CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 213Social Policy and Reform StudiesMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationEuropean Law and Migration

Three Worlds of Welfare Chauvinism? How Welfare Regimes Affect Support for Distributing Welfare to Immigrants in Europe

Open access
Van Der Waal, Jeroen, De Koster, Willem, Van Oorschot, Wim·2013·Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice
DOI 10.1080/13876988.2013.785147
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Analyzing the 2008 wave of the European Social Survey, this study assesses whether an elaborate institutional theory is able to explain why levels of welfare chauvinism differ among welfare regimes. As expected, native populations in liberal and conservative welfare regimes prove more reluctant to distributing welfare services to immigrants than those in social-democratic ones. Adding country-level data, it is demonstrated that neither differences in the selectivity nor differences in employment protection and unemployment levels can explain these varying levels of welfare chauvinism. Instead, regime differences in welfare chauvinism can be fully attributed to their differences in income inequality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13876988.2013.785147

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The pernicious effects of selective welfare on immigrants are diminished in more universalistic welfare states.

    “Various scholars have shown that this dynamic, and its pernicious effects on immigrants, is diminished in more universalistic welfare states (Van der Waal, De Koster & Van Oorschot, 2013; Larsen, 2006; Swank & Betz, 2003; Van Oorschot, 2000; Kumlin & Rothstein 2010; Rothstein 2015).”

    From Solidarity in diverse societies: beyond neoliberal multiculturalism and welfare chauvinism (2015) · cites this paper as Van der Waal, De Koster & Van Oorschot, 2013

    The Results report that more selective welfare regimes are associated with greater welfare chauvinism, and the section on selectivity proposes that universal regimes make it harder to mark immigrants out as undeserving. But the Conclusion and Discussion says selectivity did not explain the low welfare chauvinism found in social-democratic regimes. The claim therefore overstates the evidence that universalism diminishes selective welfare’s effects on immigrants. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Deservingness judgements are primed when the welfare state is organized on a more selective basis using means-tested benefits, which makes recipients more visible and invites debates about their deservingness.

    “We know that deservingness judgements are ' primed ' when the welfare state is organized on a more selective basis, using means-tested benefits, which makes recipients more visible, and invites -indeed almost requires -debates about their deservingness.”

    From Solidarity in diverse societies: beyond neoliberal multiculturalism and welfare chauvinism (2015) · cites this paper as Van der Waal, De Koster & Van Oorschot, 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Van Der Waal, J., De Koster, W., & Van Oorschot, W.
Venue
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2013-04
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
164-181
ISSN
  • 1387-6988 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-5448
DOI
10.1080/13876988.2013.785147
OpenAlex
W2061684363
Cited by
213
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
43.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Law › European Law and Migration
Keywords
welfare chauvinism, welfare regimes, immigrants, welfare distribution, institutional theory, income inequality, social democracy, employment protection, unemployment, European Social Survey

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review