686 International Organization In advanced market economy countries in the late 1990s,the importance of under- standing the politics of immigration control may seem self-evident.Immigration is a Janus-faced policy with both domestic and international consequences.Domesti- cally,many politicians are confronting a politically powerful backlash against for- eign residents of all types:undocumented and documented,foreign born and foreign by ethnicity,workers and dependents,voluntary migrants and involuntary refugees and asylum seekers.At the same time,employers continue to petition for greater access to migrant labor,both skilled and unskilled.Internationally,conflict arises over disparate national interests,such as the desire by developing countries for greater emigration versus the preference for limited immigration by advanced industrial coun- tries.Alternatively,conflict arises when one country implements policies that transfer its control problems toother nations.The 1993 German policy to reject asylum seekers transit- ing"safe"countriesen route to Germany reduced Germany's intake of asylum seek- ers but only at the expense of an increase of immigrants in neighboring countries. Empirically,national patterns of immigration control vary widely,despite similar positions of advanced industrial countries in the global economy.From the mid- 1950s to the mid-1970s,for example,many OECD (Organization for Economic Co- operation and Development)countries experienced low unemployment and tight la- bor markets,leading to rising wages.Yet some countries chose to import immigrant labor to moderate wages and labor-market shortages(for example,France,Germany, and Australia),whereas others discouraged immigration altogether(for example,Ja- pan)or began closing the door to labor-market immigrants well before the oil shock of 1973(for example,Great Britain,Switzerland,and Sweden).In light of similar labor market conditions,the variation in immigration control represents an interest- ing empirical puzzle. Moreover,the international flow of people has not yet been systematically drawn into the research agenda in international political economy.3 Although the determi- nants of global patterns of trade,production,and capital flows are now widely stud- ied,immigration remains predominantly in the domain of economists,demogra- phers,and sociologists.The literature on immigration policy formation that does exist tends to be country specific rather than comparative,making it difficult to sort between idiosyncratic factors and more generally applicable theories.As James F. Hollifield notes,"truly comparative works on immigration are few.In the field of migration studies,the tendency has been to collect national case studies,bind them together,and call the study comparative.Such compendia are useful sources of infor- mation,but they rarely yield theoretical insights."4 Comparative research on the sources of immigration policy and patterns will inform the research agenda of inter- national political economy by including an important flow of resources across na- tional boundaries. The article is divided into four parts.In the first section I briefly describe the distinctive patterns of immigration in selected OECD countries and the standard explanations advanced to account for these patterns.I explain in the second section 3.Haus1995 4.Hollifield 1992,17.In advanced market economy countriesin the late 1990s, the importance of under￾standing the politics of immigration control may seem self-evident. Immigration is a Janus-faced policy with both domestic and international consequences. Domesti￾cally, many politicians are confronting a politically powerful backlash against for￾eign residents of all types: undocumented and documented,foreign born and foreign by ethnicity, workers and dependents, voluntary migrants and involuntary refugees and asylum seekers. At the same time, employers continue to petition for greater access to migrant labor, both skilled and unskilled. Internationally, con ict arises over disparate nationalinterests,such asthe desire by developingcountriesfor greater emigration versusthe preference for limited immigration by advanced industrial coun￾tries. Alternatively, conict arises when one country implements policies that transfer its controlproblemsto other nations.The 1993German policy to reject asylumseekerstransit￾ing ‘‘safe’’ countries en route to Germany reduced Germany’s intake of asylum seek￾ers but only at the expense of an increase of immigrants in neighboring countries. Empirically, national patterns of immigration control vary widely, despite similar positions of advanced industrial countries in the global economy. From the mid- 1950sto the mid-1970s, for example, many OECD (Organization for Economic Co￾operation and Development) countries experienced low unemployment and tight la￾bor markets, leading to rising wages. Yet some countries chose to import immigrant labor to moderate wages and labor-market shortages(for example, France, Germany, and Australia), whereas others discouraged immigration altogether (for example, Ja￾pan) or began closing the door to labor-market immigrants well before the oil shock of 1973 (for example, Great Britain, Switzerland, and Sweden). In light of similar labor market conditions, the variation in immigration control represents an interest￾ing empirical puzzle. Moreover, the international  ow of people has not yet been systematically drawn into the research agenda in international political economy.3 Although the determi￾nants of global patterns of trade, production, and capital  ows are now widely stud￾ied, immigration remains predominantly in the domain of economists, demogra￾phers, and sociologists. The literature on immigration policy formation that does exist tends to be country speciŽ c rather than comparative, making it difficult to sort between idiosyncratic factors and more generally applicable theories. As James F. HolliŽ eld notes, ‘‘truly comparative works on immigration are few. In the Ž eld of migration studies, the tendency has been to collect national case studies, bind them together, and call the study comparative. Such compendia are usefulsources of infor￾mation, but they rarely yield theoretical insights.’’ 4 Comparative research on the sources of immigration policy and patterns will inform the research agenda of inter￾national political economy by including an important  ow of resources across na￾tional boundaries. The article is divided into four parts. In the Ž rst section I brie y describe the distinctive patterns of immigration in selected OECD countries and the standard explanations advanced to account for these patterns. I explain in the second section 3. Haus 1995. 4. HolliŽ eld 1992, 17. 686 International Organization