Institutional contexts of political conflicts around free movement in the European Union

Martin Ruhs and Joakim Palme

June 2018

1 27/06/2018 MPC - www.migrationpolicycentre.eu

Debates about free movement

• ‘Free movement’: unrestricted access to labour markets and – for “workers” – equal access to welfare state

• Restrict welfare benefits: UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Austria

• Keep current rules: most (?) other Member States

What explains different national policy positions on free movement across EU Member States?

• Common explanation: focus on actors such as populist political parties and “the media”

• This paper: what role of differences in national institutions across countries?

Labour markets

Welfare states

Normative attitudes

• Focus on EU15 countries

Theoretical motivation and starting points

• Tension between large-scale immigration and inclusive welfare states ? (e.g. Freeman 1986; Alesina + Glaeser 2004; Geddes + Hadj-Abdou 2015)

• Links between national institutions and immigration

policies (e.g. Afonso and Devitt 2016; Boräng 2018; Ruhs 2018)

• Tension between national socio-economic institutions and common EU legal frameworks and policies (e.g. Scharpf 2010 => EU legal integration most compatible with LMEs).

Conceptual approach

• Dependent variable: reform free movement (focus on restricting welfare benefits) or not

• Process of for developing national policy position on free movement: “interests” and “ideas”

• Labour market and welfare state institutions:

– provide context for national policy actors

– interact with normative attitudes and the characteristics of EU labour immigration

Conceptual framework

Focus on three welfare institutions

• Social insurance programmes

• Family policies

• Health care

… including their funding and qualifying conditions (important for perceived legitimacy)

How can national institutions affect national policy responses to free movement?

1. Fiscal effects of immigration: “rational” cost-benefit calculus

1. Ideas and norms about fairness and deservingness of welfare recipients: “reciprocity”

1. Perceived mismatch between national institutions and common EU regulations: “appropriateness” of the level of decision-making

So, what can we expect?

• Expectations ‘ceteris paribus’: welfare institutions that are likely to lead to greater demand for restrictions:

– Social protection systems without clear link between contributions and benefits

– Family policies based on individual rights (for “residents”)

– Health care model funded by general taxes

• Interactions between labour market regulations + welfare institutions

Institutional contexts of political conflicts around free movement in the European Union

Martin Ruhs and Joakim Palme

June 2018

11 27/06/2018 MPC - www.migrationpolicycentre.eu