Local Migration Policy: Governance Structures and Policy Output in Swedish Municipalities 3030832929, 9783030832926

Citation preview

Local Migration Policy Governance Structures and Policy Output in Swedish Municipalities Gustav Lidén · Jon Nyhlén

Local Migration Policy Lidén and Nyhlén ably synthesize past theories and findings from the US and EU, and contribute their own mixed-method investigation of Sweden, to understand the factors that shape local governments’ immigration and integration policies. Their examination of Swedish local governments provides a notable contribution to the literature given these municipalities’ historical autonomy in this sphere, and recent changes related to Sweden’s prominent role in resettlement during the migrant crisis. In particular, they highlight a convergent move toward more active local integration policies over time, even as municipalities’ immigration and integration policies may move in divergent directions. —Abigail Fisher Williamson, Political Science Department and Public Policy & Law Program and Director of the Centre for Hartford Engagement and Research (CHER), Trinity College Hartford, Connecticut, USA This book provides a long-awaited overview of local migration and integration policy in Sweden, targeting an international and Swedish readership. In a very systematic manner, the authors present the institutional setting considering the most important legal and administrative changes of the last decade. This not only makes it a highly topical book; thanks to the inclusion of essential findings from governance research and rich empirical data from three Swedish municipalities, it is also a valuable contribution from a theoretical and methodological point of view. —Sabine Kuhlmann, Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät, Universität Potsdam, Germany

Gustav Lidén · Jon Nyhlén

Local Migration Policy Governance Structures and Policy Output in Swedish Municipalities

Gustav Lidén Mid Sweden University Sundsvall, Sweden

Jon Nyhlén Stockholm University Stockholm, Sweden

ISBN 978-3-030-83292-6 ISBN 978-3-030-83293-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © Alex Linch/shutterstock.com Maps throughout this book were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. ArcGIS® and ArcMap™ are the intellectual property of Esri and are used herein under license. Copyright © Esri. All rights reserved. For more information about Esri® software, please visit www.esri.com. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

This book is the result of many years of studying local migration policy. What started with our being interested in the reception of immigrants in Swedish municipalities in 2011 has developed into dealing with the consequences of rule changes and an increased number of immigrants, as well as an even greater interest in the importance of the local level of government. Over the years we have been able to follow the increasing importance of and interest in the local level, both in research and from the political system. Government and international actors, decision makers, and researchers are more aware than ever of the importance of the local level. It is not only our interest in the importance of the local level for immigration policy that has led to the writing of this book. For a long time we have also been interested and amazed at how immigration policy and integration policy have been kept separate from each other both politically and in research. Although they often form two distinct areas, for the municipalities they are intimately intertwined. In this book we have combined these two spheres by addressing the municipal consequences of the dramatic event that the European migrant crisis represented. Writing this book has involved many conversations, meetings, journeys to municipalities and authorities, discussions and reflections on policy change and how municipalities and authorities, officials, and volunteers struggle daily to solve problems and find new ways to give immigrants a safe and good start in a new country. Many are the officials who we v

vi

PREFACE

interviewed at different political levels and who generously agreed to contribute their knowledge and perspectives regarding immigration and integration. We are most grateful to all of you. Drafts of this book have been presented frequently during recent years. We are pleased to have received valuable input from participants at the IMISCOE Annual Conference, the ECPR General Conference, and the annual meeting of the Swedish Political Science Association. Suggestions from members of GRITIM at the University of Pompeu Fabra were also valuable during Lidén’s sabbatical in Barcelona. We are particularly grateful to Professors Michele Micheletti (Stockholm University) and Anton Steen (Oslo University) who have provided us with valuable suggestions on how to develop the book during a particularly crucial time in the process. We are most grateful for the support of our editors at Palgrave Macmillan, first Jemima Warren and later Nicholas Barclay, for believing in our idea and assisting us during the process. The anonymous reviewers assigned by Palgrave Macmillan were also crucial in setting up the direction for finalising the project. The help with copy-editing given by Lisa Cockette was most helpful during the final phase of our work. On several occasions we have presented drafts of the project to colleagues at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences and the Risk and Crisis Research Centre at Mid Sweden University and the Department of Political Science at Stockholm University. These seminars had the effect of energising us to bring this project to fruition. We have also received financial support for completing this book from our home university departments and from Riksbankens Jubileumsfond. Such support was obviously crucial to carrying this through to completion. The most important part in accomplishing this book has been the support we have received from our families. The many hours dedicated to this project have required sacrifices not just for us but also for our wives Christina and Lotta and has meant considerable time away from our children. We therefore dedicate this book to Elsa, Matilda, and Hugo in the expectation that evenings and weekends from now on can be used for even more rewarding tasks than writing a book. Sörberge, Sweden Bromma, Sweden April 2021

Gustav Lidén Jon Nyhlén

Contents

1

2

Introducing Local Immigration and Integration Policy – Approaches and Themes 1.1 Introduction 1.2 The Premise of This Publication 1.3 The Rationale and Research Questions 1.4 Migration Policy and the Local Level of Government 1.4.1 The Local Government Level in Sweden and the Evolution of Swedish Migration Policy 1.5 The Theoretical Tools 1.5.1 Contemporary Contributions to Research on Local Migration Policy 1.6 Research Design 1.6.1 Elucidating State–local Relations 1.6.2 Descriptions and Patterns Drawn from Cross-Case Comparisons 1.6.3 Selection of Municipalities for Case Studies 1.6.4 Presentation of the Empirical Material 1.7 Overview of the Book References Theoretical Points of Departure 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Local Migration Policy – Key Definitions 2.3 The Governance Structures of Local Migration Policy

1 1 3 5 7 8 11 12 14 15 15 16 17 18 21 29 29 30 32 vii

viii

3

4

CONTENTS

2.3.1 Vertical Governance 2.3.2 Horizontal Governance 2.3.3 Governance Structures Within Migration Policy 2.3.4 The Actors in Local Migration Policy 2.4 The Policy Output of Local Migration Policy 2.4.1 Local Immigration Policy and the Output Created 2.4.2 Local Integration Policy and the Output Created 2.5 Concluding Remarks on Theoretical Positions References

33 34 35 40 43

Governing Swedish Immigration and Integration Policy 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The Historical Evolution of Swedish Immigration Policy 3.3 Historical Evolution of the Swedish Integration Policy 3.4 Governance Through Vertical, Horizontal, and Multi-Level Structures 3.4.1 Before the Migrant Crisis: From Large Local Discretion to Increased Government Control 3.4.2 After the Migrant Crisis: Stronger State Control and Focus on Cooperation Between Levels and Actors 3.4.3 After the Migrant Crisis: Increased Coordination and Cooperation Between Levels and Actors in Network Structures 3.5 Concluding Remarks References

73 73 74 79

Presentation and Contextualisation of Case Studies 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Describing Our Three Cases 4.2.1 Avesta 4.2.2 Vallentuna 4.2.3 Östersund 4.3 Selected Cases and Contextualisation of Their Local Immigration Policy 4.4 The Cases Selected and Contextualisation of Their Local Integration Policy 4.4.1 Integration Through the Labour Market

44 50 60 62

83 84

87

90 93 95 99 99 100 100 102 103 105 109 110

CONTENTS

4.4.2 4.4.3

Integration Through the Education System Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants 4.4.4 Compilation of Data Underlying the Local Integration Policy of the Cases Selected 4.5 Methods Used for Case Studies References 5

