The limits of diversity in European unity: European identification and preference for internal migration LSEE Lecture Democratization, European integration, and Identity London, November 20, 2017 Dr. Aleksandra Sojka asojka@clio.uc3m.es Juan de la Cierva Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Social Sciences, Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain
European identity and migration International migration challenges the self-definition of national communities Europe United in diversity supranational level of identification, difference as its constitutive element But need for demarcation of community to make it meaningful Free movement, Internal vs. External migrants Current context: Refugee and migrant crisis and Brexit politicization of migration in Europe
Source: Eurobarometer,, First Results
Attitudes towards migration in Europe Favorable view of internal migrants Favorable view of external migrants Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable of internal migrants May May May May 2 Data: EB 82.3, 83.3, 84.3, 85.2.
Preference for internal migration in the EU? Preference for internal migration a more favorable attitude to EU migrants than non-eu migrants, independent of overall migration attitude Previous studies a majority of EU citizens does not distinguish between the two types of migrants (McLaren 2001), hence, no European collective identity
Attitudes towards migration in Europe Favorable view of internal migrants Favorable view of external migrants Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable of internal migrants May May May May Data: EB 82.3, 83.3, 84.3, 85.2.
Research question How is the growing preference for internal migration related to processes of EU integration in general, and more specifically, to the development of a European collective identity?
Theoretical framework (I) Social identity theory (SIT) establishing boundaries between the inand the out-group central to the cognitive process of identification European identification as superordinate identity contributes to greater tolerance towards diversity
Theoretical framework (II) European identification compatible with national identification
Configurations of European/national identification: Single identification Double identification National first Only national () National & European (53%) European first Only European (1%) European & national (5%)
How is the growing preference for internal migration related to European identification? H1. Identifying as national and European is associated with a significantly stronger preference for internal migrants, when compared to those who identify solely as nationals. H2. Identifying as European and national or solely European is not associated with stronger preference for internal migrants, when compared to those who identify solely as nationals.
Data and methods Data: Eurobarometer between November and May Survey questions regarding migration and European identity in the 28 EU countries Analysis: Descriptive analysis of changes in aggregate migration acceptance Explanatory analysis: multilevel modelling of preference for internal migration
Results: Preference for internal migration & European identification
Only national National & European 80% 80% Favorable to internal migrants Favorable to external migrants Favorable to internal migrants Favorable to external migrants Only European European & national 80% 80% Favorable to internal migrants Favorable to external migrants Favorable to internal migrants Favorable to external migrants Data: EB 82.3, 83.3, 84.3, 85.2, 86.2.
Only national National & European 80% 80% Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable to internal migrants Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable to internal migrants Only European European & national 80% 80% Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable to internal migrants Same view of internal & external migrants More favorable to internal migrants Data: EB 82.3, 83.3, 84.3, 85.2, 86.2.
Explanatory analysis Multilevel logistical regression models DV: preference for European over non-european migrants Controls: cues & cognitive mobilization, EU attitudes Contextual variables: presence of different types of migration, economic variables (EU-28) and controls for survey wave (5 waves)
Explaining preference for internal migration in the EU (I) Data: EB 82.3, 83.3, 84.3, 85.2, 86.2. Individual level Age Sex (Woman) Employment situation (Bad) Cues & cognitive mobilization Ideology EU political discussion EU knowledge Education (Low) Education (High) EU attitudes Negative EU image Positive EU image Free movement EU enlargement Identity (Ref.: Only national) National & European European & national Only European Contextual Internal migration share External migration share Asylum claims Eurozone GDP Unemployment CEE Survey May May Nov -.5 0.5 1
Explaining preference for internal migration in the EU (II) attachment to EU vs. Europe Individual level Age Sex (Woman) Employment situation (Bad) Cues & cognitive mobilization Ideology EU political discussion EU knowledge Education (Low) Education (High) EU attitudes Negative EU image Positive EU image Free movement EU enlargement Identities (Ref.: Only national) National & European European & national Only European Data: EB 82.3, 84.3, 86.2. Attachment Attachment Country Attachment EU Attachment Europe -.6 -.4 -.2 0.2.4 EU Europe
Explaining preference for internal migration in the EU (III) Single-country models National & European FR BE NL DE IT LU DK IR UK GR ES PT FI SE AT CY CZ ES HU LV LT MT PL SK SL BU RO CR -.5 0.5 1 1.5 Data: EB 85.2, 86.2.
Conclusions Limitation: cross-sectional data, cannot account for change within individuals Caveat: who are the European/non-European migrants? But importance of general distinction National & European identification (but not European or European and national) associated with greater preference for internal migrants (H1 & H2 confirmed) Preference for internal migrants correlated with both civic (EU knowledge, support for free movement) and cultural (attachment to Europe, not the EU) factors Importance of national context not a uniform relationship across EU-28
Thank you! Aleksandra Sojka asojka@clio.uc3m.es Department of Social Sciences, Carlos III University of Madrid, Spain @AleSojka www.aleksandrasojka.eu