Suchergebnisse

Many low-income countries and development organizations are calling for greater liberalization of labor immigration policies in high-income countries. At the same time, human rights organizations and migrant rights advocates demand more equal rights for migrant workers. The Price of Rights shows why you cannot always have both. Examining labor immigration policies in over forty countries, as well as policy drivers in major migrant-receiving and migrant-sending states, Martin Ruhs finds that there are trade-offs in the policies of high-income countries between openness to admitting migrant workers and some of the rights granted to migrants after admission.

This paper discusses why and how public attitudes should matter in regulating asylum and refugee protection in rich democracies, with a focus on Europe. Taking a realistic approach, I argue that public views constitute a soft feasibility constraint on effective and sustainable policies towards asylum seekers and refugees, and that a failure to take seriously and understand the attitudes of the host country's population can have a very damaging effect on refugee protection and migrants' rights in practice. Bringing together insights from political philosophy, the politics of asylum, and research on public attitudes, I develop my argument by discussing why 'what the people think' should matter in asylum and refugee polices; how public views can and should matter given the well-known challenges with measuring attitudes and policy preferences; and what the prevailing public views might mean for the reform of asylum and refugee policies in Europe.

New policy designs will need to have an explicit dual purpose, combining the objectives of labor migration and humanitarian protection.

First Online: 13 September 2018 ; I argue that we need to connect debates about the 'free movement' of EU citizens with discussions about EU member states' 'immigration policies' toward people from outside Europe. This is exactly the opposite approach to the one traditionally taken and advocated by the European Commission and many other European policy-makers who have insisted on a clear distinction between the 'mobility' of EU citizens on the one hand, and the 'immigration' of third-country nationals on the other. To develop my argument, I first outline some of the key differences between how 'migrants' and 'mobile EU citizens' are debated and regulated in the European Union. This is followed by a brief explanation of why I think the current distinctions may be considered problematic from both a moral and political perspective.

AbstractThe current rules for "free movement" in the European Union (EU) facilitate unrestricted intra‐EU labour mobility and equal access to national welfare states for EU workers. The sustainability of this policy has recently been threatened by divisive debates between EU countries about the need to restrict welfare benefits for EU workers. This article develops a theory for why the current free movement rules might present particular challenges for certain EU member states. It focuses on the potential roles of three types of national institutions and social norms in determining national policy positions on free movement in the EU15 states: labour markets (especially their "flexibility"); welfare states (especially their "contributory basis"); and citizenship norms (focusing on the "European‐ness" of national identities). I show that these institutions and norms vary across member states and explain why we can expect these differences to contribute to divergent national policy preferences for reforming free movement.

RésuméEn matière de migrations de main‐d'œuvre, le nombre des travailleurs admis par un pays dépend souvent de l'étendue des droits qui leur sont octroyés. Cette constatation est au cœur de l'ouvrage publié par l'auteur en 2013 sous le titre The price of rights. Ici, celui‐ci revient sur ses principaux arguments et ses grandes conclusions, et il répond à une lecture critique de son ouvrage publiée dans la Revue internationale du Travail en 2015, tout en renouvelant son plaidoyer en faveur d'un débat sans a priori sur les liens entre migrations, droits et développement aux échelons national et international.

ResumenLas políticas de inmigración laboral de los países de altos ingresos establecen una relación inversa entre el grado de apertura y algunos de los derechos concedidos a los migrantes admitidos. Esta observación empírica es la base del libro The price of rights: Regulating international labor migration, que el autor de este artículo escribió en 2013. Aquí resume sus principales conclusiones, argumentos e implicaciones políticas, y responde a una reseña publicada por la Revista Internacional del Trabajo en 2015. Concluye exhortando a un debate más abierto sobre los vínculos entre derechos, migración laboral y desarrollo entre las organizaciones nacionales e internacionales interesadas en estas cuestiones.

AbstractThe labour immigration policies of high‐income countries are characterized by trade‐offs between openness to admitting migrant workers and some of the rights granted to migrants after admission. This empirical observation lies at the heart of the author's 2013 book, The price of rights: Regulating international labor migration. In this article, he reviews its main findings, arguments and policy implications and responds to a critical review of the book that was published in the International Labour Review in 2015. He concludes with a plea for more open debate on the linkages between migrant rights, labour migration and development among national and international organizations concerned with these issues.