Migration Through the Lens of Welfare Regimes : A Comparative Case Study of Migration Discourses in Sweden and the UK

This thesis compares political constructions of migrants across different welfare regime types, based on Esping-Andersen’s (1999) Three worlds of welfare capitalism. Previous comparative research into welfare regimes has not included the Social Democratic regime, leaving a gap to further explore and clarify. This paper does so by examining the relationship between welfare regime type, national identity and constructions of migrants in a Social democratic regime and a Liberal one. The central question is: how do different welfare regime types construct migrants in policy debate? To answer this, this study applied a modified version of Carol Bacchi’s ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ analytical framework to parliamentary debate in a Social Democratic regime (Sweden) and a Liberal one (the UK) and then compared the results. This approach focused on implicit representations of problems. Results showed that threat construction around migration in both cases conforms to Esping-Andersen’s (1999) regime models, fitting well with institutional theory and welfare chauvinism