Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The regulation of legal statuses and differentiation of non-citizens’ rights within the states has become a significant site in the management of migration, yet the actual operations of differential inclusion remain an underexamined issue in the migration research. This article provides an empirically grounded analysis of the differential inclusion of non-citizens and demonstrates the legal hierarchies between non-citizens’ entitlements using Finland as a case study. I argue that in addition to the regulation of residence and the access to labour markets, the unequal access to the welfare system represents a significant sphere of differentiation in the immigration process. Non-citizens’ social entitlements differ depending on the nationality, the type of legal status and the form of employment, affecting their position in the labour markets and in the society. The article highlights the role of immigration law in manipulating the residence status of non-citizens, consequently invalidating the universalism of rights and a residence-based welfare system. Immigration controls, rather than representing a neutral framework of regulation of immigration, function as an institution, which produces conditional subjects and asymmetrical social relations in the sphere of universal citizenship.
Jukka Könönen (Tue,) studied this question.