No abstract

Identifying and describing attitudes to immigration, let alone explaining them and their effects, is not a simple matter. In this chapter, we first outline the major scholarly works explaining attitudes to immigration. We identify six broad theoretical categories: economic interests, socialisation, psychological explanations, cueing, contact and context, and finally 'attitudinal embeddedness'. For each of these we present the key findings and consider the strengths and shortcomings of the literature, where applicable. We also sketch out existing research on the politics of immigration and the effects of attitudes to immigration on democratic politics, which we categorise as research on policy responsiveness, effects on party family support (notably the radical right), party competition, and polarisation. We end by considering future avenues for research.

During the last decades, the immigration phenomenon has gained increasing relevance in the European political space. This article examines to what extent the responsiveness of mainstream parties to the public opinion on immigration and to the objective migration context is affected by the party system configuration. The empirical analysis relies on data from the Comparative Manifesto Project, the European Social Survey, ParlGov database and OECD annual indicators on migration inflows, covering 17 European countries over the period 2003–2013. Based on cross-classified multilevel models, the results suggest that the presence of strong radical right parties enhances the responsiveness of mainstream parties to public preferences and the migration context.

What preferences do people have for cooperation between high and lower-income countries on irregular migration and refugee protection? Despite the increase in the number and breadth of crosscountry cooperation agreements in this policy area, we know little about people's preferences for such policies. This paper addresses this question in the context of the EU-Turkey 'migration deal' agreed in 2016. We conduct cross-country conjoint experiments in Germany, Greece, and Turkey to shed light on the types of policies that generate public support for cross-country cooperation on irregular migration and refugee protection. Our respondents are favorable to several core features of the current EU-Turkey migration deal regarding the return of irregular migrants, financial aid to refugees in Turkey, and the intensity of Turkish border controls. We also find evidence of public support for cooperation on resettlement and EU support to Greece to deal with migration. In certain aspects of cooperation, public preferences seem to respond to interactions between policy dimensions. For example, German public support for relocating refugees from Greece is enhanced if there are stepped-up border controls in Turkey. These findings have important implications for research on public attitudes to asylum and migration policies, 'migration diplomacy' in international relations, and public backlash against international cooperation more generally.