Given the widespread interest in political solutions to the current problems associated with immigration, we need to have an accurate understanding of existing policies in a cross-national perspective. To explain the coming into being and effectiveness of these policies, researchers have recently started to quantify immigration and citizenship policies and built databases across time and a large number of countries. These indices are likely to reconnect political science research with a field from which it has long been disconnected in terms of theories and methodology—the sub-field of migration and citizenship research. This special issue brings together scholars from North America and Europe who have been at the forefront of index-building and have started to employ these indices in empirical research.
BauböckR.HelblingM. (Eds.). (2011). Which indicators are most useful for comparing citizenship policies? (RSCAS Working Paper 2011/54, European University Institute). Fiesole: Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, EUDO Citizenship Observatory.
2.
BjerreL.HelblingM.RömerF.ZobelM. (2015). Conceptualizing and measuring immigration policies: A comparative perspective. International Migration Review, 49, 555-839.
3.
BrückerH.SchröderP. J. H. (2011). Migration regulation contagion. European Union Politics, 12, 315-335.
ChavesM.CannD. (1992). Regulation, pluralism, and religious market structure: Explaining religion’s vitality. Rationality and Society, 3, 272-290.
6.
CoppedgeM.GerringJ.AltmanD.BernhardM.FishS.HickenA.. . . TeorellJ. (2011). Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: A new approach. Perspectives on Politics, 9, 247-267.
7.
De HaasH.NatterK.VezzoliS. (2015). Conceptualizing and measuring migration policy change. Comparative Migration Studies, 3, Article 15.
8.
DinesenP.HoogheM. (2010). When in Rome, do as the Romans do: The acculturation of generalized trust among immigrants in Western Europe. International Migration Review, 44, 697-727.
9.
EllermannA. (2005). Coercive capacity and the politics of implementation: Deportation in Germany and the United States. Comparative Political Studies, 38, 1219-1244.
10.
FitzgeraldJ.LeblangD.TeetsJ. (2014). Defying the law of gravity: The political economy of international migration. World Politics, 66, 406-445.
11.
FleischmannF.DronkersJ. (2010). Unemployment among immigrants in European labour markets: An analysis of origin and destination effects. Work, Employment and Society, 24, 337-354.
12.
FoxJ. (2008). A world survey of religion and the state. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
13.
FreemanG. P. (2005). Political science and comparative immigration politics. In BommesM.MorawskaE. (Eds.), Reflections on migration research (pp. 111-128). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
14.
GivensT.AdamL. (2005). European immigration policies in comparative perspective: issue salience, partisanship and immigrant rights. Comparative European Politics, 3(1), 1-22.
15.
GoodmanS. (2015). Conceptualizing and measuring citizenship and integration policy: Past lessons and new approaches. Comparative Political Studies, 48, 1905-1941.
16.
GoodmanS.WrightM. (2015). Does mandatory integration matter? Effects of civic requirements on immigrant socio-economic and political outcomes. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41, 1885-1908.
17.
GrimB. J.FinkeR. (2006). International religion indexes: Government regulation, government favoritism, and social regulation of religion. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 2, Article 1.
18.
GuiraudonV.LahavG. (2000). A reappraisal of the state sovereignty debate: The case of migration control. Comparative Political Studies, 33, 163-195.
19.
GurowitzA. (1999). Mobilizing international norms: Domestic actors, immigrants, and the Japanese state. World Politics, 51, 413-445.
20.
HattonT. (2004). Seeking asylum in Europe. Economic Policy, 38, 5-62.
21.
HelblingM. (2013). Validating integration and citizenship policy indices. Comparative European Politics, 11, 555-576.
22.
HelblingM. (2016). Immigration, integration and citizenship policies: Indices, concepts and analyses. In FreemanG. P.MirilovicN. (Eds.), Handbook on migration and social policy (pp. 28-41). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
23.
HelblingM.BjerreL.RömerF.ZobelM. (2016). Measuring immigration policies: The IMPIC-database. European Political Science. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1057/eps.2016.4
24.
HelblingM.ReeskensT.StarkC.StolleD.WrightM. (2016). Enabling immigrants to participate: Redirecting our attention to the role of integration regimes. In BilodeauA. (Ed.), Just ordinary citizens (pp. 130-146). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
25.
HollifieldJ. F.WongT. K. (2013). International migration: Cause or consequence of political change?Migration and Citizenship. Newsletter of American Political Science Association Organized Section on Migration and Citizenship, 1(1), 3-9.
26.
HowardM. M. (2009). The politics of citizenship in Europe. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
JoppkeC. (2001). The legal-domestic sources of immigrant rights: The United States, Germany, and the European Union. Comparative Political Studies, 34, 339-366.
29.
KoopmansR. (2010). Trade-offs between equality and difference: Immigrant integration, multiculturalism and the welfare state in cross-national perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36, 1-26.
30.
KoopmansR. (2013). Multiculturalism and immigration: A contested field in cross-national comparison. Annual Review of Sociology, 39, 147-169.
31.
KoopmansR.MichalowskiI. (2016). Why do states extend rights to immigrants? Institutional settings and historical legacies across 44 countries worldwide. Comparative Political Studies, 50, 41-74.
32.
KoopmansR.MichalowskiI.WaibelS. (2012). Citizenship rights for immigrants: National political processes and cross-national convergence in Western Europe, 1980-2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 1202-1245.
33.
LijphartA. (1999). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
34.
MasseyD.JorgeD.KarenA. P. (2016). Why border enforcement backfired. American Journal of Sociology, 121(5), 1557-1600.
35.
MaydaA. M. (2004). International migration: A panel data analysis of the determinants of bilateral flows. Journal of Population Economics, 23, 1249-1274.
36.
MichalowskiI.van OersR. (2012). How can we categorise and interpret civic integration policies?Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 38, 163-171.
37.
MunckG.VerkuilenJ. (2002). Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: Evaluating alternative indices. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 5-34.
38.
OrtegaF.PeriG. (2013). The effect of income and immigration policies on international migration. Migration Studies, 1, 47-74.
SassenS. (1996). Losing control? Sovereignty in the age of globalization. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
41.
ShulmanS. (2002). Challenging the civic/ethnic and west/east dichotomies in the study of nationalism. Comparative Political Studies, 35, 554-585.
42.
SkaaningS.-E. (2010). Measuring the rule of law. Political Research Quarterly, 63, 449-460.
43.
TeorellJ.LindstedtC. (2010). Measuring electoral systems. Political Research Quarterly, 63, 434-448.
44.
TimmerA. S.JeffreyG. W. (1998). Immigration policy prior to the 1930s: labor markets, policy interactions and globalization backlash. Population and Development Review, 24(4), 739-771.
45.
VinkM.BauböckR. (2013). Citizenship configurations: Analyzing the multiple purposes of citizenship regimes in Europe. Comparative European Politics, 11, 621-648.
46.
VinkM.HelblingM. (Eds.). (2013). The use and misuse of policy indices in the domain of citizenship and integration. Comparative European Politics, 11, 551-554.
47.
WrightM. (2011). Policy regimes and normative conceptions of nationalism in mass public opinion. Comparative Political Studies, 44, 598-624.
