社会支出、贫困和移民:对24个中高收入民主国家福利国家有效性和诞生的系统分析

IF 1.8 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
A. Bostic, Allen Hyde
{"title":"社会支出、贫困和移民:对24个中高收入民主国家福利国家有效性和诞生的系统分析","authors":"A. Bostic, Allen Hyde","doi":"10.1177/23294965231169253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research has highlighted the disadvantaged position immigrants often face in the economy, particularly when it comes to labor market outcomes such as employment or earnings. Extending this literature, the present study evaluates the economic exclusion of immigrants, conceptualized not as labor market outcomes but as relative poverty. This study examines the relationship between welfare generosity and immigrant poverty across rich western democracies and compares this relationship with that of native poverty. One publicly held belief is that immigrants disproportionately benefit from welfare generosity, while the literature on welfare chauvinism suggests greater social spending may not necessarily benefit immigrants. Furthermore, the effects may vary by spending and immigrant type. This study uses the Luxembourg Income Study to consider differences in the effects of welfare generosity on the odds an immigrant or native household is poor, how this effect varies by the type of spending, and how the effect changes depending on factors such as region of origin or citizenship status. Using four waves of data circa 2004 to 2014 across 24 upper- and middle-income democracies, the results show some support for welfare chauvinism and advantages to being an intra-EU immigrant and citizen immigrant.","PeriodicalId":44139,"journal":{"name":"Social Currents","volume":"10 1","pages":"336 - 362"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Spending, Poverty, and Immigration: A Systematic Analysis of Welfare State Effectiveness and Nativity in 24 Upper- and Middle-Income Democracies\",\"authors\":\"A. Bostic, Allen Hyde\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23294965231169253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research has highlighted the disadvantaged position immigrants often face in the economy, particularly when it comes to labor market outcomes such as employment or earnings. Extending this literature, the present study evaluates the economic exclusion of immigrants, conceptualized not as labor market outcomes but as relative poverty. This study examines the relationship between welfare generosity and immigrant poverty across rich western democracies and compares this relationship with that of native poverty. One publicly held belief is that immigrants disproportionately benefit from welfare generosity, while the literature on welfare chauvinism suggests greater social spending may not necessarily benefit immigrants. Furthermore, the effects may vary by spending and immigrant type. This study uses the Luxembourg Income Study to consider differences in the effects of welfare generosity on the odds an immigrant or native household is poor, how this effect varies by the type of spending, and how the effect changes depending on factors such as region of origin or citizenship status. Using four waves of data circa 2004 to 2014 across 24 upper- and middle-income democracies, the results show some support for welfare chauvinism and advantages to being an intra-EU immigrant and citizen immigrant.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Currents\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"336 - 362\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Currents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965231169253\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965231169253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

先前的研究强调了移民在经济中经常面临的不利地位,特别是在就业或收入等劳动力市场结果方面。延伸这一文献,本研究评估了移民的经济排斥,其概念不是劳动力市场的结果,而是相对贫困。本研究考察了富裕的西方民主国家的福利慷慨与移民贫困之间的关系,并将这种关系与本土贫困进行了比较。一种公开持有的观点是,移民从慷慨的福利中获得了不成比例的好处,而有关福利沙文主义的文献表明,更多的社会支出可能不一定对移民有利。此外,影响可能因支出和移民类型而异。本研究使用卢森堡收入研究来考虑福利慷慨对移民或本地家庭贫穷几率的影响差异,这种影响如何随支出类型而变化,以及这种影响如何根据原籍地区或公民身份等因素而变化。利用2004年至2014年前后24个中高收入民主国家的四波数据,结果显示了对福利沙文主义的一些支持,以及作为欧盟内部移民和公民移民的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Social Spending, Poverty, and Immigration: A Systematic Analysis of Welfare State Effectiveness and Nativity in 24 Upper- and Middle-Income Democracies
Previous research has highlighted the disadvantaged position immigrants often face in the economy, particularly when it comes to labor market outcomes such as employment or earnings. Extending this literature, the present study evaluates the economic exclusion of immigrants, conceptualized not as labor market outcomes but as relative poverty. This study examines the relationship between welfare generosity and immigrant poverty across rich western democracies and compares this relationship with that of native poverty. One publicly held belief is that immigrants disproportionately benefit from welfare generosity, while the literature on welfare chauvinism suggests greater social spending may not necessarily benefit immigrants. Furthermore, the effects may vary by spending and immigrant type. This study uses the Luxembourg Income Study to consider differences in the effects of welfare generosity on the odds an immigrant or native household is poor, how this effect varies by the type of spending, and how the effect changes depending on factors such as region of origin or citizenship status. Using four waves of data circa 2004 to 2014 across 24 upper- and middle-income democracies, the results show some support for welfare chauvinism and advantages to being an intra-EU immigrant and citizen immigrant.
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 Currents
Social Currents SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Social Currents, the official journal of the Southern Sociological Society, is a broad-ranging social science journal that focuses on cutting-edge research from all methodological and theoretical orientations with implications for national and international sociological communities. The uniqueness of Social Currents lies in its format. The front end of every issue is devoted to short, theoretical, agenda-setting contributions and brief, empirical and policy-related pieces. The back end of every issue includes standard journal articles that cover topics within specific subfields of sociology, as well as across the social sciences more broadly.
×
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