Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:37:23.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptualisations of Welfare Deservingness by Polish Migrants in the UK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

DOROTA OSIPOVIČ
DOROTA OSIPOVIČ*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1H 9SH email: Dorota.Osipovic@lshtm.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The issue of reconciling ethnic diversity with the welfare state is a subject of long-standing theoretical debate. In particular, it remains unclear to what extent a shared national identity is necessary for endorsing claims to welfare at the individual and societal levels. Surveys show that migrants are seen as the least deserving category of welfare recipients. Yet migrants’ own views are rarely considered. Based on a qualitative study, this paper explores how Polish migrants residing in London conceptualised their deservingness to British welfare benefits and social housing. It finds a strong preference for conditionality of welfare predicated on contributions through work, payment of taxes and law abidance. Such conditionality applied to both in-group and out-group members thus transcending identity-based claims. These contributions were seen as both necessary and sufficient for laying claims to the British welfare system. Solely needs-based claims were seen as problematic.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 44 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 729 - 746
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banting, K. G. (2005), ‘The multicultural welfare state: international experience and North American Narratives’, Social Policy and Administration, 39: 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banting, K. G. and Kymlicka, W. (2006), ‘Introduction – multiculturalism and the welfare state: setting the context’, in K. Banting, G. and Kymlicka, W. (eds.), Multiculturalism and the Welfare State: Recognition and Redistribution in Contemporary Democracies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauböck, R. (2009), ‘The rights and duties of external citizenship’, Citizenship Studies, 13: 5, 475–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, Z. (1998), Globalization: The Human Consequences, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Baumberg, B. (2012), ‘Three ways to defend social security in Britain’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 20: 2, 149–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumberg, B. (2014), ‘Benefits and the cost of living: pressures on the cost of living and attitudes to benefit claiming’, in Park, A., Bryson, C. and Curtice, J. (eds.), British Social Attitudes: The 31st Report, London: NatCenSocial Research, pp. 95–122.Google Scholar
Bell, K. (2012), Welfare Reform – Early Impacts, London: CPAG, http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/welfare-reform-early-impacts (accessed 5 February 2015).Google Scholar
Benhabib, S. (2004), The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents and Citizens, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bommes, M. and Geddes, A. (2000), ‘Conclusion: defining and redefining the community of legitimate welfare receivers’, in Bommes, M. and Geddes, A. (eds.), Immigration and Welfare: Challenging the Borders of the Welfare State, London: Routledge, pp. 248–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, D. (2014), ‘David Cameron: we're building an immigration system that puts Britain first’, Daily Telegraph, 28 July.Google Scholar
Cook, J., Dwyer, P. and Waite, L. (2012), ‘Accession 8 migration and the proactive and defensive engagement of social citizenship’, Journal of Social Policy, 41: 2, 329–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, S. (2009), ‘Challenging the UK rules on the rights of EU8 workers’, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 31: 1, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dench, G., Gavron, K. and Young, M. (2006), The New East End. Kinship, Race and Conflict, London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Duffy, B. and Frere-Smith, T. (2014), Perceptions and Reality: Public Attitudes to Immigration, London: IpsosMORI.Google Scholar
Dustmann, C. and Frattini, T. (2014), ‘The fiscal effects of immigration to the UK’, The Economic Journal, 124: 580, F593–F643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dwyer, P. (2000), Welfare Rights and Responsibilities: Contesting Social Citizenship, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Dwyer, P. (2004), Understanding Social Citizenship: Themes and Perspectives for Policy and Practice, Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
Eade, J., Drinkwater, S. and Garapich, M. P. (2006), Class and Ethnicity – Polish Migrants in London, London: University of Surrey, CRONEMGoogle Scholar
Feather, N.T. (2003), ‘Distinguishing between deservingness and entitlement: earned outcomes versus lawful outcomes’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 33: 3, 367–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatskova, K. (2013), ‘Distributive justice attitudes in Ukraine: deed, desert or social minimum?’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 46: 2, 227–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmartin, M. and Migge, B. (2011), ‘Working through a recession’, Translocations: Migration and Social Change, 7: 1, 1–16.Google Scholar
