Exposure to Immigration and Admission Preferences: Evidence from France

Clayton, Katherine; Ferwerda, Jeremy; Horiuchi, Yusaku

doi:10.1007/s11109-019-09550-z

Cited by 45 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to direct questioning, conjoint designs are less likely to generate social desirability bias (Horiuchi, Markovich, and Yamamoto 2018) and may map more closely to respondents’ actual behavior (Hainmueller, Hangartner, and Yamamoto 2015). Within the field of migration studies, conjoint designs have recently been leveraged to understand citizens’ multidimensional preferences regarding immigrant admissions (Hainmueller and Hopkins 2014; Clayton, Ferwerda, and Horiuchi 2018), asylum seekers and refugees (Bansak, Hainmueller, and Hangartner 2016; Adida, Lo, and Platas 2017), and immigration policies more generally (Wright et al 2016). To our knowledge, however, the conjoint design has not yet been leveraged to understand migrants’ multidimensional destination preferences.…”

Section: Hypotheses and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pull Factors and Migration Preferences: Evidence from the Middle East and North Africa

Ferwerda

Gest

2020

International Migration Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Which national characteristics do voluntary migrants prioritize when considering destinations? Although this question is salient for policymakers, extant studies face challenges when seeking to identify how various pull factors shape destination preferences. Surveys of migrants are typically conducted after they arrive, introducing selection bias and post-hoc reasoning. Moreover, desirable national characteristics tend to co-vary, implying that observed relationships with migration flows may be confounded. In this article, we identify the destination preferences of prospective migrants by drawing on a sample of 8,500 respondents from five sending states across the Middle East and North Africa. Prospective migrants completed a series of conjoint survey tasks in which they chose between two destinations with randomly varying characteristics. The results reveal a clear hierarchy of preferences, with prospective migrants placing the greatest priority on liberal democratic governance and employment prospects. The availability of welfare benefits acted as a secondary consideration, while geographic distance and co-ethnic stock did not strongly predict initial destination preferences. While the rank order of these considerations remains consistent across national samples, our results suggest that respondents from different economic and political backgrounds vary in how they navigate potential tradeoffs between national characteristics. These findings address post-arrival bias in extant studies by revealing prospective migrants’ preferences before they interact with the opportunity structures that facilitate and restrict entry into desirable destinations.

show abstract

Section: Hypotheses and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pull Factors and Migration Preferences: Evidence from the Middle East and North Africa

Ferwerda

Gest

2020

International Migration Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with other immigration conjoint surveys (e.g., refs. 21 , 24 , and 38 ), our design is parsimonious. We chose this design to optimize for our specific target population and policy scenario.…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

Members of the American public express little preference for migrants of any specific ethnicity or national origin ( 20 ), though results from Europe are more mixed (contrast refs. 21 and 24 ). …”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Local elected officials’ receptivity to refugee resettlement in the United States

Shaffer

Pinson

Chu

et al. 2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local leaders possess significant and growing authority over refugee resettlement, yet we know little about their attitudes toward refugees. In this article, we use a conjoint experiment to evaluate how the attributes of hypothetical refugee groups influence local policymaker receptivity toward refugee resettlement. We sample from a national panel of current local elected officials, who represent a broad range of urban and rural communities across the United States. We find that many local officials favor refugee resettlement, regardless of refugee attributes. However, officials are most receptive to refugees whom they perceive as a strong economic and social fit within their communities. Our study contributes to a growing literature on individual attitudes toward refugees by systematically examining the preferences of US local elected officials and offers unique insights into the views of this influential and policy-relevant group.

show abstract

“…The average treatment effects of immigrant attributes on immigrant admission preference in our experimental component are presented in Figure 3. The right side of the figure shows estimated average marginal component effects (AMCE), and the left side shows marginal means (MM, see Clayton, Ferwerda, & Horiuchi, 2021;Hainmueller, Hopkins, & Yamamoto, 2014;Leeper, Hobolt, & Tilley, 2020). An overview of this figure suggests that events and origins have significant impact on the participants' preference, while the provision of public housing and the LDP endorsement do not.…”

Section: Experimental Componentmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Humanitarianism in Shaping Public Attitudes Toward Refugees

Fraser

Murakami

2021

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies that explore attitudes towards immigration conceptualize immigrants as economic migrants. The limitation of this approach is that it emphasizes economic costs and benefits while ignoring the humanitarian logic that forms the basis of refugee admission. To date, few studies have developed and tested theories that explain public support for admitting humanitarian migrants. Our article fills this gap. We argue that dispositional and situational triggers related to humanitarianism shape public attitudes towards refugees: When natives are predisposed to help others in need (humanitarianism) and/or refugees are seen to be victims of randomly occurring events, the public is more likely to support refugee admission. We test this theory using observational and experimental data from a country that accepts few resettlement refugees, Japan. Our study uses a ratingbased conjoint which randomized crisis event, place of origin, access to public housing, and degree of political support for receiving refugees. We find that humanitarianism predicts public support for admitting refugees more strongly than it predicts support for economic migrants. Moreover, we show that people with a higher level of humanitarianism prefer to admit refugees who flee natural disasters and wars as opposed to those who escape from political repression.

show abstract

Exposure to Immigration and Admission Preferences: Evidence from France

Cited by 45 publications

References 54 publications

Pull Factors and Migration Preferences: Evidence from the Middle East and North Africa

Pull Factors and Migration Preferences: Evidence from the Middle East and North Africa

Local elected officials’ receptivity to refugee resettlement in the United States

The Role of Humanitarianism in Shaping Public Attitudes Toward Refugees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About