European mobility and local political incorporation: The case of British and Romanian residents in Spain

This paper analyses the impact of European mobility in the field of the political nomination of intra-EU migrants in local elections. The study contributes to the debates in the literature related to immigrant nomination and representation by showing how group resources and political opportunities in the country of residence interact with the political opportunities of the European citizenship regime. It argues that the symbolic and legal status of European identity, representation in the European Parliament and strong links between political institutions in the countries of destination and origin play a positive role in boosting immigrant political entrepreneurs’ visibility vis-à-vis host country political actors. In order to illustrate these findings, the paper provides a qualitative comparison of British and Romanian residents in Spain.

Through the European Looking Glass: Citizenship Tests in the USA, Australia, and Canada

Discussing new or recently reformed citizenship tests in the USA, Australia, and Canada, this article asks whether they amount to a restrictive turn of new world citizenship, similar to recent developments in Europe. I argue that elements of a restrictive turn are noticeable in Australia and Canada, but only at the level of political rhetoric, not of law and policy, which remain liberal and inclusive. Much like in Europe, the restrictive turn is tantamount to Muslims and Islam moving to the center of the integration debate.

How parties frame social citizenship and the inclusion of immigrants in Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom

Recent research on the transformation of West European party systems emphasises that cultural issues such as immigration have gained in importance besides the traditional socio-economic cleavage. While this literature shows that parties address not only cultural but also economic is-sues, it has paid less attention on whether parties combine cultural and economic issues. In this paper we focus on immigrants’ social rights by analysing if and how mainstream parties combine immigration and redistributive issues. Drawing on Faist (1995), we distinguish three different perspectives how political actors, here mainstream parties, might react to the welfare chauvinist claims that aim to restrict immigrants’ social rights. Our analysis relies on party manifestos in Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom between 1999 and 2011. The results of the anal-ysis indicate that variation is found among party families, in particular among the left. Even though the purpose of the paper is not to ‘prove’ that the populist challenge explains how the mainstream left-wing parties behave, the results allow nonetheless for interpreting mainstream parties’ strategic combination of welfare and immigration issues as a response to anti-immigration and anti-integration issues raised by populist challengers.