In recent years, immigration has become a hot-button political issue, creating divisions that challenge the stability of Western democracies. Extreme right-wing parties have found anti-immigration messaging to be an effective way to gain voters, spreading ideas such as “immigrants are taking our jobs” or “they come to Spain for benefits,” based on misleading or even false data. These ideas significantly influence public support or reluctance towards immigration. In this climate of growing polarization, European governments face greater challenges in integrating immigrants into the workforce and society, along with their inherent diversity. However, this challenge also presents significant opportunities. On the one hand, integrating the immigrant population is crucial for improving civic coexistence by fostering better relationships among different social groups. On the other hand, immigration can help rejuvenate European countries, as immigrants tend to be younger and have higher fertility rates than the native population.
As a result, public institutions are seeking to review legal frameworks and migration policies to promote a more inclusive society and economic growth. However, a social dilemma arises here. While the implementation of inclusive policies requires sufficient support to achieve social cohesion, the native population holds disparate opinions on what the most effective policies are. To better understand how the public perceives immigration and what influences their preferences on integration, a study conducted by the ISEAK Foundation analyzed the perceptions, attitudes, and preferences of the native population on immigration through a national survey involving approximately 3,200 people born in Spain. The study examined opinions on perceptions of the threat of immigration, the composition of the immigrant population and their job opportunities, as well as support for various public policies aimed at attracting and integrating immigrants.
The study’s results revealed that the native population tends to significantly overestimate the number of immigrants in the country, as well as their unemployment rate and the level of economic aid they receive. Furthermore, the perception of immigration as a threat—whether to culture and traditions, the welfare state, or the job market—is associated with greater opposition to the entry of immigrants and less support for their job integration. These perceptions, including the idea that there are many immigrants, most of whom are unemployed, and that they pose a threat to the culture, finances, and job opportunities of natives, create a perfect breeding ground for the rise of extreme positions. However, these misconceptions are unevenly distributed: it is those with higher levels of education and those who identify with left-wing ideologies who generally feel less threatened by immigration.
To analyze how access to accurate information about immigration modifies perceptions and attitudes towards it, an experiment was included in the survey. In this experiment, two-thirds of the respondents randomly received a message. One-third received a text highlighting the benefits of integrating immigrants into the job market, another third received real data on the use of public resources by the immigrant population, while the remaining third received no information, continuing the survey without additional information—an experimental control group. The results of these informational messages are very relevant from the perspective of public policy and quite encouraging. Those who received accurate and objective information about immigration expressed greater support for integration policies, especially those designed to reduce inequality of opportunities between the native population and immigrants. Furthermore, these informational messages increased by 8% the number of people who expressed support for current levels of immigration compared to those in the control group.
These results highlight how prevalent misinformation in industrialized economies determines opposition to immigration and its integration. Therefore, to move towards a society that successfully integrates its immigrants, it is necessary to focus on public policies that address misinformation about immigration. We propose a series of recommendations that have already had a positive impact in countries in our environment and do not require significant funding. These recommendations include promoting media literacy to empower individuals to identify false data and news to counter the spread of misinformation. Additionally, it is important to promote diversity through collaboration activities between the native and immigrant populations. The idea behind these initiatives is that the integration of immigrants, and the resulting increase in diversity, does not create a sense of cultural threat to the native population.
The debate surrounding immigration should be studied and analyzed respecting its multifaceted nature from the rigor of complementary fields such as economics, sociology, and psychology. Our study continues to invite research and deeper exploration of anti-immigration sentiments, as well as a call for a more tolerant discourse based on information and evidence by political actors. Sara de la Rica, Odra Quesada, and David Martínez de Lafuente, from the ISEAK Foundation.
