This paper explores trade union strategies to protect wages in the face of EU migration after the enlargement of the European Union. We argue that unions have three instruments at their disposal to deal with the risks linked to downward wage pressure: closure through immigration control, equalisation through collective bargaining and minimum wages, and the organisation of migrant workers. Using comparative case studies of Sweden, Germany and the UK, we show how different types of power resources shape union strategies: unions with substantial organisational resources (in Sweden) relied on a large membership to pursue an equalisation strategy and expected to be able to ‘afford’ openness. German unions with low membership but access to the political system pushed for a mix of closure and equality drawing on political intervention (e.g. minimum wages). British unions, unable to pursue either, focused their efforts on organisation.

In 2016, the East African Community (EAC) pledged to phase out imports of used clothing within three years. The US Trade Representative (USTR) responded by threatening to revoke preferential market access for those involved. Within two years, all EAC states except Rwanda backed down. Using 21 original interviews, this article explores the extent to which political settlements theory can explain variation in commitment to the used clothing ban in Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda. Building on existing research into shrinking 'policy space,' I explicitly consider the role of foreign actors. The ban predominantly imposed costs on consumers, used clothing retailers, and foreign used clothing exporters whose interests were represented by the USTR. EAC apparel manufacturers stood to gain, but the most powerful firms in this sector were foreign-owned exporters who valued the US market more than domestic sales. The US intervention, therefore, changed the stakes for the policy's intended beneficiaries. While vulnerable and contested ruling coalitions in Kenya and Uganda struggled to hold out in conflict with affected groups, a strong dominant party in Rwanda could absorb resistance by marshaling legitimacy from alternative sources and increasing its efforts to sensitize the local population.

Abstract. In this chapter, we review existing research analysing the relationship between immigration and welfare states. This relationship is analysed in both directions, namely how immigration affects the welfare state, and how the welfare state affects migration. The chapter focuses on 5 prominent research questions in the field, namely 1) how different welfare regimes accommodate immigrants 2) how immigration may affect political support for the welfare state 3) the fiscal effects on immigration on the welfare state 4) welfare magnets and 5) welfare chauvinism. The chapter then draws on available evidence to highlight two relevant research agendas for the future.

How do governments distribute resources across economic sectors during a crisis? And why do some sectors receive more than others? The recent COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the urgency of these questions. In this paper, we explore the extent to which a political economy perspective can help explain the characteristics of sector-specific state aid in the Netherlands, a traditionally corporatist country. While KLM, the biggest player in the Dutch aviation sector, was promised loans worth €3.4 billion, the horeca (hospitality) sector was denied a similar deal. Limited cross-case analysis eliminates purely economic accounts. We employed process-tracing and analyzed hundreds of national media articles to understand the influence of elected leaders, interest groups, and experts. We find that, against the backdrop of economic concerns, vote-seeking behavior by elected leaders as well as the strength and organization of interest groups influenced how much each sector could expect. Meanwhile, policy-seeking behavior helps explain the form that aid took. Our findings highlight the need to consider fiscal support in political economy terms, even during crises, and to explore the composition of state aid, not just its presence or amount.

This chapter reviews existing research analysing the relationship between immigration and welfare states. This relationship is analysed in both directions, namely how immigration affects the welfare state, and how the welfare state affects migration. The chapter focuses on 6 prominent research questions in the field, namely 1) how different welfare regimes accommodate immigrants 2) how immigration may affect political support for the welfare state 3) the fiscal effects of immigration on the welfare state, 4) whether migrants make residence decisions based on welfare (‘welfare magnet hypothesis’), 5) whether the public supports excluding migrants from welfare (‘welfare chauvinism’) and 6) the extent to which welfare states depend on immigrant labour. The chapter then draws on available evidence to highlight two relevant research agendas for the future.