Abstract
What challenges and opportunities has federalism held for countries like Germany, one of Europe’s most ‘reluctant’ states of immigration? Although the formal, constitutional division of powers between the German central government (Bund) and the federal states (Länder) has certainly shaped Germany’s response to immigration and integration, federalism is only one aspect of a broader, ‘semisovereign’ model of governance that has dominated German state-society relations for decades (Katzenstein 1987). This model sees a range of decentralized state actors, among them constantly negotiating with a set of highly centralized societal (or “parapublic”) organizations, such as churches, labour and employer associations, leading to at best incremental policy change over the years. While some observers argue that this model will endure and likely also impair Germany’s ability to successfully navigate future immigration and integration challenges (Green and Paterson 2005), others argue that German political actors have been quite successful all along in shifting “venues” to suit their policy preferences, be that “up” (to the intergovernmental/EU level), “down” (to the local level) or “out” (to non-state actors) (Guiraudon and Lahav 2000). The chapter will argue that Germany’s particular version of immigration federalism has facilitated both incrementalism and venue shifting.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
As Motomura rightly notes, this legal division is in fact an artificial one that blurs the strong functional overlap between the two categories and their real, interlocking public policy consequences (Motomura 1994).
- 2.
The Länder have certainly taken the OECD up on the recommendation and now maintain separate representations in Brussels.
- 3.
- 4.
The two examples are: Council Directive 2009/9/EC, January 27, 2003 (“Minimum Standards Directive”), Council Directive 2009/50/EC, May 25, 2009 (“EU Blue Card Directive”).
- 5.
See http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c4d6.html for historical data.
- 6.
- 7.
Applicants from Eastern Europe had to wait only 1 year (Kanstroom 1993, p. 197).
- 8.
In cases of “particular federal interest” or in case of a danger to national security or of terrorism (Par. 58 a AufenthG).
- 9.
This is EU Directive 2008/115, the so-called “Returns Directive.”
- 10.
- 11.
References
Amt für Multikulturelle Angelegenheiten, Stadt Frankfurt am Main (2009). 20 Jahre AMKA. Frankfurt, Main.
Anderson, B., Gibney, M., & Paoletti, E. (2011). Citizenship, deportation and the boundaries of belonging. Citizenship Studies, 15(5), 547–563.
Aybek, C. (2010). Young immigrants’ low participation in the german vocational training system: How local actors in Munich and Frankfurt/Main try to make a difference. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The local dimension of migration policymaking (pp. 85–107, IMISCOE Reports). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Bendel, P., & Sturm, R. (2010). Federal Republic of Germany. In L. Moreno & C. Colino (Eds.), Diversity and unity in federal countries (pp. 167–199, A Global Dialogue on Federalism, Vol. 7). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s.
Benz, A. (2000). Two types of multi-level governance: Intergovernmental relations in Germany and EU regional policy. Regional & Federal Studies, 10(3), 21–44.
Blumenthal, J. von (2012). Migrationspolitik nach der Föderalismusreform: Zentralisierung und Dezentralisierung im deutschen Mehrebenensystem. In E. Z. für Föderalismus-Forschung (Ed.). Jahrbuch des Föderalismus 2012: Föderalismus, Subsidiarität und Regionen in Europa (pp. 125–137). Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Boswell, C. (2003). Burden-sharing in the European Union: Lessons from the German and UK experience. Journal of Refugee Studies, 16(3), 316–335.
Bundesamt, Statistisches (2012). Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund—Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2011 Bevölkerung und Erwerbstätigkeit. Wiesbaden.
Castaneda, H. (2010). Deportation deferred: “Illegality,” Visibility and recognition in contemporary Germany. In N. De Genova & N. Peutz (Eds.), The deportation regime: Sovereignty, space and the freedom of movement (pp. 245–261). Durham: Duke University Press.
Ellermann, A. (2009). States against migrants: Deportation in Germany and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Erk, J. (2008). Explaining federalism: State, society and congruence in Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany and Switzerland. London: Routledge.
Fullerton, M. (1988). Restricting the flow of asylum-seekers in Belgium, Denmark, the Federal Republic of Germany, and the Netherlands: New challenges to the Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees and the European convention on human rights. Virginia Journal of International Law, 29(33), 35.
Gibney, M. J. (2008). Asylum and the expansion of deportation in the United Kingdom. Government and Opposition, 43(2), 146–167.
Green, S. (2004). The politics of exclusion: Institutions and immigration policy in contemporary Germany. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Guiraudon, V. (2000). European integration and migration policy: Vertical policy-making as venue shopping. Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(2), 251–271.
Gunlicks, A. (2003). The Länder and German federalism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Hansen, R. (1999). Migration, citizenship and race in Europe: Between incorporation and inclusion. European Journal of Political Research, 35, 415–444.
Höfling-Semnar, B. (1995). Flucht und Deutsche Asylpolitik: Von der Krise des Asylrechts zur Perfektionierung der Zugangsverhinderung. Münster: Verlag Westfälisches Dampfboot.
