The Swiss labor market has long been a magnet for foreign workers, attracting a considerable number of individuals from neighboring countries who contribute to its economic dynamism. According to recent data from the Swiss Federal Statistical Office, by the conclusion of 2024, around 400,000 people were classified as cross-border commuters—workers who reside outside Switzerland but commute daily or regularly into the country for employment purposes. In comparison, the Swiss labor force also includes approximately 1.9 million foreign employees who reside within the country’s borders. This distinction between those living in Switzerland and those commuting from abroad poses intriguing questions about social integration, economic competition, and public perception. A groundbreaking study published in the American Journal of Political Science delves into how these two groups are differently perceived by Swiss locals, revealing insights that challenge conventional migration debates.
The study, conducted through a robust and representative survey encompassing approximately 4,000 Swiss voters, sought to understand whether Swiss citizens’ attitudes towards foreign workers are primarily shaped by economic concerns or deeper normative notions related to fairness and social belonging. By isolating the variable of residence—whether a foreign employee lives in Switzerland or commutes from a neighboring country—the study discovered a significant pattern: foreign residents who live and work in Switzerland are perceived much more positively than cross-border commuters. This finding persists despite the fact that both groups compete equally for similar employment opportunities. These insights suggest that local attitudes are less driven by direct economic competition and more by perceptions of societal participation and fairness.
One of the key theoretical frameworks underpinning this analysis is the concept of social identity and perceived group membership. The research team hypothesized that acceptance levels would correlate strongly with whether individuals saw foreign employees as part of the social fabric. The data supported this notion, illustrating that those who reside physically within Switzerland are implicitly regarded as participants in the national community and, therefore, more deserving of positive regard. Cross-border commuters, conversely, are often viewed through the lens of outsider status, which negatively colors locals’ attitudes toward them, regardless of their professional qualifications, age, or country of origin. This highlights the powerful role of societal inclusion in shaping migration policy preferences.
Beyond mere descriptive statistics, the researchers utilized experimental techniques during the survey to manipulate information about foreign employees’ residence and work patterns. This novel approach allowed them to isolate the effects of residence status on attitudes. Notably, when participants were provided with additional knowledge, especially regarding the fiscal responsibilities of cross-border commuters—such as their obligation to pay Swiss income taxes—and the limitations of their access to social benefits like unemployment insurance, attitudes toward these commuters shifted positively. This indicates that misinformation or lack of information plays a substantial role in shaping public opinion, emphasizing the need for transparent communication about migrants’ contributions and responsibilities.
The research findings have profound implications for migration policy debates, particularly in regions with high levels of cross-border labor mobility. The initial assumption that economic competition is the primary driver of negative attitudes toward migrants is contested by this study, which instead points toward social and normative dimensions as more critical. The perception of fairness—specifically whether migrants are seen as sharing in social participation and fairness norms—emerges as the central filter through which people evaluate the presence of foreign workers. This theoretical shift opens new avenues for policymakers seeking to improve integration and social cohesion in border regions.
This study’s conclusions also underscore the importance of addressing informational gaps. Many Swiss citizens harbor concerns that cross-border commuters unfairly benefit from high Swiss wages while residing in countries with a comparatively low cost of living. Such concerns, while understandable, are often based on incomplete data, as they overlook the fiscal contributions these commuters make through Swiss tax systems and the fact they do not have access to Swiss welfare benefits. Addressing these misunderstandings through targeted information campaigns could help alleviate tensions and foster a more nuanced public discourse about migration and labor mobility.
Furthermore, these insights illuminate a broader global challenge in the political economy of migration. As cross-border employment becomes increasingly common worldwide, especially in closely linked geographic regions, the question of social inclusion versus exclusion and the corresponding political attitudes become crucial. The Swiss case provides a valuable model of how attitudes can be contingent on symbolic borders and social perceptions rather than only economic variables. This can influence not only migration policy but also cross-national cooperation in managing labor markets in interconnected regions.
The interdisciplinary research conducted by Lena Maria Schaffer and Gabriele Spilker blends political science, sociology, and economics to decipher the complex relationship between migration, labor markets, and public opinion. Schaffer’s expertise in international and transnational politics coupled with Spilker’s work on political inequality provides a comprehensive lens through which the study was designed and interpreted. Their findings contribute solid empirical evidence to often ideologically charged debates on migration, enabling policymakers and civic leaders to approach these issues with greater finesse and nuance.
Importantly, balancing economic integration with social acceptance requires acknowledging the invisible lines that people draw when differentiating “insiders” from “outsiders.” Residence, as this study found, acts as an essential criterion for social inclusion, where those who integrate by physically embedding themselves in local communities are awarded social legitimacy. This social mechanism explains why attitudes diverge even when economic competition is equal, highlighting the psychological dimension of immigration debates that often escapes quantification but is critical in shaping democratic consensus.
For Swiss border regions where cross-border commuters constitute significant portions of the workforce, the study’s call for transparent communication is especially relevant. Policy interventions could focus on enhancing public knowledge about the nature of cross-border commuting, fiscal contributions, and social rights. Greater transparency can reduce misinformation-driven resentment and foster a more inclusive narrative that recognizes the economic and social realities of modern labor mobility, helping to bridge the divide between residents and commuters.
This research not only informs Swiss policymakers but also resonates internationally, especially in countries grappling with integration challenges amid increasing cross-border labor flows. It is a compelling reminder that economic policies must be accompanied by efforts to nurture social cohesion and challenge misconceptions. The political acceptance of migrant labor hinges on perceptions of fairness and inclusion, demonstrating that policy frameworks should extend beyond economics to address symbolic and cultural dimensions thoughtfully.
In sum, the study reveals that the fundamental divide between cross-border commuters and foreign residents is rooted less in actual competition over jobs and more in societal views regarding belonging and fairness. This challenges entrenched assumptions in labor migration debates and paves the way for more informed and empathetic policy approaches. As border economies continue to evolve, fostering accurate understanding and inclusive social narratives will be pivotal for sustaining harmonious labor markets and resilient societies.
As labor mobility grows globally, the Swiss example underscores how critical it is to move beyond simplistic dichotomies of insiders versus outsiders and to engage with the nuanced, underlying perceptions that shape political attitudes. The interplay of factual knowledge, social identity, and normative ideas of fairness determines public acceptance—elements that must be at the heart of future scholarly inquiry and policy innovation in the migration domain.
Subject of Research:
The political and social attitudes towards foreign labor migrants in Switzerland, with a focus on differences in perceptions between cross-border commuters and foreign residents.
Article Title:
Migrating to stay or commuting to work? How fairness perceptions and exposure shape attitudes toward labor migration.
News Publication Date:
2026
Web References:
https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.70034
References:
Schaffer, L. M.; Spilker, G. (2026). Migrating to stay or commuting to work? How fairness perceptions and exposure shape attitudes toward labor migration. American Journal of Political Science.
Image Credits:
Lena Maria Schaffer, professor of international and transnational politics at the University of Lucerne. Photo: Markus Forte.
Gabriele Spilker, professor of international politics and global inequality and co-speaker of the Cluster of Excellence “The Politics of Inequality” at the University of Konstanz. Photo: Ines Janas.
Keywords:
Social sciences, Economics, Political science
