Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Romania

This chapter examines to what extent the Romanian welfare system covers resident citizens compared to foreigners residing in Romania and Romanians living abroad. In doing so, we analyse existing social policies aiming to ensure their coverage against a variety of risks at different life-cycle stages, including unemployment, poverty, sickness and old-age. The main conclusion is that the Romanian welfare state is open to all residents, regardless of their nationality, thus providing everyone equal grounds for accessing social benefits. The criterion of residence on the Romanian soil is, however, prevalent. This implies that relatively few social provisions are extended for non-resident Romanians, which represent an increasingly sizeable community given the intensity of migration outflows in recent years. Furthermore, the Romanian social protection system has had relatively little impact on reducing the risk of poverty and income inequality in the country, despite regular amendments during the last years.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Belgium

Access to social benefits in Belgium is not conditional upon nationality but rather on periods of insurance to the Belgian social security system. Despite the lack of nationality conditions, a number of social benefits are made conditional upon residence of the beneficiary in Belgium. Consequently, even though the Belgian social security system appears, at first sight, as neutral regarding the migration trajectory of its beneficiaries, it might be more difficult for migrants to access, retain and export social security benefits from Belgium when compared to resident nationals. This chapter thus compares the conditions of access to social benefits for nationals and non-nationals residing in Belgium, as well as Belgian citizens residing abroad. It aims to analyse whether migration decisions impact access to and retention of social security benefits. More particularly, the analysis focuses on access to unemployment benefits, healthcare, old-age pensions, family benefits and guaranteed minimum income. Finally, this chapter also questions whether access to social benefits might have a consequence for the residence status of non-nationals in Belgium.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in France

After a long judicial fight between the 1970s and the late 1990s leading to the abolition of the condition of nationality that excluded foreigners from non-contributory benefits, and in a context of publicly debated restrictive immigration policies, other restrictive conditions were either reinforced or introduced in order to curb access to social protection for foreigners in France. A new condition of regularity for the access of foreigners to most social protection schemes was introduced and/or extended, especially since 1993. In a growing xenophobic context, restrictions were presented as a means to deter immigration and save the Welfare State placed under strong budgetary constraints. The classical condition of residence was also reactivated in a way to place more restrictions. New requirements, such as a condition of anteriority of presence and a condition of anteriority (seniority) of regular residence, were developed to exclude more non-EU migrants, despite their regular situation.

Migration and Access to Welfare Benefits in the EU: The Interplay between Residence and Nationality

Increasing mobility to and from European Union (EU) countries has started to challenge the principles of territoriality and national citizenship through which European democracies traditionally conditioned access to social benefits. Existing typologies of immigrant social protection regimes do not seem to adequately capture (nor explain) the diverse repertoire of policy configurations through which European welfare regimes adapt to migration-driven societal dynamics. This introductory chapter provides a critical reflection on the link between migration and access to welfare in the EU. In doing so, it aims to propose a comprehensive analytical framework that allows for a systematic comparison of the inclusiveness of social protection systems towards mobile individuals. We argue that states’ responsiveness towards the social protection needs of their immigrant and emigrant populations has to be examined through a combination of factors, including the characteristics of these populations, the migration history of these countries, as well as the main features of their welfare state.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Latvia

This chapter discusses the link between migration and welfare in Latvia. In general, the Latvian social security system may be described as a mixture of elements taken from the basic security (where eligibility is based on contributions or residency, and flat-rate benefits are provided) and corporatist (with eligibility based on labour force participation and earnings-related benefits) models. The country has experienced significant social policy and migration-related changed during the past decades. This chapter focuses on the current Latvian legislation, by closely examining the differential access to social protection benefits of resident nationals, foreigners living in Latvia and Latvian citizens residing abroad across five core policy areas: unemployment, health care, pensions, family benefits and social assistance. Our results show that the Latvian social security benefits are generally based on the principle of employment, social insurance contributions, and permanent residence. Most of the social benefits and services are available to socially insured permanent residents. At the same time, the state offers minimum protection to non-insured permanent residents. Foreigners with temporary residence permits who are not socially insured are the least socially protected group.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Ireland

This chapter focuses on the link between migration and social protection in Ireland. The chapter has two main goals. First, it presents the general legal framework regulating the social protection system in Ireland, paying particular attention to any potential differences in terms of conditions of access to social benefits between national residents, non-national residents, and non-resident nationals. Secondly, the chapter discusses how these different groups of individuals access social benefits across five policy areas: unemployment, health care, family benefits, pensions, and guaranteed minimum resources. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the relationship between migration and social protection policy.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Sweden

While the Swedish welfare state has undergone an intensified market orientation and a number of cutbacks since 1990, it has maintained many of its universal characteristics. It still provides all residents with a rather extensive system of benefits from the cradle to the grave. This chapter contributes to a systematic and detailed analysis of eligibility criteria and conditions for accessing social benefits in five core policy areas of the Swedish social security system. As universalism continues to be a cornerstone of the Swedish welfare state, nationality or the immigration status of a person does not condition his/her entitlement to social security benefits. More recently, however, a political debate has emerged regarding immigration and the welfare system, both in terms of the benefit system being a magnet that attracts migrants and concerning the capacity of the system to cope with large-scale immigration. By discussing the main features of the Swedish welfare regime and key patterns and policy developments in the field of migration, the chapter seeks to account for recent developments, trends and directions in the access to social protection for residents, non-national residents and non-resident nationals.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Portugal

This chapter starts by discussing the Portuguese Social Security system and how it has evolved since the establishment of the democratic regime in 1974. This is in fact a heterodox system – included in the so-called Mediterranean model of social protection – with elements both from the Bismarckian and Beveridgean models. Next, the chapter examines the main features of migration movements in Portugal (emigration and immigration) and analyses social security regimes applying to foreign citizens (both from EU or third countries) in order to identify potential differences when compared with the regimes applicable to national citizens.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Hungary

Given the recent salience of anti-immigrant propaganda and politics in Hungary, the inclusiveness of the Hungarian social legislation towards individuals in a situation of international mobility is a particularly relevant topic. The first section of this chapter gives an overview of the Hungarian welfare system and the main migration feature in the country. The second section closely examines differences in terms of access of nationals and non-nationals to social security benefits. The third section demonstrates that, despite negative public attitude to migration and anti-migration government measures, the Hungarian social legislation is not particularly restrictive concerning migrants’ entitlement to social security benefits. We conclude that it is probably due to the filtering effect of contributory benefits that dominate the Hungarian welfare system and prevent gaining access to the most essential benefits without work. At the same time, the chapter identifies several obstacles that foreign (and particularly non-EU) residents face when trying to access social security benefits in Hungary.

Migrants’ Access to Social Protection in Cyprus

Cyprus has been an attractive destination for labour migration the last decades. The needs of the growing migrant population are catered by an evolving and continuously adapting welfare system. The chapter analyses the main features of the current welfare system in Cyprus with brief references to recent migration patterns and the wider economic context to analyse how differences in statutory provisions affect the access of nationals and migrants to social protection. The overall conclusion is that there are few statutory provisions differentiating conditions of access among the two groups. These differences are observed in regard to means-tested non-contributory benefits and mostly affect non-EU foreign citizens, while there are not specific social protection schemes targeting national citizens residing abroad.