MANAGING MIGRATION? EU ENLARGEMENT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE IN ENGLAND
| Author | RHYS ANDREWS,KENNETH MEIER,LARRY O’ TOOLE,GEORGE BOYNE,RICHARD WALKER |
| Date | 01 March 2013 |
| Published date | 01 March 2013 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02043.x |
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02043.x
MANAGING MIGRATION? EU ENLARGEMENT, LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CAPACITY AND PERFORMANCE IN
ENGLAND
RHYS ANDREWS, GEORGE BOYNE, LARRY O’ TOOLE, KENNETH MEIER
AND RICHARD WALKER
This study explores how English local governments managed high levels of worker migration
from Eastern Europe in the wake of the enlargement of the European Union in 2004. Theories
of local government capacity suggest that strong central administration and vibrant community
organizational life can increase the likelihood that public service performance will be maintained
despite sudden shifts in the external environment. We explore the interactive effects of immigration
and administrative and community capacity on English local government performance, using
multivariate statistical techniques. The results suggest that local government capacity moderated
the negative impact on performance of migration from Eastern Europe.
INTRODUCTION
Cross-national immigration is one of the most salient issues in public policy in countries
across the world (Cornelius et al. 2004). In addition to confronting the challenge of
acculturation (or integration) within a host country (Berry 1997), immigrants require
basic housing, welfare, and education provision to settle successfully (Dorr and Faist
1997). Managing immigration is therefore one of the most significant challenges faced
by governments across the globe (Hollifield 2004). A growing scholarship examines the
effects of immigration on labour market outcomes within developed countries (e.g., Borjas
2001; Aguilera and Massey 2003; Coleman and Rowthorn 2004; Card 2005; Drinkwater
et al. 2009; Peri 2010), and the role that local governments might play in the process of
economic integration for migrants (e.g., Hatziprokopiu 2004; Poppelaars and Scholten,
2008). Missing in this literature to date, though, is an assessment of how those governments
might seek to maintain the quality of public services in areas experiencing high rates
of immigration, and thereby contribute to the ‘bureaucratic incorporation’ of economic
migrants (Lewis and Ramakrishnan 2009; Marrow 2009).
Economic migrants require at the very least basic housing, welfare, and education
provision in order to settle successfully within a host country. Where immigration is
unexpectedly high this may entail the diversion of resources from other areas to deal with
the increased demand. The ability to sustain levels of service in such rapidly changing
circumstances is therefore a core task for local governments, and one that could, in turn,
affect the successful integration of immigrants into the mainstream activities of host coun-
tries. We seek to address this important question of ‘bureaucratic incorporation’ (Helbling
2008) by exploring whether stronger administrative and community capacity enabled
English local governments to better manage the migration that followed the eastern
enlargement of the EU in 2004. This is a question of global significance as policy-makers
across the world continue to debate the costs and benefits of economic migration (Keeley
2009). At the same time, the challenges of managing economic migration for developed
Rhys Andrews and George Boyne are at Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, UK. Larry O’ Toole is at the
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA. Kenneth Meier is at Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Richard Walker is at the City University of Hong Kong.
Public Administration Vol. 91, No. 1, 2013 (174–194)
©2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden,
MA 02148, USA.
MANAGING MIGRATION 175
nations, such as the United States (Borjas 2001), Canada (Rodriguez-Garcia 2011), and
those in Europe (Carmel et al. 2011) has become of increasing interest to researchers, as
too has the less well-understood dynamics of migration between developing countries
(e.g., Martin and Z ¨
urcher 2008).
The United Kingdom serves as an interesting test case for studying immigration and
possible governmental responses at the local level. During the 2000s, UK immigration
policy was somewhat relaxed in order to secure the economic advantages that are assumed
to accrue from increased immigration (Favell 2001; Coleman and Rowthorn 2004). The
Labour Government’s response to EU Enlargement in 2004, in particular, was to extend
the freedom of movement for citizens of countries within the European Economic Area to
economic migrants from the eight Accession (A8) countries (the Czech Republic, Estonia,
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia) with few conditions. The
decision to place fewer restrictions on the movement of A8 citizens than most other EU
states is thought to have posed a serious challenge for the public organizations responsible
for managing migration at the local level. Large numbers of A8 migrant workers began to
enter the UK in 2005 and continued to do so until the onset of economic recession (Local
Government Association 2007). By way of illustration, the average number of National
Insurance (NI) numbers allocated to A8 citizens per English local government between
2005 and 2007 was 10.4 per 1,000 population, which indicates that, on average, A8 migrant
workers comprised about 1 per cent of the local population in England during this period.
Local governments in the UK deliver a wide range of public services in the areas of
education, social care, land-use planning, waste management, public housing, leisure and
culture, and welfare benefits. These are the services upon which immigrants often rely,
and the ‘street-level bureaucrats’ who deliver these services in the UK (as in most other
countries) play a vital role in shaping what it means to be a citizen through the advocacy
role that they often play in dealing with clients (Vinzant and Crothers 1998). If local public
services can deal with large population movements with few disruptions in service, then
extensive resources need not be diverted from other areas to address immigrants’ needs.
By effectively managing migration, local governments can therefore advance the interests
of migrants in ways that contribute to their successful integration within the host country
(see Helbling 2008).
The ‘bureaucratic incorporation’ of A8 citizens by English local governments is an
especially salient case for consideration of this important issue. The vastly greater than
anticipated scale of migration from the A8 countries to the UK led to serious concerns
about the ability of local governments to manage the demands placed on them by this
unexpected influx of newcomers. In addition, by focusing on a single case – English local
governments – we are able to benefit from measures that precisely fit the study setting
(see Nicholson-Crotty and Meier 2002). We are also able to control for several factors,
such as service responsibilities, central–local relations, and macro-economic cycles, which
can be sources of unmeasured heterogeneity in cross-country designs.
Organization theory suggests that unexpected environmental jolts, such as the worker
migration to the UK that followed eastern enlargement in 2004, have adverse conse-
quences for service performance, but that these can be mitigated by appropriate collective
action. Government capacity represents a potent source for such action. In particular,
central administrative capability and vibrant community organizational life may hold
the key to responding effectively to immigrants’ needs, because they furnish a stock of
appropriable human and social resources that can be mobilized by local governments
seeking to respond to challenging circumstances. Do unexpectedly high levels of worker
Public Administration Vol. 91, No. 1, 2013 (174–194)
©2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial