The relationship between the European Union's (EU) free movement regime and welfare has received ample scholarly attention. However, this has almost exclusively been from the perspective of destination countries. We know surprisingly little about the “other side” of the migration phenomenon, i.e., the welfare-related implications of large-scale emigration, which predominantly takes place from peripheral EU member states toward the core. In this paper, we break new ground using an original survey fielded in 15 EU member states in 2021. We ask how worries about immigration and emigration shape people's attitudes about social spending in their country of origin and whether they are associated with preferences for EU involvement in social policy. We show that, on average, immigration is salient across the board, but more so in core states (West and North), while emigration is a more salient issue in peripheral states (East and West). In terms of policy preferences, regression analyses indicate that worries about emigration versus immigration are linked in an inverted manner to social policy. Indeed, a preoccupation with incoming migration increases opposition to higher government social spending, while it is irrelevant for support for a stronger EU role in social matters; by contrast, a preoccupation with emigration increases support for both higher government social spending and a stronger EU role in social matters.

Free Movement and Welfare in the European Union: The Social Consequences of the Right to Exit / A. Kyriazi, F. Visconti. - In: INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION REVIEW. - ISSN 0197-9183. - (2023), pp. 1-25. [Epub ahead of print] [10.1177/01979183231185096]

Free Movement and Welfare in the European Union: The Social Consequences of the Right to Exit

A. Kyriazi
Co-primo
;
F. Visconti
Co-primo
2023

Abstract

The relationship between the European Union's (EU) free movement regime and welfare has received ample scholarly attention. However, this has almost exclusively been from the perspective of destination countries. We know surprisingly little about the “other side” of the migration phenomenon, i.e., the welfare-related implications of large-scale emigration, which predominantly takes place from peripheral EU member states toward the core. In this paper, we break new ground using an original survey fielded in 15 EU member states in 2021. We ask how worries about immigration and emigration shape people's attitudes about social spending in their country of origin and whether they are associated with preferences for EU involvement in social policy. We show that, on average, immigration is salient across the board, but more so in core states (West and North), while emigration is a more salient issue in peripheral states (East and West). In terms of policy preferences, regression analyses indicate that worries about emigration versus immigration are linked in an inverted manner to social policy. Indeed, a preoccupation with incoming migration increases opposition to higher government social spending, while it is irrelevant for support for a stronger EU role in social matters; by contrast, a preoccupation with emigration increases support for both higher government social spending and a stronger EU role in social matters.
emigration; welfare state; European Union; freedom of movement; public opinion;
Settore SPS/04 - Scienza Politica
   Policy Crisis and Crisis Politics. Sovereignty, Solidarity and Identity in the EU post 2008 (SOLID)
   SOLID
   EUROPEAN COMMISSION
   H2020
   810356
2023
12-lug-2023
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
kyriazi-visconti-2023-free-movement-and-welfare-in-the-european-union-the-social-consequences-of-the-right-to-exit.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 928.03 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
928.03 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/985388
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 3
social impact