Personal Contact with Refugees is Key to Welcoming Them: An Analysis of Politicians' and Citizens' Attitudes Towards Refugee Integration

Abstract

Politicians are influential both in directing policies about refugees and in framing public discourse about them. However, unlike other host country residents, politicians' attitudes towards refugees and integration are remarkably understudied. We therefore examine similarities and differences between politicians' attitudes towards refugee integration and those held by citizens. Based on the stereotype content model, we expect that political ideology informs stereotypes about refugees, which subsequently shape attitudes towards refugee integration. Based on the Contact Hypothesis, we further argue that personal contact with refugees reduces negative stereotypes about them—in particular for those endorsing a right‐wing ideology. We draw on data collected via two surveys with 905 politicians and 8013 citizens in the Netherlands to show that (1) unlike those with a left‐wing orientation, residents (i.e., both politicians and citizens) with a right‐wing orientation hold more negative stereotypes about refugees, which in turn relate to more negative attitudes towards refugee integration; (2) personal contact with refugees is associated with less negative stereotypes among residents; and (3) politicians, compared to citizens, report less negative stereotypes and more positive attitudes towards refugee integration. The practical implication of fostering residents' contact with refugees as well as the implications for future research are discussed.

Prolonged Contact Does Not Reshape Locals’ Attitudes toward Migrants in Wartime Settings

“…De-identified data files and code necessary to replicate the results in this article will be available at the following Dataverse repository: (link upon publication) Displaced 323. 6 Displaced 323. Figure S3 gives an overview of the displacement history among our migrant participants.…”

“…Public opinion surveys, for example, have identified a positive association between observational and self-reported contact and positive attitudes toward migrants [2][3][4][5][6]. These claims are vulnerable, however, to selection effects and social desirability bias (e.g.…”

“…Kandahar City, where the Vocational Training Centers (VTCs) were located and training conducted, was by far the most popular destination within Kandahar and one of the highest districts in all of Afghanistan, part of a broader pattern of rural to urban forced migration. 6 What drives negative attitudes toward migrants in Afghanistan? Locals view migrants as security threats, economic competitors in a tight labor market, and a strain on resources such as schools and housing.…”

“…Clearly, they don't want us to live beside 5 These include "returnee-IDPs," people who were refugees in Pakistan and Iran, but repatriated, often forcibly, back to Afghanistan and unable to return to their original homes [26,27]. 6 IOM-DTM Baseline Mobility Assessment (Round 7, Oct-Dec 2018). 7 Interview with VTC Director, December 2016.…”

Roomies for Life? An Assessment of How Staying with a Local Facilitates Refugee Integration

“…Furthermore, in being around and living with locals, it can also improve locals' integration attitudes and refugees' social bridges (cf. the contact hypothesis, Allport, 1954;Knappert et al, 2020) as well as language and cultural knowledge. However, staying with a local can also be invasive and intense for the refugee as well as the local.…”