6

Local Immigration Policy in Swedish Municipalities 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Overview of the Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities 5.3 Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities Before the Migrant Crisis 5.3.1 Patterns of Variation in Local Immigration Policy 5.4 Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities After the Migrant Crisis 5.4.1 Patterns of Variation in the Admission of Immigrants 5.5 Concluding Remarks References Local Immigration Policy in the Case Studies Selected 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Avesta—A Municipality with a High Reception of Immigrants and Self-Settled Immigrants 6.2.1 Organisation of Immigrant Admission 6.2.2 Reception of Immigrants and Political Conflicts 6.2.3 Who Governs—Local Government Officials or Politicians, the Local Level or the Central Government? 6.3 Vallentuna—Large Changes in Policy and Ways of Working 6.3.1 Changes in Policy and Organisation to Cope with Increases in the Number of Immigrants Received 6.3.2 Reception of Immigrants and Political Conflict Lines

ix

111 113 117 118 121 125 125 126 128 131 138 141 144 147 149 149 150 151 154

155 157

160 162

x

CONTENTS

6.3.3

The Governing of Local Immigration Policy—Internal and External Relations 6.4 Östersund—A History Marked by the Moderate Reception of Immigrants 6.4.1 The Way in Which Immigrant Admission Has Evolved 6.4.2 Political Conflicts and How they Transformed Local Immigration Policy 6.4.3 Internal and External Governing of Local Immigration Policy 6.5 Concluding Remarks 6.5.1 Avesta—From a Liberal Policy to One that is More Restrictive Under Both Vertical and Multi-Level Governance 6.5.2 Vallentuna—A Continuously Restrictive Policy that Transformed Horizontal Modes of Governance to Vertical and Multi-Level Ones 6.5.3 Östersund—A Continuously Liberal Policy Marked by Both Vertical and Multi-Level Governance References 7

Local Integration Policy in Swedish Municipalities 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Integration Through the Labour Market 7.2.1 Output Variables of Labour Market Ambitions 7.2.2 Outcome variables of Labour Market Ambitions 7.3 Integration Through the Education System 7.3.1 Output Variables Reflecting the Education System 7.3.2 Outcome Variables Reflecting the Education System 7.4 Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants 7.4.1 Output Variables of the Housing Situation 7.4.2 Outcome Variables of the Housing Situation 7.5 Concluding Remarks References

164 167 168 171 172 175

176

177

179 181 185 185 187 190 191 193 194 197 199 201 202 205 209

CONTENTS

8

Local Integration Policy in the Case Studies Selected 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Avesta—From Non-policy to Long-term Integration Policy 8.2.1 Strategies for Establishing Integration Policies 8.2.2 Coordination Between External Actors 8.2.3 Integration Through the Labour Market 8.2.4 Integration Through the Education System 8.2.5 Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants 8.3 Vallentuna—From Non-policy to a Framework of Integration Policy 8.3.1 Developing an Integration Policy 8.3.2 Coordination Between External Actors 8.3.3 Integration Through the Labour Market 8.3.4 Integration Through the Education System 8.3.5 Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants 8.4 Östersund—Refining an Integration Policy with Multi-Level Governance Connections 8.4.1 Working with Integration Efforts 8.4.2 Coordination Between External Actors 8.4.3 Integration Through the Labour Market 8.4.4 Integration Through the Education System 8.4.5 Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants 8.5 Concluding Remarks 8.5.1 Avesta—Shifting from a Non-policy with Vertical Traits to an Active Policy of Multi-Level Governance 8.5.2 Vallentuna—From Non-policy to a Policy with Traits of Multi-Level Governance 8.5.3 Östersund—Continuous Development of a More Active Local Integration Policy Featuring Increased Elements of Multi-Level Governance References

xi

213 213 214 215 218 221 224 226 228 228 230 231 234 236 239 240 242 246 249 252 253

254 256

257 259

xii

9

CONTENTS

Bringing the Pieces Together 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Analysis of the Empirical Material in Relation to the Research Questions 9.2.1 Governance Structures Within Local Migration Policy 9.2.2 Policy Output and Outcome Within Local Migration Policy 9.2.3 Summary of Governance Structures and Policy Output—Answers to Research Questions 9.3 Additional Pieces Added to the Puzzle: Ideological Motives and Relationships Between Politicians and Municipal Officials 9.4 State–Local Relations: Stronger Governing by the Government But with Some Discretion for the Local Level 9.5 Three Overarching Contributions 9.5.1 A Policy Field in Continuous Disharmony 9.5.2 Refinement of the Theoretical Framework 9.5.3 General Implications for Policy Studies and Public Administration Research References

265 265 266 267 271 275

278

281 283 283 286 287 288

Appendix A – Compilation of Statistical Material

295

Appendix B – List of Informants and Description of Interview Guides

305

Appendix C – Specification of Research Design

311

Index

315

Abbreviation

CO CSPP DUA EU NBHBP PES SALAR SFI SIB SMA SNLB UN UNHCR

Civic Orientation Civil Society Public Partnership Delegation for the Employment of Young People and Newly Arrived Migrants European Union National Board of Housing, Building and Planning Swedish Public Employment Service Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions Swedish For Immigrants Swedish Immigrant Board Swedish Migration Agency Swedish National Labour Market Board United Nations United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

xiii

List of Figures

Fig. 4.1 Fig. 4.2 Fig. 4.3 Fig. 4.4 Fig. 4.5

Fig. 4.6 Fig. 4.7

Fig. 4.8 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 5.2 Fig. 5.3 Fig. 5.4

Employment rate for immigrants (in %) (2011–2018) Proportion of individuals (in %) leaving the establishment period (90 days later) with employment (2015–2018) Proportion of participants (in %) who passed an SFI course (2011–2018) Average study time (in days) for participants to pass an SFI course (2011–2018) Proportion of immigrants (in %) who lived in privately owned homes and proportion of them (in %) who had been received during the three preceding years (2011–2018) Index of residential segregation (2011–2016) Proportion of population with a foreign background in the municipalities of Avesta (left), Vallentuna (centre), and Östersund (right) at the sub-municipal level (2018) Compilation of outcome variables of local integration policy (2018) Immigrants received in municipalities (2005–2018) Proportion of immigrants received in municipalities based on different categories of reception (2005–2018) Immigrants received in municipalities (bar) and average across municipalities (line) per 1,000 inhabitants (2015) Immigrants received in municipalities (Y-axis) and municipal population size on a logarithmic scale (X-axis) (2015)

110 111 112 113

114 115

116 118 126 127 129

132

xv

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 5.5 Fig. 5.6

Fig. 7.1

Fig. 7.2

Fig. 7.3

Fig. 7.4

Fig. 7.5

Fig. 7.6

Fig. 7.7

Immigrants received in municipalities (bar) and average across municipalities (line) per 1,000 inhabitants (2017) Immigrants received in municipalities (Y-axis) and municipal population size on a logarithmic scale (X-axis) (2017) Employment rates (in %) in 2011–2018 for male (solid line) and female (dotted line) immigrants received in municipalities in 2011 Employment rates (in %) in 2011–2018 for immigrants with compulsory education (solid line), upper-secondary education (dashed line), and post-secondary education (dotted line) received in municipalities in 2011 Average employment rates for immigrants (in %) in municipalities (solid line). Average employment rates for immigrants (in %) in municipalities only including immigrants received during the three preceding years (dotted line) (2011–2018) Proportion of individuals (in %) leaving the establishment period (90 days later) with employment (municipalities, Y-axis 2018, X-axis 2015; excluding municipalities with fewer than 10 individuals leaving the establishment period in 2015 and 2018) Left: average number of students per SFI teacher in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2012–2018). Right: average proportion of teachers with a university degree in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018) Left: average number of students per SFI teacher (bars) and average across municipalities (line) (2018). Right: average proportion of teachers with a university degree (bars) and average across municipalities (line) (2018) Left graph: average proportion (in %) of participants who passed an SFI course (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018). Centre graph: average proportion (in %) of beginners who passed at least two SFI courses in the two preceding years (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2013–2018). Right graph: average study time (in days) it took for participants to pass an SFI course (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018)

