How did you come to study the political participation of migrants?

During the first year of my PhD I stumbled upon an article by Victoria Finn which jointly considers migrant political engagement in both residence and homeland countries. It was particularly insightful, as immigrant and emigrant political behaviour have tended to be studied as separate subjects in the literature. This reading, in a way, represented the starting point of my thesis — I wanted to better understand the political behaviour and preferences of migrants in a truly transnational fashion, considering that their daily experiences are simultaneously embedded and shaped by what occurs in two different social, spatial, cultural and political contexts. Over time, the research has evolved and the focus on this duality became one but not the main feature of my dissertation. What was there at the beginning, and became increasingly central, was the willingness to research dynamics of exclusion and belonging in contemporary societies and understand how exclusionary discourses, policies and practices shape migrant political engagement.

Can you describe each of the three essays that make up your thesis?

At the core of my dissertation lies the recognition of a delicate paradox. Rising rates of international migration have made Western societies increasingly diverse. Yet, the same societies are witnessing a resurgence of xenophobic and nationalist discourses and attitudes. My thesis seeks to understand the implications of this tension, through an analysis of how political inclusion can occur amidst exclusionary pressures. Each of the three essays that constitute my dissertation addresses questions of political participation and representation through the standpoint of both individuals with a migration background and political actors, with an empirical focus on Switzerland.

In the first article, “Migrant Electoral Participation in Origin and Residence Countries: A Multidimensional Perspective on the Role of Inclusion and Exclusion Perceptions”, I examine how individuals’ perceptions of inclusion and exclusion, from both homeland and residence countries, affect decisions to vote amongst individuals with a migration background. This article proposes to take into account the intrinsic duality of the migration experience and to recognise that individuals with a migration background can be simultaneously embedded in two different social, geographical and political spaces. From there, it explores if — and how — perceptions of exclusion in each space affect voting decisions across contexts. With an empirical focus on the Swiss context, I analysed the electoral engagement in residence and home countries election of Kosovo-, Italian-, and German-Swiss dual citizens, using statistical methods. Three main findings emerge from the analysis. First, different dimensions of exclusion and inclusion perceptions may have different (i.e. mobilising vs. demobilising) effects on turnout. Second, there appear to be variations across groups, suggesting that broader group-level trajectories also matter. Third, findings appear to confirm the importance of considering electoral behaviour in residence and homeland elections jointly. Not only did some dimensions of inclusion and exclusion perceptions exert an effect on turnout beyond the country in which they occurred, but the direction of effects of some of these dimensions also varied across contexts.

The second article, “Opening-Up the Black Box: Migrants’ Understandings of Exclusion and Engagement with Politics Across Contexts”, maintains a focus on the connection between experiences of exclusion and political involvement. Here, however, I interrogate the implications of treating both exclusion and political participation as simply either present or absent outcomes. Drawing on sociological literature on boundary work and responses to stigmatisation, I qualitatively explored through semi-structured in-depth interviews how members of the Kosovo-Albanian diaspora community in Switzerland make sense of exclusionary experiences in different ways, and whether these different understandings of exclusion are associated with different reasons, modes, and degrees of political involvement in both Switzerland and Kosovo. Findings suggest that individuals with a migration background do make sense of exclusionary contexts differently, and these different understandings translate into different understandings of political engagement, with important implications for democratic representation. For example, while those who understand exclusion and discrimination as systemic features tend to engage with politics to voice discontent, those who downplay or deny the existence of discriminatory structures appear to engage with politics to assert their adherence with receiving societies’ norms and express more system-supporting views. Importantly, the transnational dimension of the analysis also reveals that shifts in individuals’ socio-economic positioning between Switzerland and Kosovo correspond to differences in the emotions driving the interpretation of both exclusionary experiences and decisions (not) to engage in politics.

Lastly, in the third article, “Immigrant-Background Candidates Inclusion: Party Strategies amidst Ideological and Strategic Constraints”, the focus is shifted to questions of political representation. In this contribution, I look at Swiss political parties’ decisions to nominate candidates with an immigration background in their electoral lists. I present a novel theoretical approach that considers how the interplay between strategic and ideological factors in parties’ nomination decisions can lead to inclusion outcomes that do not linearly map onto a left-right understanding of ideology. Empirically, I focussed on parliamentary elections held at the cantonal and national levels across three Swiss cantons (Geneva, Schwyz and Ticino), and combined quantitative analysis with interviews with candidates of Kosovo-Albanian origin. Findings confirm that inclusion patterns do not linearly map onto a left-right understanding of ideology: while both far-right and centre-right parties appear less inclusive than left-wing ones, far-right, anti-immigration parties are not less inclusive of immigrant-background candidates than centre-right ones that do not advance nativist discourses. Results of this paper furthermore show how parties can act as gatekeepers, placing candidates with an immigration background on lists with lower chances of election. It also unveils the existing glass ceilings individuals with a migratory background face when trying to move up the political ladder.

What could be the social and political implications of your findings?

It is crucial to note that the inclusion of migrants and minorities in politics is ultimately a question of democratic legitimacy, particularly in areas where they represent a significant share of the population. On the one hand, barriers and disincentives to their participation can endanger the representativeness of democratic decision-making processes. Similarly, their limited presence in elected bodies raises significant concerns regarding descriptive, and possibly also substantive, representation. Some of the findings presented above, concerning the potential demobilising effect of exclusion perceptions, feelings of lack of legitimacy in voicing concerns and criticism towards the system, or the existence of glass ceilings and gatekeeping from winning positions in electoral lists, must be read with this in mind. 

My work however also highlights that political participation can, and does, take place within exclusionary contexts. Some of the findings show that certain dimensions of perceptions of exclusion can have a mobilising effect. Findings also suggest that understanding experiences of exclusion as part of a systemic issue is associated with viewing political engagement as a means of expressing discontent and attempting to change discriminatory structures. Finally, although perhaps a more marginal point within the thesis, ultimately these articles also challenge the notion, often reinforced by certain political narratives, that migrants and individuals with a migration background form a homogeneous group. In reality, they exhibit a wide range of attitudes, beliefs, and political behaviours, just as is the case among populations without a migration background. It is therefore time, both in research and in politics, to stop treating them as a monolith.

*     *     *

Agnese Cecilia Maria Zucca defended her PhD thesis in International Relations/Political Science, titled “Inclusion amidst Exclusion? Perspectives on Migrants’ Political Engagement”, on 13 May 2025.
Emeritus Professor David Sylvan presided over the committee, which included Associate Professor Sungmin Rho, Thesis Director, and Associate Professor Floris Vermeulen, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Citation of the PhD thesis: 
Zucca, Agnese Cecilia Maria. “Inclusion amidst Exclusion? Perspectives on Migrants’ Political Engagement.” PhD thesis, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, 2025.
Access:
An abstract of the PhD thesis is available on the Geneva Graduate Institute’s repository. As the thesis itself is embargoed until July 2028, please contact Dr Zucca for access.

Banner image: part of a photo by Gustave Deghilage/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
Interview by Nathalie Tanner, Research Office.