Migrants’ Experiences With Limited Access to Social Protection in a Framework of EU Post‐National Policies

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth
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