Dimension-specific party and public opinion responsiveness in the EU immigration acquis

How are national party positions and national public opinion balanced when voting on the multi-dimensional immigration policies of the EU, which encompass both immigration and EU integration dimensions? The study applies the Wordscores algorithm on 1990–2018 EU immigration policies’ texts and examines the voting behaviour of national parties in the European Parliament (EP). It incorporates roll-call votes, CHES, and Eurobarometer data covering over 350 parties to test the influence of (a) parties’ programmatic positions; (b) national public opinion on parties’ level of support for EU immigration dossiers’ contents. The study provides the first comprehensive evidence that the EU immigration acquis has become increasingly restrictive and that restrictive and liberal provisions frequently co‑occur with, respectively, pro‑EU integration and pro‑sovereignty provisions. Parties adhere more closely to party positions on the immigration dimension but are more responsive to short-term changes in public opinion on the EU integration dimension instead.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
West European Politics
Published
2026-01-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2025.2605929
Primary Topic
European Union Policy and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dimension-specific party and public opinion responsiveness in the EU immigration acquis

Natascha Zaun, Miriam Sorace
West European Politics
European Union Policy and Governance
article

Dimension-specific party and public opinion responsiveness in the EU immigration acquis

Natascha Zaun, Miriam Sorace
article en

Abstract

How are national party positions and national public opinion balanced when voting on the multi-dimensional immigration policies of the EU, which encompass both immigration and EU integration dimensions? The study applies the Wordscores algorithm on 1990–2018 EU immigration policies’ texts and examines the voting behaviour of national parties in the European Parliament (EP). It incorporates roll-call votes, CHES, and Eurobarometer data covering over 350 parties to test the influence of (a) parties’ programmatic positions; (b) national public opinion on parties’ level of support for EU immigration dossiers’ contents. The study provides the first comprehensive evidence that the EU immigration acquis has become increasingly restrictive and that restrictive and liberal provisions frequently co‑occur with, respectively, pro‑EU integration and pro‑sovereignty provisions. Parties adhere more closely to party positions on the immigration dimension but are more responsive to short-term changes in public opinion on the EU integration dimension instead.

West European Politics
Leuphana University of Lüneburg (DE), School of International Relations (IR)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 83%
European Union Policy and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Dimension-specific party and public opinion responsiveness in the EU immigration acquis — Natascha Zaun, Miriam Sorace · West European Politics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS