Civilizing vs destructive globalization? A multi-level analysis of anti-immigrant prejudice

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of the latest wave of globalization on anti-immigrant prejudice. We discern and test two contradictory accounts of the impact of globalization on anti-immigrant prejudice from the prejudice and globalization literatures. On the one hand, there is the ‘civilizing/integrative globalization’ thesis, which implies that globalization should help to decrease prejudice by creating sustained and equal contact between previously alien cultures and peoples, and by spreading economic gains to everybody. On the other hand, there is the ‘destructive globalization/globalization as a threat’ thesis, which argues that globalization should increase anti-immigrant prejudice by intensifying competition over resources and by increasing perceived threat by native populations as a result of increasing immigrant populations. We test these two accounts using a multi-level analysis of 64 countries and nearly 150,000 individuals, derived from the World Values Surveys (waves 3–5). Our analyses reveal support for ‘destructive globalization/ globalization as a threat’ thesis, but emphasize the multi-dimensional character of globalization. We find that citizens of countries with higher levels of trade openness have significantly more anti-immigrant sentiments. There is also some evidence that in countries where unemployment is accompanied by high levels of trade openness or the existence of large immigrant populations, citizens hold high anti-immigrant prejudice. By contrast, foreign direct investment (FDI) has a weak effect.

Does Immigration Undermine Public Support for Social Policy?

“…Informed by theories of ethnic threat and competition (Blalock 1967;Blumer 1958), this literature shows that the size and increase of migrant populations worsen attitudes toward immigrants. This effect also interacts with economic conditions (Kaya and Karakoc 2012;Kunovich 2004;Quillian 1995). For example, Semyonov, Raijman, and Gorodzeisky (2006) constructed a "competitive threat" model to explain how growing foreign-born populations contributed to the significant increase in anti-foreigner sentiments in Europe in the 1990s.…”

The Impact of the Great Recession on Perceived Immigrant Threat: A Cross-National Study of 22 Countries

“…Perceived immigrant threat (PIT) is an index comprised of a series of seven questions. The first six questions ask respondents' how much they agree or disagree with the following statements: "(1) Immigrants increase crime rates; (2) (6) [COUNTRY] should take stronger measures to exclude illegal immigrants." The seventh question asks: (7) "Do you think the number of immigrants to [COUNTRY] nowadays should be: 1 = increased a lot, 2 = increased a little, 3 = remain the same as it is, 4 = reduced a little, 5 = reduced a lot?"…”

“…1 All variables are grand-mean centered (standard errors in parentheses). 2 Perceived immigrant threat is multiplied by 100 to facilitate interpretation of coefficients. 3 The intraclass correlation coefficient for perceived immigrant threat = 0.098.…”

“…1 All variables are grand mean centered (standard errors in parentheses). 2 Perceived immigrant threat and perceived immigrant threat (t−10) are multiplied by 100 to facilitate interpretation of coefficients. 3 Controls for the following individual-level variables are also included in the models but not shown here to conserve space: female, income, high school degree, associate's degree, and unemployed.…”

“…While these new arrivals have contributed deeply to the economic, cultural, and associational vitality of the societies in which they reside, their presence has also fueled a stunning increase of anti-immigrant sentiment [1,2]. In the aftermath of the Great Recession, anti-immigrant sentiment has penetrated electoral politics, for example, in the British referendum to leave the European Union and in Donald Trump's election as President of the United States.…”