‘Some are more equal than others’: economic egalitarianism and welfare chauvinism in the Netherlands

Abstract

Various studies have demonstrated that while the lower educated support economic redistribution more than the higher educated do, they nonetheless dislike welfare support for immigrants more strongly. This paper aims to explain this remarkably particularistic application of the principle of economic egalitarianism (‘welfare chauvinism’) by testing three theories by means of survey data representative of the Dutch population ( N = 1972). The first theory asserts that the low level of political competence of the lower educated is responsible, the second focuses on their weak economic position, and the third claims that their limited amount of cultural capital is decisive. Only the latter explanation is confirmed and implications for debates about ethnocentrism, deservingness and welfare state legitimacy, as well as the ideological profile of the lower-educated working class are discussed.

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

“…This suggestion is substantiated by our control variables at the individual level: neither unemployment nor welfare dependency has any effect whatsoever, indicating that welfare chauvinism is not inspired by ethnic competition over scare welfare resources (cf. Van der Waal et al 2010). In short, neither a cultural nor an economic non-institutional theory of welfare chauvinism seems to be able to provide an alternative explanation for the existence of two worlds of welfare chauvinism.…”

“…Their label, "welfare chauvinism", has become the standard term for the opinion that immigrants are less entitled to welfare benefits and services than the native population (cf. Van der Waal et al 2010;Mewes and Mau 2012;Reeskens and Van Oorschot 2012;De Koster et al 2013). 1 In the light of Larsen's formulation of institutional theory, this raises the question of whether three worlds of welfare chauvinism can be distinguished: are the native populations of liberal welfare states most reluctant to distribute welfare benefits and services to immigrants, followed by natives living in conservative welfare states, while those living under social-democratic regimes are most willing to do so?…”

Disentangling the ‘New Liberal Dilemma’: On the relation between general welfare redistribution preferences and welfare chauvinism

“…3 However, one's perception of immigrants as less deserving does not necessarily imply a desire to categorically exclude them from social welfare provisions. Recent studies (Mewes and Mau, 2012;van der Waal et al, 2010van der Waal et al, , 2011 on European opinions about the timing of and the conditions under which newcomers can make appeal to welfare state provisions find that only a small proportion of Europeans wants to take this step. A larger proportion of Europeans favors granting immigrants social welfare rights, but only after they acquire citizenship or after they made significant tax contributions.…”

“…To assess the unique association between general welfare redistribution preferences and specific attitudes about immigrant access to welfare provisions, we control for a number of variables previously shown to be related to welfare chauvinism and to attitudes towards immigrants (Gorodzeisky and Semyonov, 2009;Mewes and Mau, 2012;van der Waal et al, 2010). The first is age, with the expectation that elderly place higher barriers against immigrants' access to welfare provisions.…”

Does Immigration Undermine Public Support for Social Policy?

“…Welfare chauvinism occurs when public support for social policy extends only to programs for co-ethnics and citizens (Kitschelt 1995;Mewes and Mau 2012;Van der Waal et al 2010). Public support is expected to be lower for programs perceived as open to all (including immigrants) or particularly beneficial for immigrants.…”