放宽法律要求对归化意图的因果影响

IF 3.3 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Social Forces Pub Date : 2024-12-10 DOI:10.1093/sf/soae170
Yuliya Kosyakova, Andreas Damelang
{"title":"放宽法律要求对归化意图的因果影响","authors":"Yuliya Kosyakova, Andreas Damelang","doi":"10.1093/sf/soae170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the multifaceted factors influencing immigrants’ naturalization intentions, with a primary focus on legal requirements and the implementation of naturalization laws. It distinguishes between different groups of non-citizens, such as refugees, European Union (EU) citizens, and non-EU citizens. Employing a vignette experiment among non-citizens in a large-scale representative data in Germany—the German Socioeconomic Panel (in 2022), the IAB-SOEP Migration Sample (in 2022), and the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Survey of Refugees in Germany (in 2021) (Total N = 6431)—the research empirically analyzes the effects of liberalizing legal requirements and the effects of more inclusive naturalization procedure on intentions to acquire German citizenship. This comparison, both for current versus liberalized requirements and less versus more inclusive naturalization procedures, offers a realistic scenario of how liberalization and inclusiveness impact naturalization intentions. The results reveal that liberalizing legal requirements, specifically dual citizenship availability and reduced waiting period, has a positive effect on naturalization intentions. Simultaneously, these effects differ between the three groups of non-citizens, particularly due to differences in the perceived benefits of naturalization. In contrast, a more inclusive naturalization procedure does not affect non-citizens’ naturalization intentions. These results underline the importance of citizenship policy for the naturalization intentions of non-citizens. However, the results also show nuanced reactions to liberalized requirements stressing the importance of group-specific cost–benefit considerations.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The causal effect of liberalizing legal requirements on naturalization intentions\",\"authors\":\"Yuliya Kosyakova, Andreas Damelang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/sf/soae170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigates the multifaceted factors influencing immigrants’ naturalization intentions, with a primary focus on legal requirements and the implementation of naturalization laws. It distinguishes between different groups of non-citizens, such as refugees, European Union (EU) citizens, and non-EU citizens. Employing a vignette experiment among non-citizens in a large-scale representative data in Germany—the German Socioeconomic Panel (in 2022), the IAB-SOEP Migration Sample (in 2022), and the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Survey of Refugees in Germany (in 2021) (Total N = 6431)—the research empirically analyzes the effects of liberalizing legal requirements and the effects of more inclusive naturalization procedure on intentions to acquire German citizenship. This comparison, both for current versus liberalized requirements and less versus more inclusive naturalization procedures, offers a realistic scenario of how liberalization and inclusiveness impact naturalization intentions. The results reveal that liberalizing legal requirements, specifically dual citizenship availability and reduced waiting period, has a positive effect on naturalization intentions. Simultaneously, these effects differ between the three groups of non-citizens, particularly due to differences in the perceived benefits of naturalization. In contrast, a more inclusive naturalization procedure does not affect non-citizens’ naturalization intentions. These results underline the importance of citizenship policy for the naturalization intentions of non-citizens. However, the results also show nuanced reactions to liberalized requirements stressing the importance of group-specific cost–benefit considerations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Forces\",\"volume\":\"81 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Forces\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soae170\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Forces","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soae170","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了影响移民入籍意愿的多方面因素,主要关注法律要求和入籍法的实施。它区分了不同的非公民群体,如难民、欧盟公民和非欧盟公民。通过在德国大规模代表性数据——德国社会经济小组(2022年)、IAB-SOEP移民样本(2022年)和IAB-BAMF-SOEP德国难民调查(2021年)——中对非公民进行小插图实验,研究实证分析了放宽法律要求的影响,以及更具包容性的入籍程序对获得德国公民身份意愿的影响。这种比较,既包括当前与自由化的要求,也包括更少与更包容的入籍程序,提供了一个现实的场景,说明自由化和包容性如何影响入籍意图。结果表明,放宽法律要求,特别是双重国籍的可获得性和减少等待时间,对入籍意愿有积极影响。同时,这些影响在三种非公民群体之间有所不同,特别是由于对入籍好处的看法不同。相比之下,更具包容性的入籍程序并不影响非公民的入籍意图。这些结果强调了公民政策对非公民入籍意愿的重要性。然而,结果也显示了对自由化要求的微妙反应,强调了特定群体成本效益考虑的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The causal effect of liberalizing legal requirements on naturalization intentions
This study investigates the multifaceted factors influencing immigrants’ naturalization intentions, with a primary focus on legal requirements and the implementation of naturalization laws. It distinguishes between different groups of non-citizens, such as refugees, European Union (EU) citizens, and non-EU citizens. Employing a vignette experiment among non-citizens in a large-scale representative data in Germany—the German Socioeconomic Panel (in 2022), the IAB-SOEP Migration Sample (in 2022), and the IAB-BAMF-SOEP Survey of Refugees in Germany (in 2021) (Total N = 6431)—the research empirically analyzes the effects of liberalizing legal requirements and the effects of more inclusive naturalization procedure on intentions to acquire German citizenship. This comparison, both for current versus liberalized requirements and less versus more inclusive naturalization procedures, offers a realistic scenario of how liberalization and inclusiveness impact naturalization intentions. The results reveal that liberalizing legal requirements, specifically dual citizenship availability and reduced waiting period, has a positive effect on naturalization intentions. Simultaneously, these effects differ between the three groups of non-citizens, particularly due to differences in the perceived benefits of naturalization. In contrast, a more inclusive naturalization procedure does not affect non-citizens’ naturalization intentions. These results underline the importance of citizenship policy for the naturalization intentions of non-citizens. However, the results also show nuanced reactions to liberalized requirements stressing the importance of group-specific cost–benefit considerations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Forces
Social Forces SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: Established in 1922, Social Forces is recognized as a global leader among social research journals. Social Forces publishes articles of interest to a general social science audience and emphasizes cutting-edge sociological inquiry as well as explores realms the discipline shares with psychology, anthropology, political science, history, and economics. Social Forces is published by Oxford University Press in partnership with the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信