Working Paper
This paper develops and tests the most important idea of my dissertation.
Abstract
Many political theorists and empirical analysts assume that in democracies the openness of immigration regimes and the inclusiveness of citizenship regimes trade off. Yet, the existing empirical evidence supporting this assumption is mixed. In this article, I argue that that the politicization of immigration in democratic elections can account for this inconsistency. Whereas low levels of politicization should lead to a negative correlation of immigration regime openness with citizenship regime inclusiveness, high levels of politicization should lead to a positive correlation. I test this hypothesis quantitatively across 23 Western democracies from 1980 to 2018. The results support but also qualify the hypothesis and bear important implications for long-standing normative and empirical debates on democratic boundary regime making.
Many political theorists and empirical analysts assume that in democracies the openness of immigration regimes and the inclusiveness of citizenship regimes trade off. Yet, the existing empirical evidence supporting this assumption is mixed. In this article, I argue that that the politicization of immigration in democratic elections can account for this inconsistency. Whereas low levels of politicization should lead to a negative correlation of immigration regime openness with citizenship regime inclusiveness, high levels of politicization should lead to a positive correlation. I test this hypothesis quantitatively across 23 Western democracies from 1980 to 2018. The results support but also qualify the hypothesis and bear important implications for long-standing normative and empirical debates on democratic boundary regime making.