The Wayward Path Toward Convergence in European Immigration Policy

  • Alexander CaviedesEmail author
Part of the Immigrants and Minorities, Politics and Policy book series (IMPP)


This chapter surveys the progression of immigration policies in Europe, arguing that recent global economic developments have accelerated convergence. After a discussion of pre-World War II immigration that illustrates substantial differences in national policies, the chapter demonstrates how the postwar period has witnessed greater economic convergence between European countries, which has led to an increasing conjunction of immigration strategies among countries. While Western Europe’s common peace and economic prosperity have proven attractive for migrants from less developed and stable countries, a series of institutions have also been instrumental in generating parallel policies. The UN Convention on Refugees mandates common standards that have provided opportunities for asylum seekers across Europe, while the European Union itself has produced common legislation in areas such as family reunion, high-skilled migration, asylum standards, and irregular migration. While national governments ultimately retain control over the migration of non-EU nationals, global economic trends, personified by such institutions as the EU or WTO, have ushered steadily increasing convergence over the last 30 years.


European Union Asylum Seeker Immigration Policy Foreign Worker European Union Member State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Appleyard, Reginald. 2001. International migration policies 1950-2000. International Migration 39(6): 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bade, Klaus J. 2000. Europa in Bewegung. Migration vom späten 18. Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart. Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  3. Benhabib, Jess. 1996. On the political economy of immigration. European Economic Review 40(9): 1737–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bommes, Michael, and Andrew Geddes (eds.). 2000. Immigration and welfare: challenging the borders of the welfare state. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Boswell, Christina. 2009. Migration, security, and legitimacy: some reflections. In Immigration policy and security, ed. Terri E. Givens, Gary P. Freeman, and David L. Leal, 93–108. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Castles, Stephen, and Mark J. Miller. 2009. The age of migration: international population movements in the modern world, 4th ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  7. Caviedes, Alexander. 2010. Prying open fortress Europe: the turn to sectoral labor migration. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 2004a. The open method of coordination in immigration policy: a tool for prying open fortress Europe? Journal of European Public Policy 11(2): 289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapin, Wesley. 2000. Germany for the Germans? The political effects of international migration. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  10. Charter, David. 2007. Blue card scheme will lure qualified workers to ply EU skills gap. The Times (London), October 24.Google Scholar
  11. Daniels, Roger. 2002. Coming to America: a history of immigration and ethnicity in American life, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  12. Doomernik, Jeroen, Rinus Penninx, and Hans van Amersfoort. 1997. A migration policy for the future: possibilities and limitations. Brussels: Migration Policy Group.Google Scholar
  13. Freeman, Gary P. 1998. The decline of sovereignty? Politics and immigration restriction in liberal states. In Challenge to the nation-state: immigration in Western Europe and the United States, ed. Christian Joppke, 86–108. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Garrard, John A. 1971. The British and immigration, 1880–1910. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Geddes, Andrew. 2000. Denying access: asylum seekers and welfare benefits in the UK. In Immigration and welfare: challenging the borders of the welfare state, ed. Michael Bommes and Andrew Geddes, 134–147. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2008. Immigration and European integration: beyond fortress Europe? New York, NY: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Givens, Terri, and Adam Luedtke. 2004. The politics of European Union immigration policy: institutions, salience, and harmonization. Policy Studies Journal 32(1): 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenwood, Michael J. 1985. Human migration: theory, models and empirical studies. Journal of Regional Science 25(4): 521–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guiraudon, Virginie. 2001. De-nationalizing control: analyzing state responses to constraints on migration control. In Controlling a new migration world, ed. Virginie Guiraudon and Christian Joppke, 29–64. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Hailbronner, Kay. 2002. Migrationspolitik und Rechte der Drittstaatsangehörigen in der Europäischen Union. ZAR 3: 83–89.Google Scholar
  21. Hampshire, James. 2009. Disembedding liberalism? Immigration politics and security in Britain since 9/11. In Immigration policy and security, ed. Terri E. Givens, Gary P. Freeman, and David L. Leal, 109–129. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Hansen, Randall. 2000. Citizenship and immigration in post-war Britain. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hatton, Timothy J., and Jeffrey G. Williamson. 2005. Global migration and the world economy: two centuries of policy and performance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Hatzopolous, Vassilis. 2010. Labour immigration in the EU through the back door? The free provision of services as a facilitator of migration flows. In Labour migration in Europe, ed. Georg Menz and Alexander Caviedes, 150–182. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. Hollifield, James F. 1992. Immigrants, markets, and states: the political economy of postwar Europe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Holmes, John. 1988. John Bull’s island: immigration and British society, 1871–1971. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huysmans, Jef. 2000. The EU and the securitization of migration. Journal of Common Market Studies 38(5): 751–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Joppke, Christian. 2001. The legal-domestic sources of immigrant rights: the US, Germany and the EU. Comparative Political Studies 34(4): 339–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karras, Georgios, and Carmel U. Chiswick. 2000. Macroeconomic determinants of migration: the case of Germany 1964–1988. International Migration 37(4): 657–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Katznelson, Ira. 1993. Black men, white cities: race, politics and migration in the United States, 1900–30, and Britain, 1948–68. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kindleberger, Charles P. 1967. Europe’s postwar growth: the role of labor supply. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maas, Willem. 2010. Unauthorized migration and the politics of legalization, regularization, and amnesty in Europe. In Labour migration in Europe, ed. Georg Menz and Alexander Caviedes, 232–250. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. Massey, Douglas S. 1999. Why does immigration occur? A theoretical synthesis. In The handbook of international migration: the American experience, ed. Charles Hirschman, Philip Kasinitz, and Josh De Wind, 34–52. New York, NY: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Messina, Anthony M. 2007. The logics and politics of post-WWII migration to Western Europe. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meyers, Eytan. 2002. The causes of convergence in western immigration control. Review of International Studies 28(1): 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miles, Robert, and Diana Kay. 1994. The politics of migration to Britain: east-west migrations in the twentieth century. In The politics of immigration in Western Europe, ed. Martin Baldwin-Edwards and Martin A. Schain, 17–32. Essex, UK: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  37. OECD. 2008. The global competition for talent: mobility of the highly skilled. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  38. ———. 2004b. Migration for employment: bilateral agreements at a crossroads. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  39. Panizzon, Marion. 2009. Bilateral migration agreements and the GATS: sharing responsibility versus reciprocity. Journal of Migration and Refugee Issues 5(3): 70–130.Google Scholar
  40. Skran, Claudena M. 1992. The international refugee regime: the historical and contemporary context of international responses to asylum problems. In Refugees and the asylum dilemma in the west, ed. Gil Loescher, 8–35. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  41. SOPEMI. 2008. International migration outlook: annual report. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
  42. Stalker, Peter. 2002. Migration trends and migration policy in Europe. International Migration 40(5): 151–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tichenor, Daniel. 2002. Dividing lines: the politics of immigration control in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. UNHCR. 2014. UNHCR Asylum Trends, First Half 2014: Levels and Trends in Industrialized Countries. Geneva: United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees. Accessed November 6, 2015.
  45. Van Amersfoort, Hans. 1982. Immigration and the formation of minority groups: the Dutch experience 1945–1975, Trans. Robert Lyng. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Politics and International AffairsState University of New York at FredoniaFredoniaUSA

Personalised recommendations