Migration is one of the most vexing policy issues of our time. In this Handbook the editors have assembled an all-star cast of scholars to look at the many dimensions of migration policy. The book breaks new ground and it will be required reading for anyone seriously interested in how and why states seek to control the movement of people across borders.' - James F. Hollifield, Southern Methodist University, USIn this comprehensive Handbook, an interdisciplinary team of distinguished scholars from the social sciences explores the connections between migration and social policy. They test conflicting claims as to the positive and negative effects of different types of migration against the experience of countries in Europe, North America, Australasia, the Middle East and South Asia, assessing arguments as to migration s impact on the financial, social and political stability and sustainability of social programs. The volume reflects the authors' curiosity about the controversy over the connection between social and cultural diversity and popular support for the welfare state. Providing timely and original chapters which both critique the existing literature as well as build on and advance theoretical understanding, the authors focus on the formal settlement and integration polices created for migrants as well as corollary state policies affecting migrants and migration. A clutch of chapters investigates the linkage between migration and trade theory, foreign direct investment, globalization, public opinion, public education and welfare programs. Chapters then deal with leading receiving states as well as India and the authors examine the regulation of migration at the subnational, national, regional and global levels. The topic of migration and security is also covered. This compelling and exhaustive review of existing scholarship and state-of-the-art original empirical analysis is essential reading for graduates and academics researching the field. Contributors include: C. Boswell, M.L. Crepaz, T. Eule, G. Facchini, G.P. Freeman, A. Geddes, K.M. Greenhill, L. Hadj-Abdou, A. Harell, M. Helbling, P. Ireland, S. Iyengar, T. Janoski, C. Joppke, G. Lahav, D. Leblang, S. Lockhart, L. Lucassen, A.M. Mayda, M. Medina, A.M. Messina, N. Mirilovic, J. Money, E. Murard, F. Ortega, A. Perliger, F. Peters, M.E. Peters, S.I. Rajan, M. Ruhs, D. Sainsbury, I. Shpaizman, S. Soroka, R. Tanaka, M. Vink, S. Western, C.F. Wright

Immigration policy in the United States, Europe, and the Commonwealth went under the microscope after the terror attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent events in London, Madrid, and elsewhere. We have since seen major changes in the bureaucracies that regulate immigrationa "but have those institutional dynamics led to significant changes in the way borders are controlled, the numbers of immigrants allowed to enter, or national asylum policies? This book examines a broad range of issues and cases in order to better understand if, how, and why immigration policies and practices have changed in these countries in response to the threat of terrorism. In a thorough analysis of border policies, the authors also address how an intensification of immigration politics can have severe consequences for the social and economic circumstances of national minorities of immigrant origin.

Although ambivalence characterizes the stance of scholars toward the desirability of close opinion-policy linkages in general, it is especially evident with regard to immigration. The controversy and disagreement about whether public opinion should drive immigration policy are among the factors making immigration one of the most difficult political debates across the West. Leading international experts and aspiring researchers from the fields of political science and sociology use a range of case studies from North America, Europe and Australia to guide the reader through the complexities of this debate offering an unprecedented comparative examination of public opinion and immigration. part one discusses the socio-economic and contextual determinants of immigration attitudes across multiple nations part two explores how the economy can affect public opinion part three presents different perspectives on the issue of causality - do attitudes about immigration drive politics, or do politics drive attitudes? part four investigates how several types of framing are critical to understanding public opinion and how a wide range of political factors can mould public opinion, and often in ways that work against immigration and immigrants part five examines the views of the largest immigrant group in the U.S. - Latinos - as well as how opinions are shaped by contact with and opinions about immigrants in the U.S. and Canada. An essential read to all who wish to understand the nature of immigration research from a theoretical as well as practical point of view.

Although ambivalence characterizes the stance of scholars toward the desirability of close opinion-policy linkages in general, it is especially evident with regard to immigration. The controversy and disagreement about whether public opinion should drive immigration policy are among the factors making immigration one of the most difficult political debates across the West. Leading international experts and aspiring researchers from the fields of political science and sociology use a range of case studies from North America, Europe and Australia to guide the reader through the complexities of this debate offering an unprecedented comparative examination of public opinion and immigration. part one discusses the socio-economic and contextual determinants of immigration attitudes across multiple nations part two explores how the economy can affect public opinion part three presents different perspectives on the issue of causality - do attitudes about immigration drive politics, or do politics drive attitudes? part four investigates how several types of framing are critical to understanding public opinion and how a wide range of political factors can mould public opinion, and often in ways that work against immigration and immigrants part five examines the views of the largest immigrant group in the U.S. - Latinos - as well as how opinions are shaped by contact with and opinions about immigrants in the U.S. and Canada. An essential read to all who wish to understand the nature of immigration research from a theoretical as well as practical point of view.

Immigration policy in the United States, Europe, and the Commonwealth went under the microscope after the terror attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent events in London, Madrid, and elsewhere. We have since seen major changes in the bureaucracies that regulate immigrationa "but have those institutional dynamics led to significant changes in the way borders are controlled, the numbers of immigrants allowed to enter, or national asylum policies? This book examines a broad range of issues and cases in order to better understand if, how, and why immigration policies and practices have changed in these countries in response to the threat of terrorism. In a thorough analysis of border policies, the authors also address how an intensification of immigration politics can have severe consequences for the social and economic circumstances of national minorities of immigrant origin.

In order to describe how the elites in two political systems grappled with the potentially explosive influx of foreign labor, Gary Freeman analyzes and compares the ways in which the British and the French governments responded to immigration and racial conflict over a thirty-year period during the post-war era. In addition to comparing the policy records of the two countries, the author focuses on the process by which political and social phenomena become defined as public problems and how alternative responses to these problems are generated. His broader aim is to provide a standpoint from which to evaluate the more general problem-solving capability of the political systems under consideration. Professor Freeman finds that by 1975 both Britain and France had instituted tightly controlled, racially discriminatory, temporary contract-labor systems. Despite this basic similarity, however, he notes three distinctions between the two cases: while the French attempted to adapt immigration to their economic needs, the British failed to seize this opportunity; while the British moved toward an elaborate race relations structure, the French relied on criminal law and the economic self-interest of the worker to prevent outbreaks of racial violence; and the British were much more affected than the French by fears of immigration and racial conflict. Originally published in 1979. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

In order to describe how the elites in two political systems grappled with the potentially explosive influx of foreign labor, Gary Freeman analyzes and compares the ways in which the British and the French governments responded to immigration and racial conflict over a thirty-year period during the post-war era. In addition to comparing the policy records of the two countries, the author focuses on the process by which political and social phenomena become defined as public problems and how alternative responses to these problems are generated. His broader aim is to provide a standpoint from which to evaluate the more general problem-solving capability of the political systems under consideration. Professor Freeman finds that by 1975 both Britain and France had instituted tightly controlled, racially discriminatory, temporary contract-labor systems. Despite this basic similarity, however, he notes three distinctions between the two cases: while the French attempted to adapt immigration to their economic needs, the British failed to seize this opportunity; while the British moved toward an elaborate race relations structure, the French relied on criminal law and the economic self-interest of the worker to prevent outbreaks of racial violence; and the British were much more affected than the French by fears of immigration and racial conflict. Originally published in 1979. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.