European Union Migrants Research Articles

Integrating Traditional and Social Media Data to Predict Bilateral Migrant Stocks in the European Union

Although up-to-date information on the nature and extent of migration within the European Union (EU) is important for policymaking, timely and reliable statistics on the number of EU citizens residing in or moving across other member states are difficult to obtain. In this paper, we develop a statistical model that integrates data on EU migrant stocks using traditional sources such as census, population registers and Labour Force Survey, with novel data sources, primarily from the Facebook Advertising Platform. Findings suggest that combining different data sources provides near real-time estimates that can serve as early warnings about shifts in EU mobility patterns. Estimated migrant stocks match relatively well to the observed data, despite some overestimation of smaller migrant populations and underestimation for larger migrant populations in Germany and the United Kingdom. In addition, the model estimates missing stocks for migrant corridors and years where no data are available, offering timely now-casted estimates.

Agency, institutions, and welfare chauvinism: Tracing the exclusion of European Union migrant citizens from social assistance in Germany

What explains welfare chauvinistic policy reform, that is, targeted exclusion of non-citizens from welfare? Existing research suggest that contextual factors like far-right party success, perceived immigration pressures, party ideologies and institutions could spur such reform, but the processes behind reforms remain understudied. This article draws on public policy literature to call attention the critical role of agency and institutions in welfare chauvinist reform. It focuses on a law excluding migrant EU citizens from social assistance in Germany. Through process tracing and inductive reconstruction of the policy process, based on political documents, interviews, media reporting and descriptive statistics, we show that the policy proposal originated from German city administrations; that the city of Hamburg was key in pushing for exclusions; and that Hamburg’s success in doing so crucially depended on the city’s mayor. Several comparable German cities (in terms of party politics and levels of immigration) were equally concerned with ‘welfare immigration’ and complained about problem pressure, but only Hamburg had a committed mayor with the right political networks and institutional resources to lobby for welfare exclusions at the federal level.

Free Movement versus European Welfare States? Variations of the Fiscal Effects of EU Migrants across Welfare State Regimes

Strong claims have been made about the incompatibility between large-scale migration and advanced welfare states. The free movement of workers within the European Union (EU) offers an interesting case for the study of the fiscal effects of unrestricted labor migration in different types of welfare states This article therefore investigates the alleged tension between advanced welfare states and liberal migration policies by analyzing how the fiscal effects of EU migrants vary across European welfare state regimes. In contrast to arguments commonly made in public debates, we argue and explain why theoretical reasoning should lead us to expect limited differences in fiscal effects of EU migrants in different welfare states. The empirical analysis, covering twenty-nine countries during 2004–15, shows that the net fiscal impact of EU migrants in the different welfare state regimes of West European countries is positive, and we find no major differences in the fiscal impacts of EU migrants across Western regimes. These results from the EU case cast doubts on the claim that advanced welfare states are incompatible with large-scale immigration because of adverse fiscal effects, and on the idea that broad institutional characteristics of welfare states have substantial consequences for the fiscal impact of migration.

Welfare brokers and European Union migrants' access to social protection.

In spite of the existence of an extensive national and supranational legal framework, European Union (EU) citizens who exercise their right to freedom of movement to work in another Member State face numerous hurdles in accessing social protection. While recent scholarship on street-level bureaucracy and on migration and welfare has shed light on the role of discretion and stereotypes in access to rights, little is known about the processes through which such hurdles are overcome. In this article, we focus on a specific strategy which is the recourse to what we call "welfare brokers". These actors offer assistance to EU migrants to overcome specific cross-border administrative challenges in the area of social protection that derive from their use of the right to freedom of movement. Relying on qualitative data collected with brokers and Romanian migrants working in Germany, the article also demonstrates that welfare brokers attempt to transform the norms, bureaucratic practices and representations that condition access to these entitlements. The article concludes by underlining how the existence of a brokerage industry is a sign of existing inequalities in the exercise of freedom of movement within the EU.

Housing trajectories of EU migrants: between quick emigration and shared housing as temporary and long-term solutions

Over the past two decades, many European countries have witnessed new immigration patterns related to the gradual expansion of the European Union (EU). While migration motives and labour market positions of EU migrants are well-understood, relatively little is known about their housing positions in the hosting countries. Using sequence analyses and logistic regression on longitudinal register data from Statistics Netherlands, this article examines housing trajectories of EU migrants from seven countries in the Netherlands, over an eight-year period (2012–2019). Our results show that, while housing trajectories vary substantially in terms of length of stay in the Netherlands and access to social housing, private renting and homeownership, sharing is at the centre for all migrant groups, both as a temporary and long-term solution. Moreover, we show that varying housing trajectories can partially be explained through contrasting demographic and socio-economic profiles. Yet, even after controlling for such factors as income, age, and household composition, some differences between country of origin persist.

