RESEARCH EXCHANGE
Making immigration popular by making better policies
Author
About
Alexander Kustov
research
Across Europe, immigration consistently ranks among voters’ top concerns despite all the economic evidence that it can be beneficial to receiving countries.
Yet most attempts to shift public opinion—through information campaigns, appeals to humanitarian values, or efforts to reduce prejudice—have largely failed. My research suggests a different approach: governments should focus less on changing minds and more on identifying and implementing better policies.
In this short, I share findings from my book In Our Interest based on cross-national evidence from European countries over four decades, survey experiments, and comparative case studies.
Why information campaigns fall short
Pro-immigration advocates often assume that voters oppose immigration because they are prejudiced or lack accurate information. If only people understood the economic and other benefits of immigration, the argument goes, they would change their minds.
My research tells a different story. Immigration attitudes are remarkably stable—most respondents maintain consistent views over time, even through major events like the 2015–2016 refugee crisis, Brexit, and economic downturns. Simply telling voters that immigration is beneficial rarely produces lasting attitude change because people are sceptical of claims that contradict their experience (even if this experience is not fully informed).
The deeper issue is that many voters in a democracy understandably prioritise their fellow citizens first. These voters will support immigration when they believe it benefits their country, and oppose it when they believe it does not.
The key insight: persuasion through policy design
Rather than trying to convince voters that current policies are good, governments should adopt policies that are demonstrably beneficial—that is, explicitly and straightforwardly designed to advance the national interest in ways ordinary voters can understand. The truth is that, even if you believe that immigration is already good, it can yet be much better.
This is not merely about communication or framing. Examining historical data on immigration reforms across Europe, I found that programmatic pro-immigration policies—those implemented through transparent rules to benefit the public—do not cause populist backlash. In fact, they can legitimise immigration and generate their own support over time.
The contrast between Canada and Sweden illustrates this dynamic. Canada’s points-based system, which explicitly selects immigrants based on their ability to contribute economically, has sustained broad public support for decades. Sweden’s humanitarian approach, while admirable in its values, struggled to maintain legitimacy when integration outcomes faltered. The lesson is not that humanitarianism is wrong, but that sustainable immigration requires policies whose benefits are visible to ordinary voters.
Four demonstrably beneficial policy reforms
Based on this research, there are at least four sets of reforms that could build durable public support for immigration in Europe
1. Streamline skilled immigration pathways. Complex visa systems create backlogs and frustration for employers and migrants alike. Simplified, transparent processes for skilled workers make the economic benefits of immigration visible and immediate. The EU Blue Card scheme is a step in this direction but remains underutilised.
2. Strengthen immediate family reunification rights. Family reunification is often dismissed as economically inferior to skilled immigration, but this view is mistaken. Native-born citizens and legal immigrants who sponsor their foreign spouses or reunite with their immediate family members integrate more successfully and have stronger labour market outcomes. Restricting family reunification undermines integration and fuels the very concerns it aims to address.
3. Develop bilateral labour agreements for specific shortages. Temporary worker programmes tied to documented labour shortages—in healthcare, agriculture, or construction—demonstrate clear benefits to receiving communities. These agreements work best both when the visa limits are enforced and when they include protections for workers.
4. Pilot place-based visas for economically stagnant regions. Concentrating immigration in major cities creates visible pressures on housing and services while leaving the increasing number of declining regions without workers. Place-based visas could channel immigrants to areas that need population growth, spreading the benefits of immigration more evenly.
The bottom line
Immigration policy in Europe is caught between two losing strategies: restrictionists who promise to stop immigration entirely, whether it is actually good or not, and pro-immigration advocates who dismiss public concerns as prejudice while pushing humanitarian-only narratives. Neither approach is working.
My research suggests a third way. Governments that design immigration policies with demonstrable national benefits can build the public trust necessary for sustainable immigration systems. This does not mean abandoning humanitarian commitments, but recognising that those commitments are more likely to endure when embedded in policies that most voters can understand and support in democracies.
The most discriminatory immigration policy is not selective immigration—it is closed immigration. By starting with demonstrably beneficial reforms, European governments can create the political space for more generous approaches over time.
Key takeaway
To build durable public support, governments should adopt policies whose benefits are clear to ordinary voters regardless of their knowledge and convictions:
- Streamline skilled immigration through simplified, transparent visa processes
- Strengthen immediate family reunification to support long-term integration
- Develop labour agreements tied to documented shortages in specific sectors
- Pilot place-based visas to spread immigration benefits beyond major cities
Alexander Kustov is an Associate Professor of Migration in the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame. He is the author of In Our Interest: How Democracies Can Make Immigration Popular (Columbia University Press, 2025) and the Popular by Design newsletter.
Learn more:
- Book: In Our Interest
- Newsletter: Popular by Design
Submit your idea for a ‘short’ to be featured on the Co-Lab.