Groom, B. (2013), ‘Poundland ruling sparks work schemes review’, Financial Times, London.Google Scholar
Jordan, B. and Brown, P. (2007), ‘Migration and work in the United Kingdom: mobility and the social order’, Mobilities, 2: 2, 255–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, S. (2014), Measures to Limit Migrants' Access to Benefits, London: House of Commons.Google Scholar
Kumlin, S. (2007), ‘The welfare state: values, policy preferences, and performance evaluations’, in Dalton, R. J. and Klingemann, H.-D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 362–82.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, W. (1996), Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupton, R., Hills, J., Stewart, K. and Vizard, P. (2013), Labour's Social Policy Record: Policy, Spending and Outcomes 1997–2010, London: LSE CASE.Google Scholar
Marshall, G., Swift, A., Routh, D. and Burgoyne, C. (1999), ‘What is and what ought to be: popular beliefs about distributive justice in thirteen countries’, European Sociological Review, 15: 4, 349–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, T.H. (1950), Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2003), ‘Social justice in multicultural societies’, in van Parijs, P. (ed.), Cultural Diversity Versus Economic Solidarity: Proceedings of the Seventh Francqui Colloquium, Brussels: DeboeckUniversity Press, pp. 13–31.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2008), ‘Immigrants, nations, and citizenship’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 16: 4, 371–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okólski, M. and Salt, J. (2014), ‘Polish emigration to the UK after 2004: why did so many come?’, Central and Eastern European Migration Review, 3: 2, 1–27.Google Scholar
ONS (2014), ‘Migration statistics, quarterly report’, Statistical Bulletin: Office for National Statistics, November, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_386531.pdf (accessed 5 February 2015).Google Scholar
Osipovič, D. (2010), ‘Social citizenship of Polish migrants in London: engagement and non-engagement with the British welfare state’, Ph.D. thesis, University College London, http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/20186/1/20186.pdf (accessed 6 March 2015).Google Scholar
Petersen, M. B. (2012), ‘Social welfare as small-scale help: evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic’, American Journal of Political Science, 56: 1, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Putnam, R. D. (2007), ‘E Pluribus Unum: diversity and community in the twenty-first century’, the 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture, Scandinavian Political Studies, 30: 2, 137–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeskens, T. and van Oorschot, W. (2012), ‘Disentangling the “New Liberal Dilemma”: on the relation between general welfare redistribution preferences and welfare chauvinism’, International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 53: 2, 120–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeskens, T. and van Oorschot, W. (2013), ‘Equity, equality, or need? A study of popular preferences for welfare redistribution principles across 24 European countries’, Journal of European Public Policy, 20: 8, 1174–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, A. L. and Corbin, J. (1998 [1990]), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Temple, B. and Young, A. (2004), ‘Qualitative research and translation dilemmas’, Qualitative Research, 4: 2, 161–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, E. R. (2002), ‘Who Belongs? Competing conceptions of political membership’, European Journal of Social Theory, 5: 3, 323–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timonen, V. and Doyle, M. (2009), ‘In search of security: migrant workers' understandings, experiences and expectations regarding “social protection” in Ireland’, Journal of Social Policy, 38: 1, 157–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (2000), ‘Who should get what, and why? On deservingness criteria and the conditionality of solidarity among the public’, Policy and Politics, 28: 1, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (2006), ‘Making the difference in social Europe: deservingness perceptions among citizens of European welfare states’, Journal of European Social Policy, 16: 1, 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (2008), ‘Solidarity towards immigrants in European welfare states’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 17: 1, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, A. (2011), Polish Families and Migration Since EU Accession, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Willen, S. S. (2012), ‘How is health-related “deservingness” reckoned? Perspectives from unauthorized im/migrants in Tel Aviv’, Social Science and Medicine, 74: 6, 812–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar