Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660 |
Resumo: | It has been argued that nation‐states confront migrant protection with a highly diverse array of measures ranging from excluding strategies (often labelled as “welfare chauvinism”) to more inclusionary, post‐national approaches. While exclusionary strategies are often guided by nativist principles such as citizenship, post‐national approaches of social protection are usually based on residence. Building on an international comparative project with a focus on free movement within the European Union, and involving four pairs of EU member states, this article argues that the extremes of these two ways of understanding nation‐state approaches to migrant social protection are not mutually exclusive, as has been discussed so far, but, instead, are intertwined with one another. While there is a common (and globally unique) framework on the EU level for the coordination of mobile citizens’ social protection, EU member states determine their strategies using residence as a main tool to govern intra‐EU migration. We differentiate between three main intertwining strategies applied by nation‐states in this respect: generally, selectively, and purposefully gated access to social protection. All three potentially lead to the social exclusion of migrants, particularly those who cannot prove their residence status in line with institutional regulations due to their undocumented living situations or their transnational lifestyles. |
id |
RCAP_d95b54923a8434a6ede004e5f893dbbc |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4660 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policiescitizenship; EU free movement; migrants; social protection; welfare chauvinismIt has been argued that nation‐states confront migrant protection with a highly diverse array of measures ranging from excluding strategies (often labelled as “welfare chauvinism”) to more inclusionary, post‐national approaches. While exclusionary strategies are often guided by nativist principles such as citizenship, post‐national approaches of social protection are usually based on residence. Building on an international comparative project with a focus on free movement within the European Union, and involving four pairs of EU member states, this article argues that the extremes of these two ways of understanding nation‐state approaches to migrant social protection are not mutually exclusive, as has been discussed so far, but, instead, are intertwined with one another. While there is a common (and globally unique) framework on the EU level for the coordination of mobile citizens’ social protection, EU member states determine their strategies using residence as a main tool to govern intra‐EU migration. We differentiate between three main intertwining strategies applied by nation‐states in this respect: generally, selectively, and purposefully gated access to social protection. All three potentially lead to the social exclusion of migrants, particularly those who cannot prove their residence status in line with institutional regulations due to their undocumented living situations or their transnational lifestyles.Cogitatio2022-03-22info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4660Social Inclusion; Vol 10, No 1 (2022): Transnational Social Protection: Inclusion for Whom? Theoretical Reflections and Migrant Experiences; 164-1732183-2803reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4660https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4660/4660Copyright (c) 2022 Elisabeth Scheibelhoferhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessScheibelhofer, Elisabeth2022-12-20T10:58:51Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4660Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:21:18.773212Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
title |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
spellingShingle |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth citizenship; EU free movement; migrants; social protection; welfare chauvinism |
title_short |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
title_full |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
title_fullStr |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
title_full_unstemmed |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
title_sort |
Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies |
author |
Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth |
author_facet |
Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
citizenship; EU free movement; migrants; social protection; welfare chauvinism |
topic |
citizenship; EU free movement; migrants; social protection; welfare chauvinism |
description |
It has been argued that nation‐states confront migrant protection with a highly diverse array of measures ranging from excluding strategies (often labelled as “welfare chauvinism”) to more inclusionary, post‐national approaches. While exclusionary strategies are often guided by nativist principles such as citizenship, post‐national approaches of social protection are usually based on residence. Building on an international comparative project with a focus on free movement within the European Union, and involving four pairs of EU member states, this article argues that the extremes of these two ways of understanding nation‐state approaches to migrant social protection are not mutually exclusive, as has been discussed so far, but, instead, are intertwined with one another. While there is a common (and globally unique) framework on the EU level for the coordination of mobile citizens’ social protection, EU member states determine their strategies using residence as a main tool to govern intra‐EU migration. We differentiate between three main intertwining strategies applied by nation‐states in this respect: generally, selectively, and purposefully gated access to social protection. All three potentially lead to the social exclusion of migrants, particularly those who cannot prove their residence status in line with institutional regulations due to their undocumented living situations or their transnational lifestyles. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-03-22 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660 oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4660 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4660 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4660 https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i1.4660 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4660/4660 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Elisabeth Scheibelhofer http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Elisabeth Scheibelhofer http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Cogitatio |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Social Inclusion; Vol 10, No 1 (2022): Transnational Social Protection: Inclusion for Whom? Theoretical Reflections and Migrant Experiences; 164-173 2183-2803 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130660242194432 |