Reflections on the value of citizenship – explaining naturalisation practices

Abstract

The article raises the question of why immigrants become or do not become citizens of their destination country. Political incorporation of immigrants through naturalisation is driven by several factors, including opportunities to naturalise on the one hand and the (perceived) added value of naturalisation on the other hand. We argue that naturalisation propensities are strongly driven by policies, while settlement in a country raises the value of citizenship and leads to the acceptance of higher costs. Based on data from the Austrian Mikrozensus we examine the factors that drive citizenship status of immigrants from the main countries and regions of origin in Austria. We find that indicators related to the settlement of immigrants as well as indicators for having easier access to citizenship, most notably higher socioeconomic resources, reduce the likelihood of being a foreign citizen.

Which policies matter? Explaining naturalisation rates using disaggregated policy data

“…One country with particularly complex economic requirements for naturalisation is Austria, for which Joachim Stern (2012) estimated for the year 2010 that for a single person a net income of under 1000€ per month was very likely insufficient for naturalisation. Reichel and Perchinig (2015) confirm this estimate with census data, showing that income is an important individual-level indicator for naturalisation in Austria, with only few low-income immigrants actually obtaining Austrian citizenship. Confirming hypothesis (C2), this paper shows that a focus on economic resources can be associated with fewer naturalisations on an aggregate level.…”

“…Their substantial effect on naturalisation outcomes points to an economic stratification of access to fundamental rights. Such intersections of economic and legal inequality clearly violate a Marshallian (1950) concept of equal citizenship and may provide the subject for further research on the intersections of class and citizenship (Reichel/Perchinig 2015).…”

“…In other words, if naturalisation is about selecting some persons to include in the demos while excluding others (Anderson/Hughes 2015; Joppke 2007), the mere level of naturalisations is only one side of the coin, the expected characteristics of those included and excluded is another topic. Second, unlike other recent studies (Peters et al 2016;Reichel/Perchinig 2015) this analysis is not based on surveys but on national year-to-year aggregate naturalisation data. It cannot draw conclusions on individual behaviour or on the way in which policies affect immigrants with specific characteristics -be it age, education, country of origin, etc.…”

“…While studies focusing on individual-level determinants of citizenship acquisition rely on survey or register data (Bevelander/DeVoretz 2008;Reichel/Perchinig 2015;Vink et al 2013), an analysis of macro-level determinants of naturalisation outcomes requires multi-level models (Vink et al 2013) or aggregate data (Janoski 2010;Reichel 2011). For an analysis of (macro-level) destination-country determinants of naturalisation, aggregate data constitute a straightforward approach, as they allow including a larger number of countries and may also cover a longer period of time.…”

The citizenship premium

“…Furthermore, studies that perform a cross-national comparison are typically based on aggregate data, and as a result, compositional differences between countries -in terms of for instance education or wealth -are not taken into account (Aleksynska & Algan, 2010;Janoski, 2010;Reichel, 2011). Limited individual-level research on the impact of institutional conditions shows that policy indeed matters in the European context, as more restrictive citizenship policies deter citizenship acquisition (Dronkers & Vink, 2012;Vink et al, 2013;Reichel & Perchinig, 2015). However, these studies are based on cross-sectional data, and a deeper understanding of the relevance of policy requires a longitudinal analysis of citizenship acquisition under transforming institutional conditions.…”