Free movement, the welfare state, and the European Union's over‐constitutionalization: Administrating contradictions

Blauberger, Michael; Schmidt, Susanne K.

doi:10.1111/padm.12313

Cited by 22 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We investigate to what extent these benefits have been resilient in the face of Europeanisation pressures and how distinct national political and institutional conditions have contributed to different responses (Martinsen and Vollaard, 2014;Treib 2014). We go beyond formal national policy change, which cannot capture the full range of welfare state responses to EU free movement (Blauberger and Schmidt 2017;Versluis 2007), and also include the practical implementation of EU law in our analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to free movement: quarantining mobile union citizens in European welfare states

Kramer

Thierry

Hooren

2018

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is often held that free movement within the European Union and the expansion of social rights of mobile citizens by the European Court of Justice place national welfare states under pressure, potentially leading to welfare retrenchment. Yet thorough empirical investigation of this claim has been surprisingly limited. In this article, we distinguish three possible responses to such pressures: 'embedding', the inclusion of Union citizens in the welfare system; 'quarantining', restrictive measures excluding mobile Union citizens; and 'retrenchment', general cutbacks in benefit programmes. Through a longitudinal comparative case study of generous non-contributory welfare benefits in Denmark and the Netherlands, we find general welfare retrenchment in response to Europeanisation strikingly limited. Instead, welfare states remain resilient by creatively quarantining mobile Union citizens from the coverage of social benefits. Legal cultures and degrees of politicization are important factors, shaping the pathways towards these creative but exclusionary responses.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responding to free movement: quarantining mobile union citizens in European welfare states

Kramer

Thierry

Hooren

2018

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of policy relevance, this article confirms that ECJ case law is a burden for national administrations in terms of workload, as Blauberger and Schmidt already highlighted. According to earlier ECJ case law, administrations would need to apply broad principles and carry out case‐by‐case assessments (Blauberger and Schmidt, ). Conducting individual assessments, at least without fixed criteria, is hardly feasible for administrations that have to deal with a flood of procedures given their limited administrative resources.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crucial element of ECJ case law is that it is ‘very detailed and indeterminate at the same time’ (Blauberger and Schmidt, , p. 440). The implications for the specific case at issue are clear but not its broader implications.…”

Section: The Legal Framework: Ecj Case Law On Eu Social Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Social Citizenship’ at the Street Level? EU Member State Administrations Setting a Firewall

Heindlmaier

2020

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

European integration, and especially the European Court of Justice, has challenged the national character of social rights; the latter have become increasingly transnational. This contribution examines the impact of the Court at the street level. It analyses how Member State administrations handle the social rights of mobile EU citizens in practice in case they are granted discretion. Therefore, a framework of shades of compliance is developed that captures Member State responses to EU law beyond the dichotomy of compliance and non‐compliance. I argue that Member State administrations tend to make the access to social benefits difficult. Still, there may be differences in the shade of compliance on the ground. Surprisingly, these differences cannot be explained by the party‐political environment but depend to a high degree on exposedness. The claim is empirically supported by a comparative study of Austrian welfare (and migration) administrations' practices.

show abstract

“…For instance, in Belgium residence permits were withdrawn from unemployed EU citizens, who were considered to represent an unreasonable burden on the public purse. These measures were often supported by the European Court of Justice which moved towards a narrower interpretation of free movement rights (Blauberger and Schmidt, ; see also Barbulescu and Favell, this issue).…”

Section: Mobilities and Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Special Issue Introduction: Exploring the Lived Experiences of Intra‐EU Mobility in an Era of Complex Economic and Political Change

King

Pratsinakis

2020

International Migration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces the special issue on 'Intra-EU mobilities in times of crisis'. Intra-EU mobility has emerged as an ambivalent phenomenon. On the one hand, EU-wide opinion polls still depict freedom of movement as the most positive aspect of European integration. On the other hand, with nationalism and xenophobia on the rise, migration and mobility are increasingly problematized and challenged. Shifting attention from the master narratives about intra-EU mobility, the aim of the special issue is to bring to the fore the lived experiences of the key actors as recounted in a period of multiple European crises which, in turn, represent the visible and mediatized manifestations of more complex and deep-seated processes of political and economic change. Here we provide a chronological periodization of intra-EU mobility trends over recent decades and how they intersect with major geopolitical events, aiming to contextualise the special issue articles which are then presented.

show abstract

Free movement, the welfare state, and the European Union's over‐constitutionalization: Administrating contradictions

Cited by 22 publications

References 32 publications

Responding to free movement: quarantining mobile union citizens in European welfare states

Responding to free movement: quarantining mobile union citizens in European welfare states

‘Social Citizenship’ at the Street Level? EU Member State Administrations Setting a Firewall

Special Issue Introduction: Exploring the Lived Experiences of Intra‐EU Mobility in an Era of Complex Economic and Political Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About