139

142

188

189

191

192

195

196

198

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 7.8

Fig. 7.9

Fig. A.1

Average proportion of immigrants (in %) in municipalities who live in privately owned homes (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018) Average value of the index of residential segregation in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2016) Illustration of the criteria used to select cases

xvii

203

204 312

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5 Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Table 4.3

Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3

Presentation of the theoretical points of departure Policies of migration A model of governance structures applicable to local migration research Mapping actors who affect local migration policy Theoretical framework for examining local migration policy Immigrants received, actual reception, agreed reception (2010–2015) and allotted reception (2016–2018), absolute numbers and per 1,000 inhabitants (2010–2018) Immigrants arriving in municipalities who have organised their own accommodation as a proportion of the total number of immigrants received (2010–2018) Immigrants arriving in municipalities because of reunification with family members as a proportion of the total number received but excluding self-settled immigrants (2010–2018) Immigrants received in municipalities (2015) Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per classification of municipality (2015) Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities, unemployment rate (in %), and municipalities’ financial strength (2015)

30 31 39 40 60

106

107

108 130 133

134

xix

xx

LIST OF TABLES

Table 5.4

Table 5.5

Table 5.6

Table 5.7

Table 5.8 Table 5.9 Table 5.10

Table 5.11 Table 5.12

Table 5.13

Table 7.1 Table 7.2 Table 9.1

Table A.1

Average number of immigrants received in municipalities, per local government of municipality (2015) Analysis of the correlation between received and assigned immigrants in municipalities in 2015 and share of votes (in %) for the Sweden Democrats in the 2014 municipal elections Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities and share of the foreign-born population (in %) (2015) Linear regression analysis of assigned immigrants in municipalities (per 1,000 inhabitants) based on a set of independent variables Immigrants received in municipalities (2017) Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per classification of municipality (2017) Correlation analysis of immigrants received in municipalities, unemployment rate (in %), and the financial strength of municipalities (2017) Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per local government of the municipality (2017) Analysis of the correlation between received and assigned immigrants in municipalities in 2017 and share of vote (in %) for the Sweden Democrats in the 2014 municipal election (in %) Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities and share of foreign-born population (in %) (2017) Employment rates (in %) for immigrants received in municipalities (2011–2018) Assessment of housing market for immigrants received in municipalities (2014–2018) Summary of case studies—governance structures and policy outputs in local immigration policy and local integration policy Selected cases

135

136

136

138 140 142

143 144

144

145 187 201

276 312

CHAPTER 1

Introducing Local Immigration and Integration Policy – Approaches and Themes

1.1

Introduction

There is a before and after for the European migrant crisis. Migration policies in European national states changed radically as a consequence of the dramatic increase in immigration to the continent in 2015 and 2016 as a result of civil wars and conflicts, particularly in countries belonging to the Greater Middle East (e.g., Gammeltoft-Hansen & Tan, 2017). The scale of this wave of migration to Europe and exodus from affected countries had not been witnessed since the Second World War. While the global trajectories of this mass movement have been carefully monitored and reported, the impact on local communities all over Europe, which in the end became the hosts of the inflow of new individuals, has not been as systematically analysed. Nonetheless, the dispersal of immigrants arriving in European countries during this period was neither random nor proportional. Sweden, along with a few other member countries of the European Union (EU), ended up in the global limelight as recognised final host countries of the massive flow of people fleeing their home countries. Although Sweden has long been internationally known as a destination country to which immigrants seek to go, the magnitude of the inflow during this period was previously unheard of. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) lists Sweden amongst those countries in the world with the largest proportion of refugees in relation to the total population in 2017. While the other countries at the top of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_1

1

2

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

this ranking are located in Africa or the Middle East, Sweden stands out as the only high-income country located in the Western world (UNHCR, 2018). This disproportionality in the reception of immigrants across European countries was also replicated in Sweden with unequal reception across the Swedish municipalities. While some municipalities saw population growths of more than 4% in one year, simply due to the admission of immigrants, others more or less refrained from receiving immigrants. Furthermore, the responsibility of the receiving municipalities does not end at this point. After arrival, the subsequent phase involves helping individuals through the process of becoming integrated and established in their new societies. The dramatic event that the migrant crisis entailed also changed countries’ migration policies. Substantial amendments were hastily made to a policy field in which already tense state–local relations struggled to manage coordination, responsibilities, and funding (OECD, 2018). Scholars have shown that both reception policies (Gammeltoft-Hansen & Tan, 2017) and policies regulating the integration of immigrants (Hernes, 2018) became more restrictive as a consequence of the crisis (Hagelund, 2020). Sweden was no exception to this. In March 2016 the Swedish government enforced a new piece of legislation that affected its 290 municipalities’ reception of immigrants. As a result of the increased inflow of immigrants to the country, actions were taken that lowered municipal autonomy through the enforcement of the Settlement Act (SFS 2016:38, 2016). Sweden thereby moved away from espousing a system of substantial voluntary elements in which immigrants were allocated to municipalities according to a process of negotiation between state and local governments. Instead, under the new law, immigrants are dispersed to municipalities through a specific distribution model that does not take municipal standpoints into consideration. Furthermore, a package of stricter policies, denoted as a piece of temporary legislation, was also ratified in July 2016. Amongst other things it reduced the possibility for some asylum seekers to have their applications approved, replaced permanent residence permits with temporary ones in most cases, and tightened the requirement for family reunification (SFS 2016:752, 2016). This piece of temporary legislation was prolonged until July 2021. Many of the elements of this law were included in the permanent legislation implemented in July 2021. As a result of the above-mentioned circumstances, the migrant crisis and its associated policy responses must be perceived as forming a critical juncture (Collier & Munck, 2017). While it is naturally most stressful

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

3

for those individuals who have fled their homes, the event can nonetheless be described as an exogenous shock to European societies, not least to Sweden.1 In the wake of the crisis, substantial policy changes were agreed in a short period of time and moreover had long-lasting effects. Being able to reach this point required what Cappocia and Kelmen (2007, p. 343) have described as specific circumstances in which “the structural … influences on political action are significantly relaxed for a relatively short period.” Nonetheless, the critical juncture that was the migrant crisis did not have a uniform effect, neither in Europe nor in Swedish municipalities. In local governments its consequences are not yet well known. We perceive the migrant crisis and the subsequent policy responses to be an important cut-off point. If it is well utilized by academic research, then it can enrich current knowledge of both the governance and consequences of migration policy.

