Immigration is often perceived as a political topic that overlaps traditional ideological cleavages. Much research has focused on the positions of the extreme right, and little research has examined mainstream parties and their public stances on immigration. This shortcoming hampers broader understanding of political competition on this issue. Drawing on a political claims analysis of seven countries between 1995 and 2009, we present the salience, position and overall coherence of claims made by mainstream parties on immigration control and immigrant integration. Mainstream left parties adopt a more positive/expansive position on immigration and exhibit higher levels of coherence than centrist and right-wing parties. We also show that the impact of extreme-right parties on the political claims of mainstream left parties seems to be limited. Our conclusions highlight that immigration does not necessarily constitute a cross-cutting cleavage across mainstream left parties: Their ideological preferences remain aligned with their positive/liberal discourse on immigration control and immigrant integration.
Abou-ChadiT (2016) Political and institutional determinants of immigration policies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies42(13): 2087–2110.
2.
AlonsoSFonsecaS (2011) Immigration, left and right. Party Politics18(6): 865–884.
3.
BaleT (2008) Immigration and integration policy in Europe: why politics – and the centre-right matter. Journal of European Public Policy15(3): 315–330.
4.
BaleTGreen-PedersenCKrouvelA, et al. (2010) If you can’t beat them, join them? Explaining social democratic responses to the challenge from the populist radical right in western Europe. Political Studies58(3): 410–426.
5.
BorängF (2012) National Institutions – International Migration. Labour Markets, Welfare States and Immigration Policy. Doctoral Thesis, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg.
6.
BreunigCLuedtkeA (2008) What motivates the gatekeepers? Explaining governing party preferences on immigration. Governance21(1): 123–146.
7.
BürknerP (2017) brms: Bayesian Regression Models Using Stan(version 1.6.1). R. CRAN. Available at: https://github.com/paul-buerkner/brms (accessed 1 June 2018).
8.
CarvalhoJ (2014) Impact of Extreme-Right Parties on Immigration Policy. Comparing Britain, France and Italy. Oxon: Routledge.
9.
CarvalhoJ (2016) The impact of extreme-right parties on immigration policy in Italy and France in the early 2000s. Comparative European Politics14(5): 663–685.
10.
CarvalhoJ (2019) Mainstream party strategies towards extreme right parties: the French 2007 and 2012 presidential elections. Government and Opposition54(2): 365–386.
11.
CarvalhoJEatwellRWunderlichD (2015) The politicization of immigration in Britain. In: van der BrugWD’AmatoGRuedinDBerhoutJ (eds) The Politicization of Migration. Oxon: Routledge, pp. 159–178.
12.
CzaikaMde HaasH (2013) The effectiveness of immigration policies. Population and Development Review39(2): 487–587.
EarlJMartinAMcCarthyJ, et al. (2004) The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology30: 65–80.
15.
FavellA (2001) Integration policy and integration research in Europe: a review and a critique. In: AleinikoffAKlusmeyerD (eds) Citizenship Today: Global Perspectives and Practices, Washington: Brookings University Press, pp. 349–400.
16.
GeddesA (2003) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. London: Sage publications.
17.
GivensT (2012) Political parties. In: RosenblumMTichenorD (eds) The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of International Migration, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 153–170.
18.
GivensTLuetkeA (2005) European immigration policies in comparative perspective: issue salience, partisanship and immigrant rights. Comparative European Politics3(1): 1–22.
19.
HammarT (2010) Introduction to European immigration policy: a comparative study. In: MartinielloMRathJ (eds) Selected Studies in International Migration and Immigrant Incorporation. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 45–58.
20.
HampshireJ (2012) The Politics of Immigration: Contradictions of the Liberal State. Cambridge: Polity Press.
21.
HelblingM (2014) Framing immigration in Western Europe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies40(1): 21–41.
22.
HinnforsJSpeharABucken KnappG (2012) The missing factor: why social democracy can lead to restrictive immigration policy. Journal of European Public Policy19(4): 585–603.
23.
HoboltS (2016) The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent. Journal of European Public Policy23(9): 1259–1277.
24.
LahavG (2004) Immigration and Politics in the New Europe. Reinventing Borders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
LehmannPTheresMMerzN, et al. (2016) Manifesto Corpus. Version: 2016–6. Berlin: WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
26.
KitscheltH (1995) The Radical Right in Western Europe. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan University Press.
27.
KoopmansRStathamP (2010) The making of a European public sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
KoopmansRMichalowskiIWaibelS (2010) National political processes and cross-national convergence in Western Europe, 1980–2008. American Journal of Sociology117(4): 1202–1245.
29.
MeguidB (2008) Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
MessinaA (2007) The Logics and Politics of Post-WWII Migration to Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
31.
MeyersE (2002) International Immigration Policy: A Theoretical and Comparative Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
32.
MoneyJ (1999) Defining immigration policy: inventory, quantitative referents and empirical regularities. In: Annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, 2–5 September, Atlanta, GA.
33.
MoralesLPiletJRuedinD (2015) The gap between public preferences and policies on immigration: a comparative examination of the effect of politicisation on policy congruence. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies41(9): 1495–1516.
34.
MuddeC (ed) (2016) The Populist Radical Right. A Reader. Oxon: Routledge.
35.
NorrisP (2005) Radical Right Voters and Parties in the Electoral Market. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
OdmalmPBaleT (2015) Immigration into the mainstream: conflicting ideological streams, strategic reasoning and party competition. Acta Política50(4): 365–378.
37.
OdmalmPHepburnE (2017) The European Mainstream and the Populist Radical Right. Oxon: Routledge.
38.
PecoraroMRuedinD (2016) A foreigner who does not steal my job: the role of unemployment risk and values in attitudes toward equal opportunities. International Migration Review50(3): 628–666.
39.
R Core Team (2017) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 3.3.3. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.org (accessed 1 June 2018).
40.
RennwaldLEvansG (2014) When supply creates demand: social democratic party strategies and the evolution of class voting. West European Politics37(5): 1108–1135.
41.
RosenbergerSRuedinD (2017) The politicization of asylum seekers and other immigrant groups in a comparative perspective. In: MerliFPöschlM (eds) Asylrecht Als Experimentierfeld: Eine Analyse Seiner Besonderheiten Aus Vergleichender Sicht. Wien: Verlag Manz, pp. 13–26.
42.
RuedinD (2017) Citizenship regimes and the politicization of immigrant groups. Austrian Journal of Political Sciences46(1): 7–19.
43.
RuedinDMoralesL (2019) Estimating party positions on immigration: assessing the reliability and validity of different methods. Party Politics25(3): 303–314.
44.
van der BrugWD’AmatoGRuedinD, et al. (eds) 2015) The Politicization of Migration. Oxon: Routledge.
45.
Van der EijkC (2001) Measuring agreement in ordered rating scales. Quality and Quantity35(3): 325–341. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010374114305
46.
van HeerdenSvan der BrugW (2017) Demonisation and electoral support for populist radical right parties: a temporary effect. Electoral Studies47: 36–45. DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2017.04.002
47.
van SpanjeJ (2010) Contagious parties: anti-immigration parties and their impact on other parties’ immigration stances in contemporary Western Europe. Party Politics16(5): 563–586.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
