Intra-EU Labour Mobility and the Welfare State 73 (governments reduce the tax burdens of domestic producers in light of international competition and the resulting budgetary pressure leads to reductions in social protection) or the compensation hypothesis (individuals demand compensation for the increased risks incurred by economic openness) (Rodrik, 1998; Swank & Steinmo, 2002). However, Iversen and Cusack (2000) reason that deindustrialisation rather than globalisation leads to economic insecurity and subsequently demand for greater compensation. We account for both globalisation and deindustrialisation in our model and expect that globalisation will have a larger influence because the sample covers the time period 2004-2013 when large-scale deindustrialisation is no longer prominent in Europe, but the economies of several countries become increasingly more open. Second, domestic political and institutional factors are also expected to play a role. It is generally thought that left-wing governments favour more generous social protection programmes than governments that lean to the right (Allan & Scruggs, 2004). While this has been debated (Pierson, 1996), recent work shows that partisan theory is still often relevant (Swank, 2020). Similarly, strong trade unions are expected to be positively associated with welfare state effort as they tend to be key supporters of social insurance programmes (Afonso et al., 2020; Rueda, 2007; van Vliet & Wang, 2019). Finally, socioeconomic conditions such as the level of unemployment or GDP of a country are likely to affect the demand for social protection and a country’s ability to provide extensive social protection schemes. 4.3 Data and Methods 4.3.1 Sample The sample includes 16 European countries: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom (UK). Thus, the study includes the original EU15, plus Switzerland for the time period 2004-2017 during which the UK was still a member of the EU. The sample was selected because these states have experienced inflows of intra-EU labour migration and have well-established welfare states. Furthermore, the sample sizes that the created migration indicators are based on are large enough to be considered representative in these countries. Switzerland is included because it is a member of the Schengen Area, has a comparable economy and welfare state to the EU15, and is traditionally considered a country of immigration.10 In the ideal case, our sample would 10 Under these criteria, we would have included Norway – however, the country was withheld from EU-LFS data on the grounds that the data on migrants in Norway is unreliable due to a large number of non-responses.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw