This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of local processes of policy
implementation in areas that are characterised by a high level of politicisation and where
decisions are underpinned by conflicting normative and functional imperatives. Based on
original research data collected in London and Barcelona, it compares the formal
entitlements and effective access of irregular migrants to publicly funded healthcare
services provided at the local level. My analysis suggests that ...
This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of local processes of policy
implementation in areas that are characterised by a high level of politicisation and where
decisions are underpinned by conflicting normative and functional imperatives. Based on
original research data collected in London and Barcelona, it compares the formal
entitlements and effective access of irregular migrants to publicly funded healthcare
services provided at the local level. My analysis suggests that where the political context
makes it difficult for national governments to openly justify and formalise the inclusion of
unlawful residents, they tend to resort to a contradictory rhetoric and ambiguous legal
frameworks. In practice, this means that the underlying conflicts have to be mediated by
lower levels of government, as well as those institutions and individuals responsible for
implementing this set of complex, frequently changing and often inconsistent rules and
regulations.
+