Karin Borevi

Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state, 1945-2010

List of figures Preface List of Abbreviations Notes on the Contributors Welfare State, Nation and Immigration G.Brochmann & A.Hagelund Sweden: The Flagship of Multiculturalism K.Borevi Denmark a National Welfare State Meets the World H.Vad Jonsson & K.Petersen Norway: The Land of the Golden G.Brochmann & A.Hagelund Comparison: A Model with Three Exceptions? G.Brochmann & A.Hagelund Bibliography Index

Sweden: The Flagship of Multiculturalism

The welfare state that was established in Sweden after World War II can basically be seen as an integration project, the aim of which was to promote national cohesion and solidarity. 1 The integration logic of the welfare state has been most clearly formulated by British sociologist T.H. Marshall who claimed that national solidarity presupposed that all inhabitants had a share in a common set of rights and resources according to the standards prevailing in that society. 2 The basic idea is that equality promotes integration. In this respect, the welfare state plays a key role in maintaining a certain level of social equality and in preventing the emergence of great socio-economic gaps between various groups of citizens. If we look at what underlies the Swedish welfare state, it is also possible to discern ideas concerning how the actual distribution of resources is to be organised in order to promote the aim of solidarity. The universal welfare model is based on the idea that a welfare policy that in principle includes all inhabitants is better able to promote overall solidarity among citizens than is a policy that selectively focuses on certain population categories.

Multiculturalism and welfare state integration: Swedish model path dependency

The present article offers an account of Swedish integration policies in the post-war period. The theoretical purpose is to assess Christian Joppke’s hypothesis that recent trends of integration policy convergence have rendered the national model approach analytically useless. The analysis shows that Sweden deviates, in some important respects, from the European trend by not formulating demands that link integration achievements to immigrants’ access to fundamental rights. The conclusion is that the Swedish case does not support Joppke’s hypothesis, but rather indicates that path dependency of national models is a valid explanation to ongoing developments. It is argued that the Swedish exception should be understood as an expression of the persistent impact of a policy logic according to which integration requires that all citizens have equal and universal access to certain fundamental rights. The article builds on general comparisons with European policy developments and uses Denmark as a more specific reference point.

Understanding Swedish Multiculturalism

Sweden is often portrayed as one of the most prominent representatives of an officially declared multicultural policy. Indeed, the Swedish case has been celebrated, alongside Canada and Australia, as the model for positive multicultural immigrant integration (Castles and Miller 1993). Sweden was also often mentioned — together with the UK and the Netherlands — as one of the European countries that in the postwar period most markedly adopted a multicultural policy (Koopmans et al. 2005; Freeman 2004; Castles and Miller 1993). The policy processes that followed after the terror attacks in 2001 profoundly changed this standard story, and now it is commonplace to characterize UK and Dutch multiculturalism as being in retreat (e.g. Joppke 2004; Entzinger 2003). However, when it comes to describing the current condition of multiculturalism in Sweden, commentators usually either give a rather uncertain or vague picture, or hold that the country constitutes something of an exception to the common European trend of backing down from previous multicultural policies (Koopmans et al. 2005; Joppke 2004). Hence, there is a widespread idea first that Sweden represents one of the clearest examples of immigrant multiculturalism in Europe, and second that this policy approach in Sweden, in contrast with other countries, remains rather unaffected by the ‘multiculturalism crisis’ that has been witnessed throughout the Western world since the turn of the millennium.

The tension between choice and need in the housing of newcomers: A theoretical framework and an application on Scandinavian settlement policies

The settlement and housing of refugees is high on the agenda in most European countries. This article develops a theoretical perspective on the housing provision of newly arrived migrants and applies it on the national discourses on settlement policies in Sweden, Denmark and Norway. The theoretical discussion focuses on the ambivalence between choice and need in housing policy, and between promoting demos and ethnos in integration policy. The empirical analysis takes its departure in these tensions and investigates the national discourses in terms of three potential arguments for restricting autonomy in the housing market precisely for newly arrived migrants: the legal status, resource and neighbourhood arguments. This frame of analysis makes it possible to interpret and understand the surprisingly strong differences in settlement policies between the three countries. We argue that our theoretical approach and analytical framework should be relevant for understanding national political discourses on settlement policy more generally.

A ‘civic turn’ in Scandinavian family migration policies? Comparing Denmark, Norway and Sweden

Family migration policy, once basing citizens and resident foreigners’ possibilities to bring in foreign family members mainly on the right to family life, is increasingly a tool states use to limit immigration and to push newcomers to integrate into civic and economic life. The family migration policies of Denmark, Norway and Sweden range widely – from more minimal support and age requirements to high expectations of language skills, work records and even income levels. While in Denmark and increasingly in Norway growing sets of requirements have been justified on the need to protect the welfare state and a Nordic liberal way of life, in Sweden more minimal requirements have been introduced in the name of spurring immigrants’ labor market integration even as rights-based reasoning has continued to dominate. In all three countries, new restrictions have been introduced in the wake of the refugee crisis. These cases show how prioritizations of the right to family life vis-à-vis welfare-state sustainability have produced different rules for family entry, and how family migration policies are used to different extents to push civic integration of both new and already settled immigrants.

Family Migration Policies and Politics Understanding the Swedish Exception

This article aims at characterizing and explaining Swedish family migration policies from a European comparative point of view. The analysis shows that Sweden applies equally strict eligibility rules for members beyond the nuclear family as most other European countries. Moreover, Sweden introduced such stricter rules much earlier than other countries. In other respects, however, Swedish family migration policies stand out as exceptionally liberal in European comparison; few, if any, requirements are imposed on the sponsor and joining family members acquire equal rights status either immediately or 2 years after admission. To explain this situation, the article analyzes political processes behind two important family migration policy decisions in 1997 and 2010. The conclusion is that Swedish welfare state ideology and party politics importantly contribute to understanding why Sweden diverges from European trends in family migration policies.

The civic turn of immigrant integration policies in the Scandinavian welfare states

This special issue addresses the question of how to understand the civic turn within immigrant integration in the West towards programs and instruments, public discourses and political intentions, which aim to condition, incentivize, and shape through socialization immigrants into ‘citizens’. Empirically, it focuses on the less studied Scandinavian cases of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. In this introduction, we situate the contributions to this special issue within the overall debate on civic integration and convergence. We introduce the three cases, critically discuss the (liberal) convergence thesis and its descriptive and explanatory claims, and explain why studying the Scandinavian welfare states can further our understanding of the nature of the civic turn and its driving forces. Before concluding, we discuss whether civic integration policies actually work.

Gender and the ‘integrationist turn’ : Comparative perspectives on marriage migration in the UK and Sweden

Family migration policies are part of a larger integration policy trend referred to as the ‘civic integrationist turn’. States across Europe have moved away from more rights-based approaches for th ...