Immigrant integration policy is one of the most important issues in political discourse and is likely to remain so in the future. The article investigates the effectiveness of immigrant integration policy formation in Lithuania. According to theoretical insights, the general idea of integration includes the national reorganization of social and political areas for the inclusion of new immigrants, when legal, social, cultural and political rights are deliberately expanded for the immigrants in the host country. The analysis of legal documents reveals that the EU-level European Migration Agenda (2015) sets common priorities focusing on highly skilled workers, when at the same time Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) determines general directions and principles of immigrant integration at the national level. It is necessary to highlight the point that the document does not set a specific goals, objectives, measures or evaluation criteria of immigration policy. The quantitative Eurostat (2016), European Migration Network (2017) and Statistics Lithuania (2004–2017) data analysis showed that among the EU member states Lithuania's attractiveness for immigrants is low and the implementation of immigration policy can not create a counterweight to the aging population and large emigration. In conclusion, the Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) provided at national level are not sufficiently specific and clear to ensure effective integration of immigrants in Lithuania.
Immigrant integration policy is one of the most important issues in political discourse and is likely to remain so in the future. The article investigates the effectiveness of immigrant integration policy formation in Lithuania. According to theoretical insights, the general idea of integration includes the national reorganization of social and political areas for the inclusion of new immigrants, when legal, social, cultural and political rights are deliberately expanded for the immigrants in the host country. The analysis of legal documents reveals that the EU-level European Migration Agenda (2015) sets common priorities focusing on highly skilled workers, when at the same time Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) determines general directions and principles of immigrant integration at the national level. It is necessary to highlight the point that the document does not set a specific goals, objectives, measures or evaluation criteria of immigration policy. The quantitative Eurostat (2016), European Migration Network (2017) and Statistics Lithuania (2004–2017) data analysis showed that among the EU member states Lithuania's attractiveness for immigrants is low and the implementation of immigration policy can not create a counterweight to the aging population and large emigration. In conclusion, the Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) provided at national level are not sufficiently specific and clear to ensure effective integration of immigrants in Lithuania.
Immigrant integration policy is one of the most important issues in political discourse and is likely to remain so in the future. The article investigates the effectiveness of immigrant integration policy formation in Lithuania. According to theoretical insights, the general idea of integration includes the national reorganization of social and political areas for the inclusion of new immigrants, when legal, social, cultural and political rights are deliberately expanded for the immigrants in the host country. The analysis of legal documents reveals that the EU-level European Migration Agenda (2015) sets common priorities focusing on highly skilled workers, when at the same time Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) determines general directions and principles of immigrant integration at the national level. It is necessary to highlight the point that the document does not set a specific goals, objectives, measures or evaluation criteria of immigration policy. The quantitative Eurostat (2016), European Migration Network (2017) and Statistics Lithuania (2004–2017) data analysis showed that among the EU member states Lithuania's attractiveness for immigrants is low and the implementation of immigration policy can not create a counterweight to the aging population and large emigration. In conclusion, the Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) provided at national level are not sufficiently specific and clear to ensure effective integration of immigrants in Lithuania.
Immigrant integration policy is one of the most important issues in political discourse and is likely to remain so in the future. The article investigates the effectiveness of immigrant integration policy formation in Lithuania. According to theoretical insights, the general idea of integration includes the national reorganization of social and political areas for the inclusion of new immigrants, when legal, social, cultural and political rights are deliberately expanded for the immigrants in the host country. The analysis of legal documents reveals that the EU-level European Migration Agenda (2015) sets common priorities focusing on highly skilled workers, when at the same time Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) determines general directions and principles of immigrant integration at the national level. It is necessary to highlight the point that the document does not set a specific goals, objectives, measures or evaluation criteria of immigration policy. The quantitative Eurostat (2016), European Migration Network (2017) and Statistics Lithuania (2004–2017) data analysis showed that among the EU member states Lithuania's attractiveness for immigrants is low and the implementation of immigration policy can not create a counterweight to the aging population and large emigration. In conclusion, the Immigration Policy Guidelines (2008) provided at national level are not sufficiently specific and clear to ensure effective integration of immigrants in Lithuania.
The aim of this work is to indicate reasons that determine the choice of the immigration policy in Lithuania. This is a new approach to this public policy area, because most of the research has analyzed only the nature of migration policy in the country so far. In this Master's thesis the existing nature of immigration policy toward labor immigrants from non-EU countries is chosen as an dependent variable and the reasons that could explain it are sought. The main goal of the work is to indicate the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. To achieve the goal, the following objectives were set: 1) to define how the concept of immigration policy is understood in this work; 2) based on previous research of migration policy, to construct a theoretical model on the basis of which countries like Lithuania should choose a rational immigration policy that corresponds to the country's economic, social and demographic interests; 3) to introduce theoretical approaches to political science that could explain the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the migration policy theories and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania; 4) to formulate the hypotheses based on the theories of political science presented; 5) to confirm or deny the hypotheses based on the information collected during the interviews and the data available in public space. The main question of this study asks why there is a clear discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. As immigration is seen as a part of public policy, public policy analysis approaches were chosen as tools that could help to answer the main question of the study. In addition, considering the fact that many public policy areas in Lithuania are securitized, the interpretation of international relations based on threat analysis was included. Based on the presented theories, three hypotheses were raised: 1) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the unwillingness of politicians to make unpopular decisions that could threaten their further political career (re- election); 2) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the most effective interest group; 3) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by real and fictional security threats. The results of the study confirmed two of the three hypotheses.
The aim of this work is to indicate reasons that determine the choice of the immigration policy in Lithuania. This is a new approach to this public policy area, because most of the research has analyzed only the nature of migration policy in the country so far. In this Master's thesis the existing nature of immigration policy toward labor immigrants from non-EU countries is chosen as an dependent variable and the reasons that could explain it are sought. The main goal of the work is to indicate the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. To achieve the goal, the following objectives were set: 1) to define how the concept of immigration policy is understood in this work; 2) based on previous research of migration policy, to construct a theoretical model on the basis of which countries like Lithuania should choose a rational immigration policy that corresponds to the country's economic, social and demographic interests; 3) to introduce theoretical approaches to political science that could explain the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the migration policy theories and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania; 4) to formulate the hypotheses based on the theories of political science presented; 5) to confirm or deny the hypotheses based on the information collected during the interviews and the data available in public space. The main question of this study asks why there is a clear discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. As immigration is seen as a part of public policy, public policy analysis approaches were chosen as tools that could help to answer the main question of the study. In addition, considering the fact that many public policy areas in Lithuania are securitized, the interpretation of international relations based on threat analysis was included. Based on the presented theories, three hypotheses were raised: 1) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the unwillingness of politicians to make unpopular decisions that could threaten their further political career (re- election); 2) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the most effective interest group; 3) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by real and fictional security threats. The results of the study confirmed two of the three hypotheses.
The aim of this work is to indicate reasons that determine the choice of the immigration policy in Lithuania. This is a new approach to this public policy area, because most of the research has analyzed only the nature of migration policy in the country so far. In this Master's thesis the existing nature of immigration policy toward labor immigrants from non-EU countries is chosen as an dependent variable and the reasons that could explain it are sought. The main goal of the work is to indicate the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. To achieve the goal, the following objectives were set: 1) to define how the concept of immigration policy is understood in this work; 2) based on previous research of migration policy, to construct a theoretical model on the basis of which countries like Lithuania should choose a rational immigration policy that corresponds to the country's economic, social and demographic interests; 3) to introduce theoretical approaches to political science that could explain the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the migration policy theories and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania; 4) to formulate the hypotheses based on the theories of political science presented; 5) to confirm or deny the hypotheses based on the information collected during the interviews and the data available in public space. The main question of this study asks why there is a clear discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. As immigration is seen as a part of public policy, public policy analysis approaches were chosen as tools that could help to answer the main question of the study. In addition, considering the fact that many public policy areas in Lithuania are securitized, the interpretation of international relations based on threat analysis was included. Based on the presented theories, three hypotheses were raised: 1) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the unwillingness of politicians to make unpopular decisions that could threaten their further political career (re- election); 2) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the most effective interest group; 3) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by real and fictional security threats. The results of the study confirmed two of the three hypotheses.
The aim of this work is to indicate reasons that determine the choice of the immigration policy in Lithuania. This is a new approach to this public policy area, because most of the research has analyzed only the nature of migration policy in the country so far. In this Master's thesis the existing nature of immigration policy toward labor immigrants from non-EU countries is chosen as an dependent variable and the reasons that could explain it are sought. The main goal of the work is to indicate the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. To achieve the goal, the following objectives were set: 1) to define how the concept of immigration policy is understood in this work; 2) based on previous research of migration policy, to construct a theoretical model on the basis of which countries like Lithuania should choose a rational immigration policy that corresponds to the country's economic, social and demographic interests; 3) to introduce theoretical approaches to political science that could explain the reasons which determine the discrepancy between the migration policy theories and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania; 4) to formulate the hypotheses based on the theories of political science presented; 5) to confirm or deny the hypotheses based on the information collected during the interviews and the data available in public space. The main question of this study asks why there is a clear discrepancy between the policy, proposed by migration analysts and economists, and the actual immigration policy in Lithuania today. As immigration is seen as a part of public policy, public policy analysis approaches were chosen as tools that could help to answer the main question of the study. In addition, considering the fact that many public policy areas in Lithuania are securitized, the interpretation of international relations based on threat analysis was included. Based on the presented theories, three hypotheses were raised: 1) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the unwillingness of politicians to make unpopular decisions that could threaten their further political career (re- election); 2) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by the most effective interest group; 3) The nature of immigration policy in Lithuania is determined by real and fictional security threats. The results of the study confirmed two of the three hypotheses.
Education is one of the most important factors, because the higher education of immigrants, the more they participate in the active civic life. Social networks, power, prestige, socialization of children and ethnic identity of immigrants promote to continue their civic activities. Very important motivation for immigrant activity is their public identification and recognition as representatives of certain immigrant groups.
Education is one of the most important factors, because the higher education of immigrants, the more they participate in the active civic life. Social networks, power, prestige, socialization of children and ethnic identity of immigrants promote to continue their civic activities. Very important motivation for immigrant activity is their public identification and recognition as representatives of certain immigrant groups.
In the last 20 years, after ethnic Germans came back to this country and other refugees started flowing to it, the debates about immigration became especially important among politicians. After World War II, people left their home countries and searched refuge in other countries. Germany was one of those countries where refugees sought asylum. Germany received such people because its industry needed labourers. The question of the integration of immigrants became the priority of the state. We can single out five phases of immigration into Germany: (1) Post- War Immigration in 1945 – 1954, (2) Guest Workers' Immigration in 1955 – 1973, (3) Family Reunification in 1974 – 1982, (4) Asylum and Refugee Immigration in 1983 – 1993, and (5) Immigration caused by the development of the European Union and Inflows of Ethnic Germans since 1988 until nowadays.
In the last 20 years, after ethnic Germans came back to this country and other refugees started flowing to it, the debates about immigration became especially important among politicians. After World War II, people left their home countries and searched refuge in other countries. Germany was one of those countries where refugees sought asylum. Germany received such people because its industry needed labourers. The question of the integration of immigrants became the priority of the state. We can single out five phases of immigration into Germany: (1) Post- War Immigration in 1945 – 1954, (2) Guest Workers' Immigration in 1955 – 1973, (3) Family Reunification in 1974 – 1982, (4) Asylum and Refugee Immigration in 1983 – 1993, and (5) Immigration caused by the development of the European Union and Inflows of Ethnic Germans since 1988 until nowadays.
In the last 20 years, after ethnic Germans came back to this country and other refugees started flowing to it, the debates about immigration became especially important among politicians. After World War II, people left their home countries and searched refuge in other countries. Germany was one of those countries where refugees sought asylum. Germany received such people because its industry needed labourers. The question of the integration of immigrants became the priority of the state. We can single out five phases of immigration into Germany: (1) Post- War Immigration in 1945 – 1954, (2) Guest Workers' Immigration in 1955 – 1973, (3) Family Reunification in 1974 – 1982, (4) Asylum and Refugee Immigration in 1983 – 1993, and (5) Immigration caused by the development of the European Union and Inflows of Ethnic Germans since 1988 until nowadays.
Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.
Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.