1.2

The Premise of This Publication

In this book we set out to study local migration policy in Sweden before, during, and after the migrant crisis. Our perspective is that this involves two different but related types of policies. We adhere to Hammar and colleagues’ (1985) classical distinction that has been widely applied in this field (e.g., Filomeno, 2017; Varsanyi, 2010) and distinguish between policies that (i) regulate and distribute the admission of immigrants into local societies and (ii) policies that regulate the social integration of immigrants in their new local communities. Throughout this book we refer to the first example as local immigration policy and the second as local integration policy. Notwithstanding the formal administration inherent in such policies, we argue that in democratic societies in which there is some degree of local self-rule the sub-national level will always have some authority over the processes of design and implementation (Filomeno, 2017; Varsanyi, 2010). As stated by Hammar et al. (1985), these two types of policy are not isolated from each other. Quite the contrary, they are highly interdependent and should therefore be shaped in conjunction with each other. For instance, a more liberal immigration policy will put additional pressure on the integration policy for it to succeed. Likewise, a struggling integration policy will have repercussions on how any future immigration policies are shaped. Throughout this book we refer to the individuals that are subject to local migration policy as immigrants. However, we restrict this term

4

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

to those foreign citizens who have been received or settled in Swedish municipalities and have been granted residential permits as refugees, as a result of subsidiarity protection or extraordinary circumstances, including being relatives of such individuals. From a local perspective, it would be redundant to examine any other groups since it is the admission of these individuals for which municipalities are compensated, and these individuals who are subject to local policy. Although this book aims to add general theoretical knowledge, it reaches such knowledge from analyses of the local government level in Sweden. There are several connected arguments for our explicit focus on Sweden. The country is characterised as a decentralised unitary state in which the local government level has significant autonomy, both in regulations and in reality. This is all related to the importance of the local government level, its economic capacity, and its mandate, which is guaranteed in the constitution (Ladner et al., 2019; Lidström, 2011). In terms of establishing a specific migration policy, Sweden is highlighted by international scholars as a forerunner. As early as the 1960s, Swedish policy went from a phase of non-policy to a regulated form of policy that in 1975 was followed by a specific integration policy with multicultural characteristics (Borevi, 2012; Hammar, 1985). Penninx (2015) writes that a layer of local policy arose in the wake of this regulation, particularly in Swedish cities, and states that Sweden together with the Netherlands have a long tradition of local policies in this area. This historical tradition of maintaining specific policies can still be seen today in the area of integration policy. In international comparisons Sweden comes out as an extreme case. Solano and Huddleston (2020) found Sweden to be one of the countries whose policies created the best conditions for integrating immigrants of the 52 countries studied. The significance of migration policy has increased steadily in Swedish society. Correspondingly, how this area of policy should be designed has also become more important for Swedish citizens, and nowadays it is frequently perceived as one of the most significant issues in opinion polls. In fact, in 2019 immigration was ranked by Swedish citizens as the most important societal issue (Martinsson & Andersson, 2020). Finally, and most paradoxically, policy making in the local government arena in Sweden has not been studied comprehensively within this field. The fact that local responses to the migrant crisis have not been systematically examined from a Swedish perspective, despite the requests of international scholars (Trix, 2018), is similar to how Sweden has mainly been overlooked in comparative

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

5

projects of local migration issues (Caponio et al., 2018; Caponio & Borkert, 2010; Glorius & Doomernik, 2020). Although a few recent examples have targeted the local level policy in Sweden, it has not been studied in a systematic manner (Lacroix & Desille, 2017) nor comprehensively (Hudson et al., 2021). This lack of inclusion of the Swedish context in comparisons is particularly worrying given that this is a country with a long tradition of well-tested policies as well as far-reaching local autonomy. As such, valuable new theoretical and empirical knowledge can be expected to be gained from this setting.

1.3

The Rationale and Research Questions

Those few studies that have addressed the consequences of the migrant crisis at a local level have emphasized that this critical juncture has created a window of opportunity for active policy making (Bazurli, 2019; Betts et al., forthcoming; Sabchev, 2021; Søholt & Aasland, forthcoming), giving rise to the notion that local governments are becoming more active agents that formulate their own agendas, strategies, answers, and solutions (Zapata-Barrero et al., 2017). Even if new research is beginning to cover the migrant crisis, the seemingly vast variation in how it has affected local governments has been far less examined. This evocatively fascinating puzzle, encompassing varying conditions, governance, and policies produced by such polities, is likely to entice migration and policy scholars to examine this particular period in due course. This publication aims to contribute some of the elements that can lead to a greater understanding. Our study of local migration policy is underpinned by two thematic approaches that act as building blocks combining seldom-used analytical perspectives. In Chapter 2 these building blocks are transformed into a theoretical framework that will guide our empirical analysis. The first building block is a simultaneous investigation into local immigration policy and local integration policy. While this has been the ambition of studies of national level policies (e.g., Hammar, 1985), the corresponding elements in studies of local governments have only been presented in a theoretical fashion (Filindra & Goodman, 2019; Filomeno, 2017; Varsanyi, 2010). Hence this publication contrasts with the common tradition of research in this field. We perceive these different aspects to be highly interdependent, representing two sides of the same coin. An integrated analysis of the two types of policy is necessary for studying the broader concept of local migration policy.

6

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

As a second building block, we will differentiate between governance structures on the one hand, and the output and outcome of policy produced in such settings on the other.2 As articulated by Caponio and Donatiello (2017), we will jointly address the issues of both policy making processes and policy content, which have been uncommon in migration research but enable a more holistic procedural perspective. From our standpoint, governance structures refer to the processes that precede specific policy results. They involve alternative modes of governance and potentially a multitude of involved actors and highlight state–local relations. A governance perspective of migration issues is necessary in order to handle this complex policy field (Meer et al., 2021; Scholten, 2020). As with all examinations of the local level of government, linkages between municipalities and public and non-public actors need to be considered (Sellers et al., 2020). Although this is an empirical question, we expect to find elements of vertical, horizontal, and multi-level governance covering the policy agenda, governing processes, and the values embodying the latter (cf., Eckersley, 2017; Pierre & Sundström, 2009; Scholten, 2013). Issues related to output and outcomes of policy instead focus on what it is that political systems produce, and it is found they differ between local immigration and local integration policy. While the first is analysed as being liberal or restrictive in terms of the reception of immigrants (Meyers, 2004), the latter can be characterised as either upholding a situation of non-policy or adopting an active policy with the aim of facilitating immigrant integration (Alexander, 2007). In laying these building blocks, our research makes use of two frames of comparison that function as empirical delimitations and create methodological leverage. First, the temporal cut-off point will be used for comparisons before and after the migrant crisis and the subsequent policy changes. This helps create novel insights into the vast but varying settings and results of local migration policy before and after this critical juncture. Second, spatial comparisons are enabled through cross-case comparisons of the full range of the 290 local municipalities in Sweden. Two research questions focus on the Swedish context and guide this publication. Together they draw on the above-mentioned building blocks.

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

7

• How are the governance structures of local migration policy shaped? Embedded within the above question are parallel analyses of local immigration and local integration policy, prevailing before and after the migrant crisis, and comparisons of governance structures both between municipalities and between the government and local actors. • How are outputs and outcomes of local migration policy described and explained? This question relates to both the direct policy content created, namely policy output, and the more long-term effects of such policies, referred to as outcomes. Once again, this involves matching analyses of local immigration and local integration policy prevailing before and after the migrant crisis. To be able to answer this research question comparative work is required.3

1.4 Migration Policy and the Local Level of Government While migration research has traditionally been characterised by a ‘methodological nationalism’ (Bommes & Thränhardt, 2010; Wimmer & Schiller, 2002) meaning that national models have been given precedence over more fine-grained levels of analysis, there has been a growing interest in the crucial role played by local-level policy making in terms of migration and integration issues. Sub-national polities have received increasing attention subsequent to modern pioneering works by scholars such as Alexander (2007) and Caponio and Borkert (2010). Referred to as a ‘local turn’, it is fair to say that this constitutes a completely new sub-field within migration research (e.g., Caponio et al., 2018). The scientific interest in the role played by the local government level in these policy areas is an acknowledgement that local governments are becoming more active agents that formulate their own agendas, strategies, answers, and solutions (Zapata-Barrero et al., 2017). Local policy making in this area has evidently affected state–local relations, creating divergences and sometimes decoupled policy areas (e.g., Dekker et al., 2015; Poppelaars & Scholten, 2008; Schmidtke & Zaslove, 2014). As a consequence, theoretical preferences within this field have tended towards

