96 Chapter 5 5.1 Introduction Since the 2004 expansion of the European Union (EU) and the two following rounds of enlargement in 2007 and 2013, mobility around the EU has increased considerably in a relatively short period of time. Between 2003 and 2016, the percentage of EU citizens living in an EU Member State other than the one they were born in has almost tripled from 1.3 to 3.8 percent of the EU-28 population (Cappelen & Peters, 2018; Eurostat, 2016). The total foreign-born figure across the EU in 2016 was 10.7 percent up from 8.6 percent in 2005 (Eurostat, 2016; Münz, 2006) indicating that much of the overall growth can be accounted for by increasing intra-EU mobility. However, these averages mask the considerable heterogeneity across Member States. For example, nearly half of Luxembourg’s population is foreign-born, whilst Poland’s foreign-born make up less than two percent of the total population. Moreover, most of those foreign-born in Luxembourg are made up of other EU citizens, while for Sweden and the United Kingdom the majority of immigration is made up by non-EU nationals (Eurostat, 2016). These developments in intra-EU mobility are important because a number of scholars have argued that increasing immigration and ethnic diversity undermines the societal legitimacy and sustainability of the welfare state (Alesina, Glaeser, & Sacerdote, 2001; van Oorschot, 2008). As Freeman puts it “the individuals who agree to share according to need have to experience a sense of solidarity that comes from common membership in some human community” (Freeman, 1986, p.52). This anti-solidarity hypothesis, the notion that generous welfare states are challenged by immigration because it erodes the sense of solidarity between citizens, has been largely based on results from the US context and generalised to the European one. However, more recent literature has not necessarily found this to be the case and in certain instances found the opposite effect could also be possible (Fenwick, 2019; Gaston & Rajaguru, 2013). Hence, scholars have started to look to other mechanisms, such as the compensation hypothesis, cultural threat, and welfare chauvinism, to explain the effects noted in Europe (Burgoon, Koster & van Egmond, 2012; Cappelen & Peters, 2017; Heath & Richards, 2020; Lipsmeyer, Philips & Whitten, 2017; Negash & Van Vliet, 2024; Walter, 2017). This paper seeks to complement that literature through exploring the validity of the compensation hypothesis as an explanation for how immigration, in particular Central and Eastern European labour mobility, might have altered support for the welfare state in European countries traditionally on the receiving end of immigration. It focuses on redistributive preferences in light of deepening and widening EU mobility and consequently furthering understanding on the processes that can lead to the adjustment of EU welfare systems. Moreover, this paper sits within the broader literature
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw