Swiss Political Science Review 0(0): 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.70005

Abstract: In recent decades, as growing numbers of noncitizen residents remain excluded from the electorate, the question of who should be included in the electorate has gained prominence in both political and academic debates. Drawing on theories of integration and immigrant attitudes, I explore whether Swiss voters would consider integration criteria as prerequisites for enfranchisement and which criteria matter to whom. First, using original survey data from Switzerland fielded in 2021, I identify three key criterion types for inclusion: civic-cultural knowledge, economic contribution, and being of good character. Second, the findings reveal that partisanship is a primary factor shaping the importance citizens assign to these criteria, and which criterion specifically matters most. Interestingly, I find that few socioeconomic and demographic indicators influence voters' views on whether such integration criterion could be used as a route towards enfranchisement. Taken together, the results point to the pivotal role that ideological divides play in framing debates over immigrants and their integration in Switzerland. 

Conditional Accept, Political Studies

Abstract: As democracies grow more diverse through immigration, a key question arises: when should immigrants participate in political decision-making? We examine citizens’ beliefs about when immigrants should vote in national elections (before citizenship, with citizenship, or never) and whether these views depend on immigrants’ integration markers. We assess how exclusionary worldviews and psychological predispositions---authoritarianism, social dominance orientation (SDO), and ethnocentrism---shape views of democratic membership and their malleability. Using 2021 survey data from Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States, we find that integration criteria matter most to those who view citizenship as the primary gateway to political inclusion. High levels of SDO and ethnocentrism are associated with exclusionary preferences, though integration efforts reduce resistance among individuals high in SDO. Authoritarian-leaning individuals are simultaneously more willing to include immigrants pre-naturalization and more likely to support permanent exclusion. These findings highlight the conditional nature of political inclusion in diverse democracies.

Abstract: As democracies’ populations continue to diversify, public debates around immigrants’ voting rights remain salient in both politics and public opinion. We analyze citizens’ preferences towards granting noncitizen residents voting rights, and the factors shaping support for granting these rights to immigrants before naturalization. Leveraging a unique conjoint survey experiment fielded in Switzerland, Sweden, and the US in late 2024, we evaluate policy packages for regional enfranchisement. The packages vary criteria common in existing laws, such as residency requirements and permit types, but also consider whether other markers of integration, such as language proficiency, economic contributions and political integration, influence evaluations. We find that despite the institutional differences, citizens in all three countries display similar preferences. Citizens favor policies with moderate residency, advanced language proficiency, civic exams, and economic contributions. These preferences hold across groups, with modest left--right orientation differences. These findings suggest that enfranchisement proposals incorporating such integration markers may attract broader public support.

This project aims to better understand citizens’ preferences towards granting noncitizen residents political participation rights, the conditions under which they are willing to grant such rights, and what variables influences citizens’ propensity to grant political rights to immigrants. It focuses on Switzerland not only because of the high salience of the immigration debate, but also because Article 36(1) of the federal constitution gives cantons jurisdiction to self-determine whether immigrants may participate in municipal and cantonal elections. It will do so through survey experiments, to be fielded in early 2024.

Questions of belonging are of great relevance for modern societies that are becoming more diverse due to migration. While immigration and attitudes towards immigrants are being widely studied, we know less about attitudes towards emigrants—particularly, when it comes to their access to political and social rights (e.g., voting rights, access to public assistance in the origin country). Our project addresses this gap and will provide insights into how citizens in the three countries prefer to share their privileges with those who left. With this project, we seek to better understand perceptions towards emigrants and their access to two types of rights in their home countries: political rights and social rights. Particularly, because we interested in questions of who belongs to society, we ask for how long and under what conditions do nonresident citizens belong to the polity and/or the welfare state? We will do so through survey experiments in Switzerland, Sweden and the US.