8

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

multi-level perspectives of governance (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018; Guiraudon & Lahav, 2007; Zapata-Barrero et al., 2017). This mirrors how the social sciences in general have started to highlight local governments as crucial bodies that take on roles of leadership and coordination when it comes to the provision of welfare services (Agranoff, 2018). This is expected in circumstances in which we see governing systems characterised by interdependent public and private actors, found at different levels, that challenge traditional understandings of state–local relations. Hence municipalities are important in the design and implementation of migration policy. Alexander (2007, p. 6) rightfully states that: “National-level migration policies are tried, tested and articulated at the local level.” The fact that the translation of national policy into local circumstances involves challenges that will often create different results in different local settings was already well known in pioneering work on policy theory (e.g., Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973). Analogous to this is an understanding that even with a reinforcement of national policy, different forms of local discretion will nonetheless be possible. Such local autonomy can take many forms and is apparent both within organisations and between them. As noted, this is not unfamiliar to scholars of migration policy. Money (1999) demonstrates that the sub-national distribution of immigrants is neither random nor free of political influence. Regardless of whether local immigration policies exist or not, immigrants can be expected to settle according to some kind of pattern as borne out by studies showing significant concentrations of immigrants in capitals or major cities (Robinson et al., 2003). As a result of a wide array of local conditions, sub-national entities can take a stance on the admission of immigrants that can create tensions with the central government (Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). Correspondingly, the outcome of integration policy is not simply a matter of implementing the national policy (Dekker et al., 2015). The tensions between state and local governments will inevitably mean that policies will not remain uniform throughout the processing by all actors concerned. To be able to capture dynamics of this nature we must use a more fine-grained unit of analysis. 1.4.1

The Local Government Level in Sweden and the Evolution of Swedish Migration Policy

In general, Scandinavian municipalities belong to a certain type of local government that has several common trademarks that characterise their

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

9

far-reaching autonomy. They have the right to tax their citizens, they are multi-functional, and they can engage in policy areas that are not exclusively related to any other administrative levels (Hansen, 2014). Furthermore, they are a key provider of welfare services since the municipal sector accounts for a substantial share of total public expenditure (Lidström, 2011). More specifically, the Swedish political system consists of three administrative levels to which citizens elect their representatives every four years. These levels consist of the national government, intermediate regional agencies, and local municipalities. The 290 municipalities are the smallest units of government and Sweden is viewed as a decentralized unitary state; this is the reason local self-government is protected in the Swedish Constitution (Lidström, 2011). In addition, administrative structures are complemented by a supranational level since Sweden is a member state of both the EU and the UN (United Nations). It should be noted that compared with other countries the sub-national level in Sweden is not only financially strong but also usually made up of well-populated municipalities. However, there is a considerable variation in population size that often divides sparsely populated municipalities in rural areas and municipalities in urban areas. Over a longer timeframe, Swedish municipalities appear as key actors in the formation of migration policy. As early as 1985 the admission of immigrants was made a local issue when the government established agreements with municipalities for the placement of immigrants (Borevi, 2012; Qvist, 2012). The distribution of immigrants throughout Swedish municipalities has been a highly debated issue though. This system, with its voluntary agreements, created a significant variation in the reception of immigrants from one municipality to another (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014). Nonetheless, the system was partly maintained by the municipalities’ sense of solidarity with each other (Qvist, 2012). This model of agreements between the government and the municipalities continued in place until 2016 when the voluntary part of the system was replaced. Likewise, integration policies were institutionalised in 1985 when they were agreed in cooperation with the Swedish National Labour Market Board (SNLB), one of the predecessors of the current Public Employment Service (PES), the Swedish Immigrant Board (SIB), one of the predecessors of the current Swedish Migration Agency (SMA), and the municipalities.4 This was followed by a new system for government compensation that, in conjunction with having the possibility to establish introduction programmes for immigrants at the local level, was meant

10

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

to stimulate municipalities to aim for fast integration of immigrants (Bäck & Soininen, 1998; Lundh & Ohlsson, 1999). However, in 2010 this responsibility was delegated to the national level and the PES. It was nonetheless emphasized that the public authority needed to cooperate with the municipalities since they were still in charge of crucial activities concerning integration policy, as stipulated by the Establishment Reform (SFS 2010:197, 2010). The overarching ambition of this new regime was to enhance labour market integration of immigrants. Since 2018 additional changes have been implemented that further emphasize labour market integration. Between 2016 and 2020 the government also allocated extra funding to municipalities, calculated based on the cost of receiving immigrants. Turning to the current system, it must generally be argued that Swedish migration policy originates from the central government. In turn, the national government is restricted by agreements taken at the EU level and through international commitments. The Swedish government formulates the general objectives of its policies and cooperates with supranational and international authorities within this area. However, such policies involve the local level in several important ways. In terms of immigration policy, the SMA organises the process for incoming people, including asylum seekers. However, when an immigrant receives a temporary or permanent residence permit in Sweden, the SMA assigns the individual to a municipality that is then responsible for receiving such individuals and ensuring housing for them. As already described, the aftermath of the European migrant crisis created this new system. Since 2016 the government has decided on the number of immigrants that each region is to receive, and also proposes the number of immigrants for each municipality to receive (SFS 2016:38, 2016). Hence municipalities no longer have the possibility to refrain from receiving immigrants if this is not the outcome of the distribution model. It must be noted that throughout this period an important deviation from this system has existed. Namely, immigrants who have already organised their own accommodation during their asylum process are not relocated to any other municipality when being granted a residence permit. Similarly, immigrants who decline proposed residence in a municipality when receiving their residence permit must organise their own accommodation. A significant portion of immigrants thereby organise their accommodation for themselves. We refer to this group as self-settled immigrants. This is another source of considerable variation in the distribution of

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

11

immigrants throughout the municipalities that is driven by individuals’ own actions. In terms of integration policy, the PES is responsible for providing immigrants with support that facilitates their establishment in Sweden. Individuals may have reached municipalities through different routes and thereby be differently subjected to local policies. This may include quota refugees, individuals coming from asylum accommodation organised by the government, individuals who have organised their own accommodation both during the asylum period and in the municipality, and individuals coming to a municipality due to family reunification. Working-age individuals are assigned to a two-year establishment programme that, through different arrangements, is meant to facilitate the individual’s chances of gaining employment. However, the PES is obliged to cooperate with other actors, particularly the municipalities, in managing this complicated task (Lidén et al., 2015). Beyond providing housing, the local authorities’ formal responsibilities are limited to the provision of Swedish language training (SFI, Swedish For Immigrants) and civic orientation (CO). However, as a result of local self-rule and their general competence in initiating policy in other areas (Lidström, 2011), local authorities often participate in more far-reaching activities than that. Such initiatives may be related to the labour market or education and are often put in place in cooperation with public and non-public actors (Holmqvist et al., 2020).

