measuring immigration policies: the impic database marc helbling a,b, * , liv bjerre b , friederike römer b and malisa zobel c

In the last decade, researchers have developed many innovative ideas for the construction of indices measuring immigration policies. Methodological considerations have, however, been largely absent from the discussion. To close this gap, this paper investigates the characteristics of existing indices by critically comparing and discussing them. We start by providing a definition of immigration policy which may serve as a benchmark when assessing the indices. By means of the analytical framework developed by Munck and Verkuilen (2002), which we adapt and customize for our analysis, we then evaluate the conceptualization, measurement, and aggregation, as well as the empirical scope of thirteen immigration policy indices. We discuss methodological strengths and weaknesses of the indices, how these affect the research questions that can be answered and what the next steps in index building within the field of immigration policy should be.

How sensitive are country ranks to the aggregation function used in index construction? This paper tests whether different aggregation functions come to different results in regard to the ranking of countries. Indices within the field of immigration and integration policy are analyzed, yet, the results pertain to index building across the social sciences. The paper discusses three aggregation methods: the arithmetic mean, the geometric mean, and a noncompensatory/non‐linear aggregation function based on the Condorcet method. In the empirical part, these three aggregation functions are applied to the family indicators for the year 2010 of the Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) dataset, a new dataset which measures immigration policies’ restrictiveness, as well as to the eight policy strands of the Migrant Integration Policy Index for the year 2014. Results show that the methods react differently to extreme values and thus result in different rank orders in the middle range. In the politicized field of immigration and integration policies, country ranks play a crucial role and this is shown to have profound real‐world implications. The paper thus urges researchers to be reflective of the assumptions of different aggregation functions, as these lead to different results.

Introduction: More than 50% of People with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS) in Denmark use alternative treatment. Most of them combine alternative and conventional treatment, but PwMS often find that they engage in parallel courses of treatment between which there is no dialogue, coordination or synergy. For this reason the Danish Multiple Sclerosis Society conducted a research project to develop and examine different models for collaboration between conventional and alternative treatment providers.

BackgroundThe Danish Multiple Sclerosis Society initiated a large-scale bridge building and integrative treatment project to take place from 2004–2010 at a specialized Multiple Sclerosis (MS) hospital. In this project, a team of five conventional health care practitioners and five alternative practitioners was set up to work together in developing and offering individualized treatments to 200 people with MS. The purpose of this paper is to present results from the six year treatment collaboration process regarding the development of an integrative treatment model.DiscussionThe collaborative work towards an integrative treatment model for people with MS, involved six steps: 1) Working with an initial model 2) Unfolding the different treatment philosophies 3) Discussing the elements of the Intervention-Mechanism-Context-Outcome-scheme (the IMCO-scheme) 4) Phrasing the common assumptions for an integrative MS program theory 5) Developing the integrative MS program theory 6) Building the integrative MS treatment model. The model includes important elements of the different treatment philosophies represented in the team and thereby describes a common understanding of the complexity of the courses of treatment.SummaryAn integrative team of practitioners has developed an integrative model for combined treatments of People with Multiple Sclerosis. The model unites different treatment philosophies and focuses on process-oriented factors and the strengthening of the patients’ resources and competences on a physical, an emotional and a cognitive level.