This thesis compares political constructions of migrants across different welfare regime types, based on Esping-Andersen’s (1999) Three worlds of welfare capitalism. Previous comparative research into welfare regimes has not included the Social Democratic regime, leaving a gap to further explore and clarify. This paper does so by examining the relationship between welfare regime type, national identity and constructions of migrants in a Social democratic regime and a Liberal one. The central question is: how do different welfare regime types construct migrants in policy debate? To answer this, this study applied a modified version of Carol Bacchi’s ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ analytical framework to parliamentary debate in a Social Democratic regime (Sweden) and a Liberal one (the UK) and then compared the results. This approach focused on implicit representations of problems. Results showed that threat construction around migration in both cases conforms to Esping-Andersen’s (1999) regime models, fitting well with institutional theory and welfare chauvinism.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:su-221445 |
| Date | January 2023 |
| Creators | Gordon, Meaghan |
| Publisher | Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för ekonomisk historia och internationella relationer |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds