark out the terms and practices of social member‐ ship, as well as relative positions of privilege and subordination” (Carmel & Sojka, 2020, p. 645)
Not much has been written on the topic of how and if welfare state models might influence how migrants’ welfare deservingness is being perceived in different European countries
Summary
Several authors have remarked on the fact that differ‐ ent types of welfare states are loaded with different normative ideas on justice and fairness, and on who is considered to be “deserving” of wel‐ fare. The article will explore the relationship between four various types of discourses on welfare deserv‐ ingness for migrants in three different types of wel‐ fare states: social democratic (Sweden), liberal (UK, Estonia, Bulgaria, Hungary), and conservative‐corporatist (Austria, Germany, Poland). The central premise of this distinction is that ideas on welfare deserv‐ ingness for migrants take different forms and should not be unified under a singular term (like welfare chauvin‐ ism) As concepts, both “welfare chauvin‐ ism” and “deservingness” lack in theoretical basis and are often used as an umbrella term to present populist ideas surrounding social welfare (Greve, 2019) such as migrants’ access to social security rights (Carmel & Sojka, 2020). We will offer a short intro‐ duction to the three welfare state models presented by Esping‐Andersen (1990) as well as to the rationales of belonging used by Carmel and Sojka (2020)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
