IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v21y2020i1p43-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How public discourse affects attitudes towards Freedom of Movement and Schengen

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Karstens

Abstract

Regulating migration is currently one of the most salient issues in Europe. So far, research has overlooked how this politicisation affects attitudes towards migration regimes. This article links the literatures on public opinion and framing effects from a comparative European perspective and presents original data from representative EU-wide vignette experiments conducted in mid-December 2017 ( N  = 10.827). I show that framing Schengen as a threat to public security or national identity weakens support for the status quo inside Schengen and reaffirms it amongst Schengen outsiders. Regarding Freedom of Movement only negative frames, particularly those referring to labour market risks, have a significant impact. Given the weak public support in several EU member states, these findings have important implications for the future of European migration regimes.

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Karstens, 2020. "How public discourse affects attitudes towards Freedom of Movement and Schengen," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 43-63, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:21:y:2020:i:1:p:43-63
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116519874880
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116519874880
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116519874880?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grigorieff, Alexis & Roth, Christopher & Ubfal, Diego, 2016. "Does Information Change Attitudes Towards Immigrants? Representative Evidence from Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 10419, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Laura Cram, 2012. "Does the EU Need a Navel? Implicit and Explicit Identification with the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 71-86, January.
    3. Erica Owen & Stefanie Walter, 2017. "Open economy politics and Brexit: insights, puzzles, and ways forward," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 179-202, March.
    4. Grande, Edgar & Schwarzbözl, Tobias & Fatke, Matthias, 2019. "Politicizing immigration in Western Europe," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(10), pages 1444-1463.
    5. Michael M. Bechtel & Jens Hainmueller & Yotam Margalit, 2014. "Preferences for International Redistribution: The Divide over the Eurozone Bailouts," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 835-856, October.
    6. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    7. Sides, John & Citrin, Jack, 2007. "European Opinion About Immigration: The Role of Identities, Interests and Information," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 477-504, July.
    8. Rachid Azrout & Joost Van Spanje & Claes De Vreese, 2012. "When News Matters: Media Effects on Public Support for European Union Enlargement in 21 Countries," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(5), pages 691-708, September.
    9. Nelson, Thomas E. & Clawson, Rosalee A. & Oxley, Zoe M., 1997. "Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(3), pages 567-583, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aleksandra Sojka & Liisa Talving & Sofia Vasilopoulou, 2024. "Free to move, reluctant to share: Unequal opposition to transnational rights under the EU's free movement principle," European Union Politics, , vol. 25(2), pages 269-290, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Facchini, Giovanni & Margalit, Yotam & Nakata, Hiroyuki, 2022. "Countering public opposition to immigration: The impact of information campaigns," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    3. Fabian Wagner, 2021. "Zahl der Zuwanderer und religiösen Minderheiten wird systematisch überschätzt," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 28(04), pages 07-11, August.
    4. Bloemraad, Irene & Voss, Kim & Silva, Fabiana, 2014. "Framing the Immigrant Movement as about Rights, Family, or Economics: Which Appeals Resonate and for Whom?," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3b32w33p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    5. Dolls, Mathias, 2024. "An unemployment re-insurance scheme for the eurozone? Stabilizing and redistributive effects," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    6. Salomon, Katja, 2020. "Dynamics of immigrant resentment in Europe," Discussion Papers, Presidential Department P 2020-002, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    7. Sarah Ciaglia & Clemens Fuest & Friedrich Heinemann, 2018. "What a feeling?! How to promote ‘European Identity’," EconPol Policy Reports 9, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    8. Nicolò Conti & Danilo Di Mauro & Vincenzo Memoli, 2019. "Citizens, immigration and the EU as a shield," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 492-510, September.
    9. Katerina Linos & Kimberly Twist, 2016. "The Supreme Court, the Media, and Public Opinion: Comparing Experimental and Observational Methods," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 223-254.
    10. Cigdem Kentmen-Cin & Cengiz Erisen, 2017. "Anti-immigration attitudes and the opposition to European integration: A critical assessment," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(1), pages 3-25, March.
    11. Alberto Alesina & Armando Miano & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Immigration and Redistribution," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 1-39.
    12. Christoph Mikulaschek, 2023. "The responsive public: How European Union decisions shape public opinion on salient policies," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(4), pages 645-665, December.
    13. Mohamadian, Mehdi & Javdani, Mohsen & Heroux-Legault, Maxime, 2024. "Public Attitudes Towards Immigration in Canada: Decreased Support and Increased Political Polarization," IZA Policy Papers 211, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Marlène Gerber & André Bächtiger & Irena Fiket & Marco Steenbergen & Jürg Steiner, 2014. "Deliberative and non-deliberative persuasion: Mechanisms of opinion formation in EuroPolis," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 410-429, September.
    15. Junseop Shim & Chisung Park & Mark Wilding, 2015. "Identifying policy frames through semantic network analysis: an examination of nuclear energy policy across six countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 51-83, March.
    16. John Ahlquist & Mark Copelovitch & Stefanie Walter, 2020. "The Political Consequences of External Economic Shocks: Evidence from Poland," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 904-920, October.
    17. Lucio Baccaro & Björn Bremer & Erik Neimanns, 2021. "Till austerity do us part? A survey experiment on support for the euro in Italy," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 401-423, September.
    18. Baccaro, Lucio & Bremer, Björn & Neimanns, Erik, 2020. "Is the euro up for grabs? Evidence from a survey experiment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    19. Thomas J. Leeper, 2016. "How does treatment self-selection affect inferences about political communication?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67604, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Ilhom Abdulloev & Ira N Gang & Myeong-Su Yun, 2014. "Migration, Education and the Gender Gap in Labour Force Participation," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 26(4), pages 509-526, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:21:y:2020:i:1:p:43-63. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.