Leave or remain? The post-Brexit (im)mobility intentions of Bulgarians in the United Kingdom

In the light of impending Brexit, what factors shape European Union migrants’ plans to remain in or leave the UK? Based on an online survey of 360 Bulgarians, an under-researched migrant group in the UK, this study finds that the ones who plan to remain have lived longer in the UK, are skilled professionals and are well integrated into the labour market. Contrastingly, respondents who feel that they will be discriminated against in the labour market or in setting up a business are more likely to intend to leave post-Brexit.

What are the challenges in the vaccination of migrants in Norway from healthcare provider perspectives? A qualitative, phenomenological study

BackgroundMigrant populations in the European Union (EU) suffer a disproportionate burden of infectious diseases and may be particularly vulnerable due to poor conditions in countries of origin or throughout transit...

The politics of embedding and the right to remain in post-Brexit Britain

The European Union membership referendum (i.e. the Brexit referendum) in the United Kingdom in 2016 triggered a process of introspection among non-British European Union citizens with respect to their right to remain in the United Kingdom, including their right to entry, permanent residence, and access to work and social welfare. Drawing on interview data collected from 42 European Union nationals, namely Finnish and Polish migrants living in Scotland, we explore how European Union migrants’ decision-making and strategies for extending their stay in the United Kingdom, or returning to their country of origin, are shaped by and, in turn, shape their belonging and ties to their current place of residence and across state borders. In particular, we draw on the concept of embedding, which is used in migration studies to explain migration trajectories and decision-making. Our key argument is that more attention needs to be paid to the socio-political context within which migrants negotiate their embedding. To this end, we employ the term ‘politics of embedding’ to highlight the ways in which the embedding of non-British European Union citizens has been politicized and hierarchically structured in the United Kingdom after the Brexit referendum. By illustrating how the context of Brexit has changed how people evaluate their social and other attachments, and how their embedding is differentiated into ‘ties that bind’ and ‘ties that count’, we contribute to the emerging work on migration and Brexit, and specifically to the debate on how the politicization of migration shapes the sense of security on the one hand, and belonging, on the other.

Don’t Mention the War! Second World War Remembrance and Support for European Cooperation

At the core of the European project is the idea that through increased state cooperation and dependency, national divisions can be overcome and peace can be secured on the European continent. National and European elites often make reference to past devastations of the Second World War (WWII) in order to convey the added value of European cooperation among the public. Does WWII remembrance enhance public support for European cooperation? By presenting evidence from a set of novel survey experiments conducted in the six largest member states (France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom) in July 2017, this contribution shows that reminding people of the devastations of WWII, increases support for their country’s cooperation within the European Union (EU) today. Yet, only when it comes to providing assistance for other member states in dire economic need. Reminding people of the devastations of WWII does not make people more willing to extend the rights to EU migrants or contribute to the establishment of an European army. These findings are important as they suggest that WWII remembrance triggers a largely transactional response among the public, a willingness to provide financial support combined with an unwillingness to embrace intra-EU migration or security cooperation. This evidence suggests that securing public support for further deepening of free movement of people and European security cooperation through historical rhetoric might be difficult to achieve.

‘I Would Never Have Come If We’d Know It Might Be Like This’

This paper presents the findings from a small-scale pilot study which explores the experiences of accessing welfare benefits by the migrant Roma European Union (EU) citizens in the UK. It compares administrative barriers and individuals’ knowledge of welfare entitlement both prior and after the implementation of changes to the welfare regime in 2014, when a tranche of ‘policy hardening’ legal enactments came into force. For the migrants who participated in this study, precarious, low paid post-migration work has brought several hazards, including a non-eligibility for certain social protections and an inability to demonstrate documentation which enable access to ‘passported’ welfare benefits. The combination of problems in accessing welfare benefits and the resulting state interventions, including expulsion from the UK in some cases, suggest that EU Roma citizens experience disproportionate negative impacts of welfare hardening, adding to the much vaunted ‘hostile environment’ to EU migrants in the wake of the Brexit vote. As such, we find the practice of ‘bordering’ migrant EU Roma citizens to the UK is taking place through covert state enforcement action against families and households, discouraging effective and genuine use of their free movement rights guaranteed under European Union law.

