Privatization in Israeli Integration Policy: When Zionism Meets Neoliberalism

  • Ilana Shpaizman


This chapter demonstrates changes in state responsibility for the integration of Jewish immigrants from 1989 to 2017. It shows that the dynamic is not linear, and includes both an increase and a decrease in state responsibility. Specifically, during the 1990s the state decreased its responsibility for the funding and production of services for most immigrants, but at the same time it increased its responsibility for the funding and provision of services for the weaker immigrants. From the mid-2000s, as integration services for most immigrants continued to erode, the state increased the funding and guidance provided to the wealthy and skilled immigrants. Shpaizman argues that this nonlinear dynamic is explained by the combination of the Zionist idea of gathering the exiles and the neoliberal perception of immigration as means of economic growth.


  1. Arat-Koc, S. 1999. Neo-Liberalism, State Restructuring and Immigration: Changes in Canadian Policies in the 1990’s. Journal of Canadian Studies 34 (2): 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Béland, D. 2005. Ideas and Social Policy: An Institutionalist Perspective. Social Policy and Administration 39 (1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Béland, Daniel. 2007. Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift. Social Science Quarterly 88 (1): 20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Béland, D., and R.H. Cox (eds.). 2011. Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berman, S. 1998. The Social Democratic Moment: Ideas and Politics in the Making of Interwar Europe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 2013. Ideational Theorizing in the Social Sciences Since ‘Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State.’ Governance 26 (2): 217–237.Google Scholar
  7. Borukhov, E. 1998. Immigrant Housing and Its Impact on the Construction Industry. In Profile of an Immigration Wave: The Absorption Process of Immigrants from the Former Soviet Union, 1990–1995, ed. E. Leshem and M. Sicron, 207–231. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University.Google Scholar
  8. Bruquetas-Callejo, M., B. Garces-Mascarenas, R. Penninx, and P.W.A. Sholten. 2007. Policy Making Related to Immigration and Integration: The Dutch Case—A Policy Analysis. Working Paper 15. IMISCOE.
  9. Campbell, J.L. 1998. Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy. Theory and Society 27 (3): 377–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke, J. 2004. Dissolving the Public Realm? The Logics and Limits of Neo-Liberalism. Journal of Social Policy 33 (1): 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cox, R.H. 2004. The Path-Dependency of an Idea: Why Scandinavian Welfare States Remain Distinct. Social Policy and Administration 38 (2): 204–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Della Pergola, Sergio. 2010. World Jewish Population. 2010. 2. World Jewish Population Reports. Jerusalem, CT: Mandell L. Berman Institute—North American Jewish Data Bank.
  13. Doron, A., and H.J. Kargar. 1993. The Politics of Immigration Policy in Israel. International Migration 31 (4): 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gal, J. 2008. Immigration and the Categorical Welfare State in Israel. Social Service Review 82 (4): 639–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gal, J., and E. Leshem. 2000. Examining Changes in Settlement Policies for Immigrants: The Israeli Case. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 2 (2): 235–255.Google Scholar
  17. Gilbert, N. 2002. Transformation of the Welfare State: The Silent Surrender of Public Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hacohen, D. 2003. Immigrants in Turmoil: The Great Wave of Immigration to Israel and Its Absorption, 1948–1955. New York: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hall, Peter, A. 1993. Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics 25 (3): 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hammar, T. (ed.). 1985. European Immigration Policy: A Comparative Study. London and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Joppke, C. 2007. Beyond National Models: Civic Integration Policies for Immigrants in Western Europe. West European Politics 30 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Joppke, C., and Z. Rosenhek. 2003. Contesting Ethnic Immigration: Germany and Israel Compared. European Journal of Sociology 43 (3): 301–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kuisma, Mikko. 2013. Understanding Welfare Crisis: The Role of Ideas. Public Administration 91 (4): 797–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leshem, E. 1986. Master Plan for Immigration Absorption. Jerusalem: Ministry of Immigration and Absorption.Google Scholar
  25. Mahroum, S. 2005. The International Policies of Brain Gain: A Review. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 17 (2): 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. March, J.G., and J.P. Olsen. 2004. The Logic of Appropriateness. Arena—Centre for European Studies WP 04/09: 1–28.Google Scholar
  27. Mashal, S. 1971. The Absorption Administration in Israel 1964–1970. Jerusalem: Academon.Google Scholar
  28. Mehta, J. 2011. The Varied Roles of Ideas in Politics. In Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research, ed. D. Béland and R.H. Cox, 1–46. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Ministry of Immigrant Absorption. 1995. Regulation No. 4.063: Grants to Immigrants in Need. Retrieved from
  30. Ministry of Immigrant Absorption. 2010. Regulation No. 305: Immigration 2010. Retrieved from
  31. Paz-Fuchs, A. 2007. Welfare to Work: Conditional Rights in Social Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Prime Minister Office. 1993. Government Decision 1886: Entitlement Criteria for Public Housing for Immigrants. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  33. Prime Minister Office. 1998. Government Decision 3818: Extension of the Entitlement Period in Employment Assistance for Immigrants. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  34. Prime Minister Office. 1999a. Government Decision 4694: Second Chance for Hebrew Studies. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  35. Prime Minister Office. 1999b. Government Decision 4695: Entitlement Period for Hebrew Studies. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  36. Prime Minister Office. 2001a. Government Decision 166: Extension of the Entitlement Period in Entrepreneurship and Employment Assistance. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  37. Prime Minister Office. 2001b. Government Decision 243: Extension of the Entitlement Period in Housing for Immigrants. Jerusalem: Prime Minister Office archive.Google Scholar
  38. Savas, E.S. 2000. Privatization and Public–Private Partnerships. New York: Chatham House.Google Scholar
  39. Schmidt, R. 2007. Comparing Federal Government Immigrant Settlement Policies in Canada and the United States. American Review of Canadian Studies 37 (1): 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schmidt, V.A. 2008. Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse. Political Science 11 (1): 303–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. ———. 2011. Speaking of Change: Why Discourse is Key to the Dynamics of Policy Transformation. Critical Policy Studies 5 (2): 106–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shachar, Ayelet. 2006. The Race for Talent: Highly Skilled Migrants and Competitive Immigration Regimes. New York University Law Review 81: 148–206. Google Scholar
  43. Starr, P. 1989. The Meaning of Privatization. In Privatization and the Welfare State, ed. S.B. Kamerman and A.J. Kahn, 15–48. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ilana Shpaizman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political StudiesBar Ilan UniversityRamat GanIsrael

Personalised recommendations