Validating the Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) dataset

Samuel D. Schmid and Marc Helbling

Discussion Papers, various Research Units from WZB Berlin Social Science Center

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to discuss the external and internal validity of the newly created Immigration Policies in Comparison (IMPIC) dataset. After presenting its theoretical conceptualization, we compare the IMPIC to other datasets in this policy field. Next, using a variant of principal component analysis, we empirically analyze its sub-dimensions. Among other things, and contrary to some expectations in the extant literature, we find that there appears to be a comprehensive and consistent dimension comprising immigration policies for the fields of labor migration, family reunification, and asylum seekers. We also offer two typologies, which can be used to map the most important dimensions of variation. These validity tests allow us to better understand what the IMPIC dataset measures, what its main dimensions are, and how it can be compared to other indices that measure immigration policies.

Keywords: immigration policy; open borders; internal validity; external validity; principal component analysis; index-building (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-mig
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/156687/1/883212358.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:zbw:wzbdiv:spvi2016202

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers, various Research Units from WZB Berlin Social Science Center Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics ().