ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Social Inequalities and the Exclusion of Immigrants from Welfare Programmes in Europe: an In-Depth Analysis of National and EU-Based Parliamentary Speeches

Social Policy
Welfare State
Immigration
Policy Change
Policy-Making
Irene Landini
Universiteit Antwerpen
Irene Landini
Universiteit Antwerpen

Abstract

Among the experiences lived by both EU and extra-EU immigrants during their integration processes in European destination countries, social inequality is still a recurring phenomenon. The present paper especially focuses on social inequality in formal and political terms, i.e., unfavorable treatments reserved to immigrants in national laws, policies, politicians’ discourses. It is a fact that a political view promoting nativism as the main guiding principle in social provision has progressively gained ground in several European countries. This is known as “welfare chauvinism”, giving preference to natives over immigrants in accessing social programs. The wide literature on this has until now neglected the topic of the justificatory arguments behind welfare chauvinism itself. This is especially relevant in the light of the Western democratic principle of non-discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or nationality which is indeed at the core of welfare chauvinism itself. The article aims therefore at providing a deeper understanding of the justificatory arguments behind welfare chauvinism in politicians’ official public discourses. It specifically investigates whether and how these justifications are nested within the specific contexts considered, i.e., how they vary according to different types of welfare regimes, specific social programme and different categories of immigrants. The article pursues that by means of a qualitative content analysis of several selected parliamentary debates across 4 different European countries as well as within the European Parliament, in most recent years. It emerges that the justifications vary across different social programmes, types of welfare regimes and categories of immigrants. Yet, at the same time, some common patterns are observed. That should make both scholars and politicians reflecting about the possibility for long-term legitimization of welfare chauvinism and social exclusion.