New research suggests immigration affects public support for social redistribution differently depending on whether programs are universal or means-tested. This study employs survey experiments to demonstrate that while universal welfare mitigates negative perceptions of immigrants, targeted benefits increase hostility among natives.
Survey Experiment Design: The authors utilized randomized surveys with participants from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds in [Country/Countries Mentioned in Original Abstract if any]. Respondents were randomly exposed to different policy descriptions regarding immigration impact and selection criteria for aid.
Key Findings: Immigration concerns appear amplified by means-tested programs, which trigger identity politics among natives. Universal benefits, however, neutralize these concerns across all income groups.
Implications & Context: This research challenges previous contradictory findings about immigration's welfare-state effects. It shows policymakers how institutional design shapes public opinion on social spending during demographic change.
| Immigration and Support for Social Policy: An Experimental Comparison of Universal and Means-tested Programs was authored by Jordi Muñoz and Sergi Pardos-Prado. It was published by Cambridge in PSR&M in 2019. |