Ireland, P. R. (2004). Becoming Europe: Immigration, integration and the welfare state. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Joppke, C. (1999). Immigration and the nation–state: The United States, Germany and Great Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kanstroom, D. (1993). Wer sind Wir Wieder? Laws of Asylum, Immigration, and Citizenship in the Struggle for the Soul of the New Germany. Yale Journal of International Law, 18, 155.
Katzenstein, P. (1987). Policy and politics in West Germany: The growth of a semisovereign state. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Korbmacher, H. (1987). Besteht auf dem Gebiet des Asyl- und Flüchtlingsrechts ein Bedarf an gesetzlicher Regelung? In W. Fürst (Ed.), Festschrift für Wolfgang Zeidler (pp. 901–918). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Mahnig, H. (2004). The politics of minority-majority relations: How immigrant policies developed in Paris, Berlin and Zurich. In R. Penninx, K. Kraal, M. Martiniello, & S. Vertovec (Eds.), Citizenship in European Cities: Immigrants, Local Politics and Integration Policies (pp. 17–37). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. (1996). European integration since the 1980s. State-centric versus multi-level governance. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 341–378.
Messina, A. (2007). The logics and politics of post-WWII migration to Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Migration, Sachverständigenrat deutscher Stiftungen für Integration und Migration. (2012). Integration im föderalen System: Bund, Länder und die Rolle der Kommunen. Jahresgutachten 2012 mit Integrationsbarometer. Berlin.
Motomura, H. (1994). Immigration, alienage, federalism and proposition 187. Virginia Journal of International Law, 35, 201–216.
Mushaben, J. M. (2008). The changing faces of citizenship: Social integration and political mobilization among ethnic minorities in Germany. New York: Berghahn.
Neuman, G. L. (1996). Strangers to the constitution: Immigrants, borders and fundamental law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Oeter, S. (2006). Federal Republic of Germany. In K. Le Roy & C. Saunders (Eds.), Legislative, executive, and judicial governance in federal countries (pp. 135–164, A Global Dialogue on Federalism, Vol. 3). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s.
Penninx, R., Kraal, K., Martiniello, M., & Vertovec, S. (Eds.). (2004). Citizenship in European cities: Immigrants, Local politics and integration policies (Research in migration and ethnic relations). Aldershot: Ashgate.
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Provine, M., & Varsanyi, M. W. (2012). Scaled down: Perspectives on state and local creation and enforcement of immigration law: Introduction to the special issue of law & policy. Law & Policy, 34(2), 105–112.
Scharpf, F. W. (1988). The joint-decision trap: Lessons from German federalism and European integration. Public Administration, 66(Autumn), 239–278.
Schmitter Heisler, B. (2008). Local authority responses to immigrants: The German case. In L. M. Hanley, B. A. Ruble, & A. M. Garland (Eds.), Immigration and integration in urban communities: Renegotiating the city (pp. 237–267). Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Centre Press.
Schönwälder, K. (2003). Zukunftsblindheit oder Steuerversagen? Zur Ausländerpolitik der Bundesregierungen der 1960iger und frühen 1970iger Jahre. In J. Oltmer (Ed.), Migration Steuern und Verwalten. Deutschland vom späten 19. Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart (pp. 123–144). Göttingen: IMIS-Schriften.
Schuster, L. (2003). The use and abuse of political asylum in Britain and Germany. London: Frank Cass.
Shachar, A. (2006). Race for talent: Highly skilled migrants and competitive immigration regimes. New York University Law Review, 81, 148–206.
Spiro, P. J. (2001). Federalism and immigration: Models and trends. International Social Science Journal, 53, 67–73.
Thränhardt, D. (2001). Integrationspolitik in föderalistischen Systemen. In L. Akgün & D. Thränhardt (Eds.), Integrationspolitik in föderalistischen Systemen. Jahrbuch Migration—Yearbook Migration 2000/2001 (pp. 15–34). Münster: LIT.
Triadafilopoulos, T., & Schönwälder, K. (2006). How the Federal Republic became an immigration country: Norms, politics and the failure of West Germany’s guest worker system. German Politics and Society, 24(80), 1.
Tsebelis, G. (1995). Decision making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science, 25(3), 289–325.
Varsanyi, M. W. (2008). Rescaling the “Alien,” rescaled personhood: Neoliberalism, immigration and the state. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(4), 877–896.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Sasha Baglay, Delphine Nakache and Rob Mauchel for their patience and editorial feedback. I also owe sincere thanks to Virginie Guiraudon, Erin Fielding Delaney and Galya Ruffer for their questions and thoughtful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Soennecken, D. (2014). Germany and the Janus Face of Immigration Federalism: Devolution vs. Centralization. In: Baglay, S., Nakache, D. (eds) Immigration Regulation in Federal States. International Perspectives on Migration, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8604-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8604-1_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-8603-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-8604-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)