This article provides a review of the economic, demographic and welfare effects of immigration in contemporary Europe. It argues that the economic benefits of migration are small but positive, its welfare effects minimal if not non-existent, and its demographic effects modest but real. It then provides a series of recommendations for governing migration policy in Europe: keeping the borders open but controlled; keeping employment high and income support low, and keeping speech free but fair. The most important policy recommendation centres on work: immigration policy will only work when immigrants work.

An egalitarian approach to the fair representation of voters specifies three main institutional requirements: proportional representation, legislative majority rule and a parliamentary system of government. This approach faces two challenges: the under-determination of the resulting democratic process and the idea of a trade-off between equal voter representation and government accountability. Linking conceptual with comparative analysis, the article argues that we can distinguish three ideal-typical varieties of the egalitarian vision of democracy, based on the stages at which majorities are formed. These varieties do not put different relative normative weight onto equality and accountability, but have different conceptions of both values and their reconciliation. The view that accountability is necessarily linked to ‘clarity of responsibility’, widespread in the comparative literature, is questioned – as is the idea of a general trade-off between representation and accountability. Depending on the vision of democracy, the two values need not be in conflict.

The interest in procedures for political decision-making has grown tremendously during recent decades. Given the intense scholarly debate and the implementation of greater opportunities for citizen participation in many democracies, there has been surprisingly little interest in citizens’ conceptions of democracy understood as their preferences concerning the processes by which the political system works. Some recent attempts do, however, suggest that it is important to expand the study of public opinion from policy output to decision-making processes, and that there are coherent patterns in citizens’ expectations of the way in which political decisions come about. What is not clear, though, is whether citizens’ different conceptions of democracy have repercussions for how they engage in politics. Using the Finnish National Election Study of 2011 (Borg and Grönlund 2011), this article explores the relationship between citizens’ conceptions of democracy and patterns of political participation. Results demonstrate a distinct association between citizens’ ideals and the actions they take.

The economic crisis has meant that radical left parties in Europe have been faced with changing socioeconomic environments. In this study we examine how European radical left parties have responded to the crisis in terms of their societal mobilization strategies and seek to explain their responses. Discussions in the relevant literature advocate that party-specific characteristics matter greatly in how parties mobilize in society and establish relations with social groups in times of stability. But do they continue to be as important at times of dramatic change, when new realities emerge in society? We look at the cases of the Greek (Greek Communist Party and Coalition of the Radical Left), Irish (Sinn Féin), Portuguese (Portuguese Communist Party and Bloco) and Spanish (Spanish Communist Party/United Left) radical left parties, which are alike at the country level but exhibit differences at the party level. Utilizing data from an original expert survey, we show that both ideology and organizational legacy throw considerable light on the observed variation among the six radical left parties’ societal responses to the crisis. In this way, they ensure continuity rather than change.

This article demonstrates the utility of comparative historical approaches and tools for temporal analysis in comparative regional integration. Over three decades Australian and New Zealand policymakers constructed a Trans-Tasman Single Economic Market that, like the Single European Market, creates supra-national authority and removes administrative barriers to free movement of goods, services capital and people. Like the Single European Market, the Trans-Tasman Single Economic Market regulates internal movements of people liberally. In Europe, some argue, liberal regulation of people movements has led to politicization of integration. In Australia and New Zealand integration has no mass political salience. This article compares European and trans-Tasman integration to explain these divergent outcomes. It shows how differing sequences of events can explain varying levels of mass mobilization around integration in the two cases. In Europe ‘economic integration’ preceded the liberalization of people movements. Trans-Tasman integration reversed this sequence.