Explaining the birthright citizenship lottery: Longitudinal and cross‐national evidence for key determinants

Abstract

In the modern nation‐state, birthright citizenship laws – jus soli and jus sanguinis – are the two main gateways to sociopolitical membership. The vast majority of the world's population (97 percent) obtains their citizenship as a matter of birthright. Yet because comparative research has focused on measuring and explaining the multiple components of citizenship and immigration policies, a systematic analysis of birthright citizenship is lacking. We bridge this gap by analyzing the birthright component in prominent databases on citizenship policies and complementing them with original data and measures. This allows us to systematically test institutional and electoral explanations for contemporary and over‐time variation in birthright citizenship. Institutional explanations – legal codes and colonial history – are consistently associated with limitations on birthright law. As for electoral explanations, specific electoral powers – Nationalist, Socialist and Social‐Democratic parties – rather than the traditional left/right‐wing divide, are linked with reforms in birthright regimes.

Do Sociotropic Concerns Mask Prejudice? Experimental Evidence on the Sources of Public Opposition to Immigration

“…Rather, it is rooted in civic-minded calculations regarding the potential effects of immigration on the nation as a whole. Public opposition to immigration can therefore be reduced by domestic policy measures-and there is already evidence for this proposition (Solodoch, 2020). Building on sociotropic explanations for opposition to immigration, Facchini et al (2016) designed a large-scale experiment in Japan.…”

“… 6. Explaining immigrant attitudes toward immigration is therefore especially relevant in countries that grant territory-based birthright citizenship ( jus soli ), and the Netherlands has a more inclusive jus soli law than most European countries (Solodoch and Sommer, 2020). …”

Citizenship Studies: Policy Causes and Consequences

“…Sredanovic (2015) finds an "intelligible link" between the direction of citizenship policy change (inclusive versus restrictive) and left-right positioning (determined by EU Parliament group affiliation) but only for the EU-15; a pattern was not detected among post-1995 member states. And in their analysis of birthright citizenship policies, Solodoch & Sommer (2020) show a relationship linking nativist parties with restriction and left parties with liberalization.…”