“Where are we going to go now?” European Union migrants' experiences of hostility, anxiety, and (non‐)belonging during Brexit

AbstractThis paper examines the impact of the 2016 European Union (EU) referendum and its aftermath from the perspective of European migrants living in Wales. Drawing on interviews conducted with EU nationals in 2016 and 2017, the article highlights various examples of hostility and violence encountered by these migrants during and after the referendum campaign, demonstrating the longstanding nature of hostile experiences. It further outlines the uncertainty and insecurity experienced during this period, noting how Brexit affected not only EU migrants' rights and entitlements but also their settlement and sense of identity and belonging. The analysis sheds light on various negative emotions and reactions triggered by the referendum, illustrating the diversity of migrants' experiences. Highlighting the multiple and complex ways in which the referendum affected the migrants, the article argues that Brexit should be understood as an ongoing process of “othering” and unsettling.

Freedom of movement, social rights and residence-based conditionality in the European Union

This article stresses the need to study how European Union (EU) member states define and implement the concept of habitual residence to assess boundaries of welfare in the EU. It focuses specifically on EU migrant citizens’ social rights and draws on comparative qualitative research on two EU member states – Germany and Sweden. The article first clarifies the differences between legal and habitual residence, and distinguishes between legal definitions of habitual residence and administrative formalities tied to such definitions. After examining legal definitions at the EU level, it goes on to consider additional definitions found in each member state case and administrative formalities attached to these definitions. Following this, implications for EU migrant citizens’ social rights in each country are assessed. The analysis reveals how administrative processes of residence registration shape conditionality. In this way, administrative aspects of habitual residence can have far-reaching exclusive effects on EU migrant citizens’ access to social benefits and services in the destination member state, as well as inhibit their ability to enjoy their right to freedom of movement. The article thus illustrates the inherent tension between free movement and residence-based social rights in a Union with devolved social provision.

Roma migration, anti-migrant sentiment and social integration: A case study in South-east England

This article explores the settlement and residential patterns of Slovakian Roma migrants in Chatham, Kent where a significant number have been moving since the mid-2000s. This process is analysed in the context of growing hostility to European Union migrants and of fundamental changes to the local economy, labour markets, social and demographic structures and of growing neighbourhood polarisation. Vertovec’s ( 2006 ) notion of ‘hyper-diversity’ is used to frame the analysis allowing for a shift away from homogenising categories that conceive of Roma as being qualitatively ‘different’ to other migrant populations and towards the generationally specific hybrid group dynamics that evolve at the grassroots level (Tremlett, 2014 ). The discussion will highlight the relationship between the participants’ migratory strategies, social ties and settlement patterns in the UK and the increasingly diverse intergenerational experiences of life in their adopted hometown. While many Roma are following a similar path of absorption into the lower end of the working class followed by other migrant groups, structural changes to the local economy and the deterioration of poorer neighbourhoods mean this equates to integration into the social exclusion and marginalisation experienced by large swathes of the contemporary working classes as captured by Wacquant’s ( 2008 ) concept of ‘advanced marginality’.

The (de-) politicization of EU freedom of movement: political parties, opportunities, and policy framing in Germany and the UK

Freedom of movement (FOM) of EU citizens within the European Union (EU) has become a salient issue in some member states. In Germany and the UK, EU FOM prompted governments to tighten the residency and benefits prerequisites for EU migrants. Interestingly, these policy reforms prevented EU FOM from becoming a major political concern in Germany but not in the UK. Understanding the causes of this divergence can cast light on the driving factors behind EU de-politicization. Analysis of the UK case shows that several key factors, including rightist party ideology, political opportunity, and policy framing strategies, fuelled the country’s critical debate over its EU membership. By contrast, Germany’s successful de-politicization of the EU FOM issue can largely be explained by the absence of Euroscepticism in the government, limited political opportunities for mobilization, and the specific framing strategies used by the politicians who reformed EU FOM at the domestic level. Taking into account the existing scholarly work on politicization, this article provides an in-depth qualitative case study of the driving factors behind reactions to EU FOM in the UK and Germany, and discusses how to prevent the politicization of EU policy to turn into criticism of the EU polity level.

Threat Perceptions of Migrants in Britain and Support for Policy

Arguments that migrants represent a threat to the Britain are often cast in terms of impact on the economy and a criminal threat to Britain’s streets. We examine the impact of these attitudes on support for policies curtailing the rights of European Union (EU) and non-EU migrants in the United Kingdom separately, as well as their implications for support for punitive criminal sanctions. Using data on a nationally representative sample of Britons, results indicate that perceptions of migrants as a criminal threat have a greater effect on support for curtailing rights of EU migrants, more so than economic threat, suggesting that British citizens invoke deep rooted stereotypes about EU migrants as criminal when choosing their preferences. Criminal threat is also associated with support for more punitive criminal sanctions. Thus, threat narratives, especially narratives of immigrant crime, could be instrumental in public support for policy, but different narratives are associated with EU and non-EU migrants.

