Selective Immigration and Import Policies: A Scientific Approach to Countering Populism

In recent decades, the rise of populist political parties has become a defining feature of the global political landscape. This phenomenon transcends borders, manifesting in virtually every country with varying degrees of intensity and ideological leanings. A groundbreaking study published in the prestigious Economic Journal sheds new light on the complex interplay between globalization and the surge in populist rhetoric. By disentangling the nuanced effects of trade and immigration—two pivotal dimensions of globalization—the research offers a detailed and methodologically rigorous examination of how these forces influence political narratives and electoral success.

At the heart of the investigation lies a novel populism index, meticulously developed by Riccardo Turati and colleagues. Drawing on a comprehensive meta-analysis of electoral programs from fifty-five countries over a span of nearly six decades (1960–2019), this index measures the degree to which political parties employ anti-elite discourse and promise protection from external economic shocks. This continuous populism score enables an unprecedented empirical analysis of trends and patterns, revealing a significant escalation in populist rhetoric across Europe during the 2010s. Notably, this shift is not confined to fringe parties but extends to traditional political actors who have increasingly adopted populist language as a strategic response to economic anxieties.

The study advances the understanding of globalization’s impact by distinguishing between the skill composition embedded in imported goods and the educational qualifications of immigrants. Such a granular approach offers critical insights beyond simplistic generalizations about globalization fueling populism. Specifically, the findings reveal that imports characterized by a high-skilled labor content and the influx of highly educated immigrants serve to dampen the electoral fortunes of populist parties, particularly those on the right wing. In contrast, the importation of low-skilled, labor-intensive products appears to dramatically fuel both right- and left-wing populism, reflecting the heightened economic insecurity perceived by lower-skilled domestic workers.

An intriguing dimension arises in how different types of immigration are linked to divergent populist outcomes. Low-skilled immigration, for instance, correlates with an increase in right-wing populism. This pattern may be attributed to economic competition fears and cultural anxieties prevalent among constituencies susceptible to such narratives. Paradoxically, the same low-skilled immigration seems to reduce left-wing populist support, hinting at fundamentally different ideological bases and target demographics for these two political currents. This nuanced delineation challenges the reductionist views that often dominate popular discourse on immigration and nationalism.

The authors emphasize the crucial role of skill content as a mediating factor between globalization shocks and political mobilization. Unlike previous studies that treat globalization as a monolithic force, this research elucidates how the heterogeneous composition of trade and migration shapes political responses. Importantly, the skill dimension commands significant policy relevance, suggesting that the qualitative characteristics of economic integration matter as much as quantitative measures. This insight marks a step forward in crafting targeted interventions to manage the political fallout of globalization.

Riccardo Turati, Serra Hùnter Professor at Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, underscores the contemporary urgency of these findings. As populist leaders worldwide increasingly adopt protectionist stances, advocating restrictions on international trade and migration, the study offers a counterpoint rooted in pragmatism. Turati highlights the potential efficacy of policies that selectively account for the skill profile of imported goods and immigrant workers, rather than broad-based barriers. Such differentiated, skill-sensitive policy frameworks could mitigate the adverse political consequences while preserving the economic benefits of global openness.

The methodological robustness of the study is noteworthy. By integrating meta-analytic techniques with a longitudinal dataset encompassing diverse geographical regions and political contexts, the authors perform a rigorous causal analysis. This methodological approach ensures that observed correlations are not spurious but reflect substantive mechanisms linking globalization to populist tendencies. Moreover, the continuous populism index not only enhances analytical precision but also facilitates the detection of subtle shifts in political rhetoric over time, often missed by binary or categorical measures.

Crucially, the research traverses ideological boundaries in its examination of populist phenomena. By simultaneously analyzing right-wing and left-wing variants, the study demonstrates the multifaceted nature of populism as a political strategy and movement. The differential sensitivity of right- and left-wing populism to trade and immigration variables enriches theoretical debates and offers a more nuanced map of the political ecosystem shaped by globalization. Such complexity is vital to avoid oversimplified narratives that conflate diverse populist strains into a single category.

The implications of this study extend beyond academic circles into the realm of public policy and political strategy. The evidence suggests that blanket trade restrictions or immigration caps are unlikely to resolve the underlying drivers of populist success. Instead, policies informed by the skill-specific content of globalization could strategically address economic vulnerabilities without resorting to protectionism or exclusion. For instance, bolstering educational programs for immigrants or fostering industries engaged in high-skilled global trade could form part of a comprehensive approach to stabilizing political environments.

Furthermore, this research provides a valuable framework for future scholarship. Its integrative methodology and conceptual innovation pave the way for investigations into other dimensions of globalization, such as technological change or financial flows, and their political consequences. Additionally, the dynamic populism index offers a replicable tool for assessing political discourse in different temporal and spatial contexts. Such tools are indispensable for monitoring ongoing political developments and designing timely interventions.

It is also noteworthy that the study results from a highly collaborative international effort. Contributors like Frédéric Docquier from LISER in Luxembourg, Stefano Iandolo from the University of Salerno in Italy, Hillel Rapoport from the Paris School of Economics in France, and Gonzague Vannoorenberghe from UCLouvain in Belgium collectively bring diverse expertise and perspectives. This multidisciplinary partnership enriches the analytical depth and ensures the broad applicability of the findings across Europe and beyond.

In summary, this innovative research convincingly demonstrates that the relationship between globalization and populism is far from straightforward. Instead, it is mediated by the qualitative aspects of trade and immigration—specifically, the skill content of imported goods and the educational level of immigrants. This insight challenges prevailing policy debates centered on blanket measures and invites a more nuanced, evidence-based discourse on managing globalization’s political effects. As such, it represents a significant advancement in our understanding of the evolving political economy in an increasingly interconnected world.

News Publication Date: 16-Feb-2026

Web References: https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueag019

References: The Economic Journal