Mikkel Haderup Larsen forsvarer sin ph.d.-afhandling på Sociologisk Institut
Titel
Limits of Solidarity in Increasingly Diverse Societies
- The role of deservingness perceptions and the radical right in the formation of chauvinistic attitudes toward the welfare state
Bedømmelseskomite
- Professor Mads Meier Jæger (Forperson), Københavns Universitet
- Associate professor Tim Reeskens, Tilburg University
- Professor Céline Teney, Freie Universität Berlin
Vært
Professor Bente Halkier, Ph.d. Programleder på Sociologisk Institut
Tid og sted
Fredag den 28. april 2023
Kl. 13:00 - 16:00
Auditorium 35.01.05.
Københavns Universitet, Det Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet,
Gammeltoftsgade 15, 1353 København K
Ph.d.-afhandlingen vil være tilgængelig gennem Academic Books som e-publikation.
Efter forsvaret er Sociologisk Institut vært ved en reception i lokale 16.1.62 fra kl. cirka 15:30.
Engelsk resume
The aim of this dissertation is to add new empirical knowledge to the debate on the relationship between diversity and solidarity in contemporary European welfare states. I ask as a primary research question: “What drives native citizens reluctance to share welfare benefits, a collective good, with people of immigrant-origin?” The dissertation is composed of an introduction and five empirical papers that are tied together via the concepts of solidarity, diversity, and welfare chauvinism. It positions itself within the comprehensive literature on the immigration-welfare state nexus through three sub-questions.
- Does the public hold welfare chauvinistic attitudes in access to essential healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic?
- Do welfare chauvinistic attitudes translate to social policy preferences?
- Do radical right parties play a role in the formation of welfare chauvinistic attitudes?
The dissertation relies on both experimental and observational survey data and state-of-the-art quantitative methods to address these research questions. It makes six contributions to the scholarly literature. First, it shows that native Danes attitudes towards access to essential healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic follows established lines of welfare chauvinism. Second, it disentangles the effect of ethnic background and immigration status on welfare deservingness from stereotypes about anti-social behavior and irresponsible lifestyles.
Third, it demonstrates that identity-motivated attitudes translate to public preferences for openly welfare chauvinistic social policies. Fourth, it provides some evidence that welfare chauvinistic social policy preferences are driven by taste-based considerations.
Fifth, it demonstrates that preferences for the radical right positively affects welfare chauvinistic attitudes and finds limited evidence for the reverse relationship. Sixth, it shows that the political representation of radical right parties in national parliaments is negatively associated with public support for a redistributive welfare state.
In sum, this dissertation shows that national identity constitutes the magna divisio in welfare deservingness and that radical right parties strengthen existing solidarity boundaries through their political representation and dissemination of a nativist discourse.