Divided citizenship: how retirement in the host country affects the financial status of intra-European Union migrants

AbstractSince European Union (EU) enlargement in 2003, labour migration from East to West and South to North has increased. It is to be expected that a share of these workers will want to retire in their host countries. According to the academic literature, EU legislation protects such mobility well by allowing the transfer of rights accrued in any EU country to another. However, such research has focused on legislation, not outcomes. We know little about how migration will affect the financial status of retired migrants in their host country and their ability to sustain a life there, should they stay after retirement. Using migration, wage and pension policy data (Eurostat, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), this paper projects the post-retirement incomes of a range of hypothetical EU migrants, selected in relation to the most common migratory flows since 2003. After having worked in their home countries (Romania, Poland, Bulgaria, Italy) for at least ten years, these people move to richer countries (Italy, Spain, Germany, United Kingdom) and work there for at least 30 years. To determine whether they can remain settled after decades of labour force participation in the host country, the paper adds their pension entitlements from home and host countries and compares this income with the relative poverty line of the host countries. This shows that good portability of entitlements matters little when these are very low because of a large wage gap between home and host country. Thus, after at least 30 years of enjoying all citizenship rights as workers, most of these individuals are projected to receive incomes below the relative poverty line of their host countries and thus experience a sharp drop in this status. Their citizenship is diminished. The paper concludes by considering policies that could avoid such an outcome.

Migrants\u2019 decision-process shaping work destination choice: the case of long-term care work in the United Kingdom and Norway

Escalating demands for formal long-term care (LTC) result in the reliance on migrant workers in many developed countries. Within Europe, this is currently framed by progressive European immigration policies favouring inter-European mobility. Using the UK and Norway as case studies, this article has two main aims: (1) to document changes in the contribution of European Union (EU) migrants to the LTC sectors in Western Europe, and (2) to gain further understanding of migrants’ decision-processes relating to destination and work choices. The UK and Norway provide examples of two European countries with different immigration histories, welfare regimes, labour market characteristics and cultural values, offering a rich comparison platform. The analysis utilizes national workforce datasets and data obtained from migrants working in the LTC sector in the UK and Norway (n = 248) and other stakeholders (n = 136). The analysis establishes a significant increase in the contribution of EU migrants (particularly from Eastern Europe) to the LTC sector in both the UK and Norway despite their different welfare regimes. The findings also highlight how migrant care workers develop rational decision-processes influenced by subjective perspectives of investments and returns within a context of wider structural migration barriers. The latter includes welfare and social care policies framing the conditions for migrants’ individual actions.

Buying into Myths: Free Movement of People and Immigration

AbstractThe way in which free movement of people has become the central issue of the British government's renegotiation and referendum campaign on the UK's relationship with the European Union (EU) risks obfuscating at least three central issues: why immigrants are coming to the UK; what impact EU migrants are having on the UK; and what can be done to effectively regulate such inflows. It is, however, not just the eurosceptics and the British government, but also ‘in campaigners’ and other EU member states, who risk perpetuating a number of widely held misconceptions about free movement and immigration for political reasons. Buying into such myths risks undermining attempts to have a more honest and more evidence‐based debate about immigration and migrant integration.

Spaces of Not Belonging: Inclusive Nationalism and Education in Scotland

This study addresses the issue of the role of national identity-making through education and how this positions migrants in the national discourse in Scotland. The issue has been highlighted by the arrival of European Union migrants post-enlargement, whose children are being schooled in Scotland. The study discusses the tensions, particularly in relation to migrant populations, between the policy discourse of inclusive nationalism and emphasis on performance that promotes standardization processes and individual accountability. Giving particular attention to the language regulations and practices in education, this article notes the fact that language creates a barrier to the fair benefits of education for migrant populations. Rather than facilitating migrants' inclusion, language has become a vehicle for assimilating migrants into the dominant social and cultural norms of the host society. The study concludes by reflecting on the notion of inclusive citizenship and the implications of social responsibility to balance the economic benefits of people's mobility with cultural recognition and protection.

Social dumping cases in the Swedish Labour Court in the wake of Laval, 2004–2010

This article studies conflicts in the Swedish Labour Court that have occurred between trade unions and companies concerning the pay and working conditions for European Union migrant workers in Sweden during the period 2004–2010. During this period, unions and employers entered into disputes over: unions’ rights in Sweden to be consulted when a company uses a subcontractor, the definition of an employee (the issue of ‘bogus self-employment’), the application of Swedish collective bargaining agreements to and for workers active in Sweden, how to determine wages for temporary staffing agency workers, and workers’ rights to join a trade union. The article discusses the conflicts in the context of a widespread concern about ‘social dumping’ in the European Union, and in the context of weakening trade unions and institutional change in labour markets.