1.5

The Theoretical Tools

In this book we are interested in understanding and explaining local policies and how they vary between municipalities. This is done by distinguishing between governance structures and policy output. It is within such governance structures that decision-making processes and implementation of policies take place. There are contesting notions of how policies are reached and turned into action. Hierarchy, bureaucracy, and top-down perspectives are all characteristics of a traditional view (Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973; Scharpf, 1994). For our purposes, these characteristics are encapsulated in a vertical governance model that builds on clear superiority and subordination of different levels and instances in which the chain of command emanates from the central government (Birkland, 2011; Hood & Margetts, 2007). A different view, in which governance is established and policy is implemented through agreement between actors organised into networks, has emerged as a popular

12

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

competitor to the traditional view (Rhodes, 1997). We distil this into a horizontal mode of governance that builds upon a structure in which processes are defined by including several stakeholders that coordinate and together formulate and reach goals (Peters & Pierre, 1998). The final contender to consider is the multi-level governance structure. This is dependent on several jurisdictions emanating from various territorial levels. Multi-level governance processes are recursive, interactive, and play out at several administrative levels (Hooghe & Marks, 2003) in which policy coordination can take the form of networks that span through different administrative levels. Concerning the policy output of our different areas of study, we distinguish between local immigration and local integration policy. There are no clear-cut borders for local immigration policy but we agree with prior research and distinguish between liberal or restrictive stances on the reception of immigrants (Hammar, 1985; Meyers, 2004; Money, 1999). As a backdrop to such classifications, we make use of Steen’s (2010) line of reasoning on symbolic or instrumental circumstances to understand the motives behind such policy adaptations. In our examination of local integration policy, we consequently direct our attention to the socioeconomic dimension (Penninx & Garcés-Mascareñas, 2016) and delimit ourselves from the legal–political and cultural and religious dimensions, since the socioeconomic represents the ‘primary arena for local policy making’ (Alexander, 2007, p. 205). When analysing such aspects of integration policy we examine whether local governments pursue active policy or find themselves in a state of non-policy (Alexander, 2007). From a Swedish perspective, a non-policy alternative is only viable in situations where a municipality refrains from taking any measures that go beyond those that are decreed as compulsory by the government. In situations in which active local integration policy is noted, there is a further level of refinement based on whether municipalities perceive immigrants to be temporary or permanent phenomena, or act in such a way that they can be assessed to be such within the local community. 1.5.1

Contemporary Contributions to Research on Local Migration Policy

As scholars have evolved their general understanding of the governance of society, this has spilled over into policies of migration. The policies have been described as being made up of a layer that spans over

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

13

different vertical levels that assemble various interests in which actors are to be found at policy venues internationally, nationally, and locally (Guiraudon & Lahav, 2007). Hence the plethora of interdependent actors, both public and private, often acknowledged as being influential in the realm of migration policy (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018; Filomeno, 2017; Scholten & Penninx, 2016). Such actors are commonly perceived to gather in networks (Filomeno, 2017; Guiraudon & Lahav, 2007). The constitution of such networks and their main emphasis differ though due to contextual circumstances. In these types of governance structures, bargaining and negotiations between involved actors are used to agree on policies (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018). This forms a complex puzzle of intersecting dynamics generated by vertical and horizontal dimensions (Scholten, 2020), not uncommonly through the ideas of multi-level governance. Prior empirical research within this area can enhance understanding further. It is appropriate to break such research down into the different areas of policy. In terms of local immigration policy, explanatory studies have mainly focused on policy results and pointed out that economic, demographic, political, and sociocultural factors tend to influence policy at the local level. Briefly put, economic motives are either related to a demand for an increased workforce for the labour market (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Walker & Leitner, 2011), which can be managed by relaxing local immigration policy, or influenced by the economic capacity of the municipal organisation (Jacobsen, 1996; Steen & Røed, 2018). Demographic determinants can also be a driver through the ambition to increase a community’s population. For instance, studies have shown that a restrictive standpoint can be related to costs for the municipality or to a limited labour market, while a liberal standpoint can be related to a crucial inflow of new citizens who in the long term can also be vital to economic development (Williamson, 2018; Lidén & Nyhlén, 2015). Researchers have particularly examined political motives from the perspective of how anti-immigration parties have influenced the design of local immigration policy. It has been shown that under the right conditions such parties (Bolin et al., 2014; Folke, 2014; Steen, 2009) or traditionally conservative parties (Gulasekaram & Ramakrishnan, 2015; Walker & Leitner, 2011) can influence local immigration policy in a more restrictive way. Finally, sociocultural aspects stress the importance of migration networks. Researchers have shown that prior experiences of a more ethnically heterogeneous population (Rodríguez, 2008) or practice of receiving

14

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

refugees (Williamson, 2018; Steen & Røed, 2018) can lead to a more liberal outcome of local immigration policy. When it comes to local integration policy and as a crucial prerequisite for our undertaking, it has been seen that substantial variations in local integration policy exist both between (Martínez-Ariño et al., 2019; Zuber, 2019) and within countries of different character (Jørgensen, 2012; Paquet, 2019). These comparisons note both variations in policy regimes, differentiating between more pluralist and assimilatory alternatives, as well as the scope and range of policy. The fact that the policy agenda originates in local demands and assessments has been noted by researchers (Caponio et al., 2016), and it corroborates the notion of varying outputs of local integration policy. Scholars have also contributed with findings related to the governance structures of local integration policy. In recent studies covering such topics, it has been pointed out that policies are advanced jointly by a multitude of actors and that networks originating from different levels are valuable in such governance processes (Flamant, 2020; McDaniel et al., 2019). In terms of the specific organisation of the local government, analyses have been carried out into the relations between public actors as important drivers within policy processes. In such discussions, it has been particularly evident that policy making in this area is characterised as being pragmatic (Schmidtke & Zaslove, 2014) and advanced more by public officials than elected ones (Campomori & Caponio, 2017; Paquet, 2015).

1.6

Research Design

To address the research questions, we employ a mixed-method approach that draws from various data and that addresses the studied phenomenon from different angles that enable comparisons over time and across municipalities. The examination of the two policy areas builds on different types of data, involving analyses of the constitution of both types of policy in Sweden’s 290 municipalities as well as three in-depth case studies. While the first approach provides nomothetic knowledge via the description and identification of patterns of policies in Swedish municipalities, the latter adds idiographic knowledge through enriched insights from a few selected municipalities. Taken together, this strategy accords with our ambition to examine both governance structures and output of policy. There are several advantages to this research design. Our reliance on different types of data lays the groundwork for a thorough analysis

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

15

that can provide more nuanced answers to research questions, as it is composed of analyses of quantitative and qualitative data in a mixedmethods fashion (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017). Moreover, the fact that we perceive the migrant crisis and its subsequent policy changes as a critical juncture generates a cut-off point that is valuable when conducting temporal analysis. This clear dividing line is also highly important in the selection of cases to ensure there is a desirable level of variation between them (Gerring, 2017). Finally, the fact that cross-case comparisons can be performed at two levels, both quantitatively and qualitatively, provides us with an enhanced ability to identify patterns that may be valuable for theoretical development. 1.6.1

Elucidating State–local Relations

In the analysis of governance structures, state–local relations are implicit when it comes to assessing their effect on local governance. This is particularly evident in this policy sector that naturally involves actors representing different political levels, as has been the tradition in the Swedish sphere of migration policy (Borevi, 2012; Lidén et al., 2015; Qvist, 2016). To capture such relations and assess how they influence governance processes, we have conducted elite interviews with actors at the higher administrative level. In addition, such relations are also examined through case study research, which is expanded below. 1.6.2

Descriptions and Patterns Drawn from Cross-Case Comparisons

To gain more general knowledge, we compare all 290 Swedish municipalities. The comparisons have a longer timeframe and are designed differently based on the policy sphere that is being analysed. However, what is common to all these comparisons is that they mainly bring either policy output or more long-term outcomes to the fore. With regard to local immigration policy, the distribution of immigrants in Swedish municipalities is used as a proxy for such policies. This is intended to reveal variations in immigrant reception and additionally relate such variations to theoretically motivated predictors. This undertaking makes particular use of the cut-off point of the European migrant crisis and subsequent policy changes, and thus compares local policy, through reception levels, in the period just before and after this event.

16

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Turning to the comparisons made with local integration policy, we apply a longer time span to be able to detect variations in policy activities. Furthermore, the cross-case analysis distinguishes between output and outcome indicators. Output variables illustrate the level of municipal efforts in terms of local integration policy, whereas outcome variables are concerned with the long-term results of integration within the spheres examined. The data are selected to be able to measure three aspects of socioeconomic integration: through the labour market, through the education system, and through individuals’ housing situations. 1.6.3

Selection of Municipalities for Case Studies

To add precision to the understanding of local policy, three case studies have been selected as a vital part of this publication. We use the same municipalities for the study of both local immigration policy and local integration policy. This enables a comparison of municipal actions and standpoints on different but closely related policies, which can add important knowledge to the general field of local migration policy. The point of departure for the selection of cases is the previously established critical juncture and within that the coming into force of the Settlement Act in 2016. This law drastically altered the context for local governments by restricting them from negotiating with the state about the volumes of immigrants to receive. Two extreme cases and one typical case have been selected. While the first two represent how differences in local immigration policy were maximised, the latter appears to be unaffected by policy change (Gerring, 2017; Seawright, 2016). The municipalities of Avesta and Vallentuna were selected as our two extreme cases. While Avesta represents a situation with a decreased admission of immigrants since the cut-off point, Vallentuna illustrates the opposite. Our typical case is provided by Östersund, a municipality that according to numbers has been rather unaffected by legislative change. These municipalities are located in two of three geographic parts of Sweden, from the south central and south west of Sweden to the southwestern part of the north of Sweden. They are all mid-sized Swedish local governments. Before the new law was enacted, Avesta, located in the county of Dalarna, was one of the top per-capita receivers in the country, particularly driven by a significant portion of self-settled immigrants. Vallentuna, part of the Stockholm metropolitan area, represents a municipality that has been forced to substantially increase its inflow of

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

17

immigrants. Finally, the municipality of Östersund, the regional centre of the county of Jämtland, represents our intermediate typical case. In terms of actual numbers of immigrants received, Östersund has not been dramatically affected by any changes either as a consequence of the new law or other circumstances. The characteristics, similarities, and differences of the municipalities are extensively depicted in Chapter 4 together with a description of the underlying analytical strategy for the case studies. More details on the case-selecting techniques adopted for this book are provided in Appendix C. 1.6.4

Presentation of the Empirical Material

As stated, this publication draws from a range of different empirical material. First, interviews with elite representatives of the government, its authorities, and concerned organisations within this policy area, were conducted to enhance the understanding of state–local relations and how these influence local migration policy. Furthermore, interviews were conducted to cover our three case studies. These municipalities were visited on several occasions and, since local migration policy involves a palette of different actors (Lahav & Guiraudon, 2006), our strategy has been balanced to reach both depth and width and it has additionally endeavoured to account for a longer time span. In each case, we have talked to politicians, both those representing the governing majority and those from the opposition, as well as public officials at different levels of the municipal organisation who handle these issues in their daily work. In addition, local representatives of relevant government authorities have also participated as informants. Finally, representatives from both the business sector and civil society were interviewed. They were normally recommended to us by public officials. All the interviews included in this publication have followed a semi-structured model. A list of all those interviewed and interview guides is compiled in Appendix B. This was complemented by extensive studies of various documents being carried out. The quantitative material either comprised data on local immigration policy or local integration policy. Such data were mainly collected from Swedish government authorities. The data covering local immigration policy reflect the admission of immigrants and variables that can be expected to influence such policy output. Similar sources have been used

18

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

for the data that are used to illustrate local integration policy. These data reflect ambitions to influence both local integration policy (i.e., output variables) and the potential outcomes of such policies. A compilation of variables and their sources is provided in Appendix A. A more detailed description of the selection of the empirical material is provided in Appendix C.

1.7

Overview of the Book

This introductory chapter has explained the focus of this book, namely, to examine how the European migrant crisis and its subsequent policy changes affected local migration policy in Sweden. The content of the remaining chapters is summarised below. In Chapter 2 we present the theoretical points of departure. The chapter starts with a presentation and definition of the key concepts. Thereafter, there is a compilation of the models of governance structures that provides a basis for the analysis of both local immigration and integration policy. This section is followed by separate conceptualisations of policy output of the two aspects of local migration policy that are also applied in the analyses of the empirical material. These theoretical clarifications constitute the building blocks of a theoretical framework for examining local migration policy, which is presented at the very end of the chapter. Embedded throughout this chapter is a review of previous research covering both aspects of local migration policy. In Chapter 3 we describe the Swedish immigration and integration policy and its development over time, as well as examine the responsibility of different actors at different administrative levels. Hence this chapter analyses the state–local dynamic that characterises policy making. The chapter will use policy documents and interviews with key officials from relevant authorities and actors at the central level of government. In Chapter 4 we have a three-fold objective. First, we present our three case studies in greater depth. This includes a description of what the three municipalities represent and what characterises them. That is achieved through a short historical background, a presentation of the demography of each municipality, and a description of the local political context. Second, we will contextualise them by providing information on how they relate to each other and Sweden in general by drawing on statistical material including presentations of both local immigration policy and local integration policy. In the final section, we provide a description of

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

19

the specific methods used for case studies, including the collection and analysis of data. In Chapter 5 we present the output of local immigration policy in all Swedish municipalities. This analysis provides a comprehensive quantitative review of the complete municipal sector in Sweden, identifies significant variations between municipalities, and makes it possible to see important shifts that have occurred over the years. Taking into account the temporal focus, the first part of the chapter shows data on key variables over a longer time period; thereafter the chapter distinguishes between the situation before and after the defined cut-off point. In addition to descriptive statistics, we also present correlational and multivariate analyses to help understand potential patterns that influence the output of local immigration policy. In Chapter 6 we analyse local immigration policy in our three selected cases based on interviews and document studies. Each case is presented in turn and includes a longer temporal focus that enables comparisons before and after the cut-off point. This analysis relies on the distinction between governance structures and policy output. To achieve this, the approach used enables reconstruction of the processes leading to specific policy decisions, which also allows a more explorative strategy. The final section provides an analysis of the three cases, also following the theoretical framework. In Chapter 7 we address local integration policy to describe conditions for immigrants in Swedish municipalities and how the political entities work when it comes to integrating immigrants. This examination of local integration policy is based in the socioeconomic dimension of the integration concept and focuses on integration through the labour market, the education system, and immigrants’ housing situations. Distinctions are made by variables relating to output and outcome. Throughout the chapter comparisons of cases are supplemented with a longer temporal focus that makes it possible to identify variations over time. In Chapter 8 we analyse local integration policy in our three selected cases. In line with the structure of Chapter 6 each case is presented in turn – from a longer temporal focus right through to the cut-off point. This analysis relies on the distinction between governance structures and policy output. The three aspects of socioeconomic integration – labour, education, and housing – are used to structure the analysis, which also enables an approach that is more exploratory. The empirical material consists of interviews and document studies. The different nature of the

20

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

data and the fact that they reflect a longer timeframe makes it possible to address the course of events leading up to policy decisions. The chapter ends with an analysis embedded with theoretical assumptions about the three cases. In Chapter 9, the last chapter of the book, we conduct an integrated analysis by bringing the different empirical and theoretical pieces together. This includes a discussion of the empirical findings in relation to the research questions and theoretically founded models reflecting such enquiries. Moreover, we address wider theoretical ambitions by complementing or contrasting empirical contributions with ideas that are more explorative in character. This is followed by conclusions that particularly address state–local relations in the governance of migration policy. Finally, we end this publication by summarising how we see our theoretical contribution and how knowledge from this particular study can inform and assist further studies within this area and research in policy and public administration more broadly.

Notes 1. Although we are aware of the critical discussions concerning the constitution and framing of this event as a crisis (e.g., Doomernik et al., 2016; Glorius & Doomernik, 2020; Menjívar et al., 2019; Scholten & Nispen, 2015), we find the depiction of it as a crisis and a critical juncture both reasonable and helpful from a Swedish perspective. 2. We use the term governance structure as defined by Qvist (2016) and Knuth (2014) to describe institutional arrangements or frameworks of control. This term is, in our view, more precise than governance modes or governance arrangements, for example, and represents an important aspect within governance literature (Pierre & Peters, 2020). 3. It should be noted that of these two aspects our main focus is on policy output, with the exception of Chapters 4 and 7, which also address potential policy outcome. Consequently, the term policy output will be frequently used when clarifying theoretical fundamentals. We adhere to the classical distinction used within political science. Hence we perceive output as explicit measures produced by a political system, while outcome is the long-term results of such

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

21

efforts being applied in the world external to the organisation being analysed (Pollitt & Dan, 2013). 4. The Public Employment Service is the body mainly responsible for public employment and executes much of the Swedish labour market policy. This includes a mandate to facilitate the entry into the labour market of newly arrived immigrants. The Swedish Migration Agency considers applications from individuals who want to take up permanent residence in Sweden, make a visit, seek protection from persecution, or obtain Swedish citizenship.

References Agranoff, R. (2018). Local governments in multilevel governance: The administrative dimension. Lexington Books. Alexander, M. (2007). Cities and labour immigration. Ashgate. Bäck, H., & Soininen, M. (1998). Den kommunala invandrarpolitiken: Arenor, aktörer och barriärer. SNS Förlag. Bazurli, R. (2019). Local governments and social movements in the ‘Refugee crisis’: Milan and Barcelona as ‘Cities of welcome.’ South European Society and Politics, 24(3), 343–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2019. 1637598 ˘ Betts, A., MemiSo ¸ Glu, F., & Ali, A. (Forthcoming). What difference do mayors make? The role of municipal authorities in Turkey and Lebanon’s response to Syrian refugees. Journal of Refugee Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fea a011 Birkland, T. A. (2011). An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. M.E. Sharpe. Bolin, N., Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Do anti-immigration parties matter? The case of the Sweden democrats and local refugee policy. Scandinavian Political Studies, 37 (3), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/14679477.12031 Bommes, M., & Thränhardt, D. (Eds.). (2010). National paradigms of migration research. V&R Unipress. Borevi, K. (2012). Sweden: The flagship of multiculturalism. In G. Brochmann, & A. Hagelund, Immigration policy and The Scandinavian welfare state 1945–2010 (pp. 25–96). Palgrave Macmillan. Campomori, F., & Caponio, T. (2017). Immigrant integration policymaking in Italy: Regional policies in a multi-level governance perspective. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2), 303–321. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0020852315611238

22

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The study of critical junctures: Theory, narrative, and counterfactuals in historical institutionalism. World Politics, 59(3), 341–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100020852 Caponio, T., Baucells, O. J., & Güell, B. (2016). Civic integration policies from below: Accounting for processes of convergence and divergence in four European cities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39(5), 878–895. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01419870.2015.1080379 Caponio, T., & Borkert, M. (Eds.). (2010). The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam University Press. Caponio, T., & Donatiello, D. (2017). Intercultural policy in times of crisis: Theory and practice in the case of Turin. Comparative Migration Studies, 5(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-017-0055-1 Caponio, T., & Jones-Correa, M. (2018). Theorising migration policy in multilevel states: The multilevel governance perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(12), 1995–2010. Caponio, T., Scholten, P., & Zapata-Barrero, R. (2018). The Routledge Handbook of the governance of migration and diversity in cities. Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781351108478 Collier, D., & Munck, G. L. (2017). Building blocks and methodological challenges: A framework for studying critical junctures. Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, 15(1), 2–9. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE. Dekker, R., Emilsson, H., Krieger, B., & Scholten, P. (2015). A Local dimension of integration policies? International Migration Review, 49(3), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12133 Doomernik, S. I. E. B. G., & J., Doomernik, J., & Glorius, B. (2016). Refugee migration and local demarcations: New insight into European localities. Journal of Refugee Studies, 29(4), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1093/ jrs/few041 Eckersley, P. (2017). A new framework for understanding subnational policymaking and local choice. Policy Studies, 38(1), 76–90. Filindra, A., & Goodman, S. W. (2019). Studying public policy through immigration policy: Advances in theory and measurement. Policy Studies Journal, 47 (3), 498–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12358 Filomeno, F. A. (2017). Theories of local immigration policy. Palgrave Macmillan. Flamant, A. (2020). The local turn in integration policies: Why French cities differ. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 43(11), 1981–2000. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01419870.2020.1738522 Folke, O. (2014). Shades of brown and green: Party effects in proportional election systems. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(5), 1361–1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12103

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

23

Gammeltoft-Hansen, T., & Tan, N. F. (2017). The end of the deterrence paradigm? Future directions for global refugee policy. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 5(1), 28–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/233150 241700500103 Gerring, J. (2017). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press. Glorius, B., & Doomernik, J. (Eds.). (2020). Geographies of Asylum in Europe and the Role of European Localities. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-030-25666-1 Guiraudon, V., & Lahav, G. (2007). Immigration policy in Europe: The politics of control. Routledge. Gulasekaram, P., & Ramakrishnan, S. K. (2015). The new immigration federalism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978131 6282410 Hagelund, A. (2020). After the refugee crisis: Public discourse and policy change in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Comparative Migration Studies, 8(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-019-0169-8 Hammar, T. (Ed.). (1985). European immigration policy: A comparative study. Cambridge University Press. Hansen, T. (2014). Kommunal autonomi – hvor stort er spillerommet? In L. E. Rose, & H. Baldersheim (Eds.), Det Kommunale laboratorium: Teoretiske perspektiver på lokal politikk og organisering (3. utg., pp. 239–260). Fagbokforl. Hernes, V. (2018). Cross-national convergence in times of crisis? Integration policies before, during and after the refugee crisis. West European Politics, 41(6), 1305–1329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2018.1429748 Holmqvist, E., Omanovi´c, V., & Urban, S. (2020). Organisation av arbetsmarknads- och bostadsintegration. SNS Förlag. Hood, C., & Margetts, H. C. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97 (2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649 Hudson, C., Lidén, G., Sandberg, L., & Giritli-Nygren, K. (2021). Between Central Control and Local Autonomy – the Changing Role of Swedish Municipalities in the Implementation of Integration Policies. In J. Franzke, & J. Ruano de la Fuente, Local Integration Policy of Migrants—European Experiences and Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan. Jacobsen, K. (1996). Factors influencing the policy responses of host governments to mass refugee influxes. International Migration Review, 30(3), 655–678.

24

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Jørgensen, M. B. (2012). The diverging logics of integration policy making at national and city level. International Migration Review, 46(1), 244–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2012.00886.x Knuth, M. (2014). Broken hierarchies, quasi-markets and supported networks – A governance experiment in the second tier of Germany’s public employment service. Socal Policy & Administration, 48(2), 240–261. Lacroix, T., & Desille, A. (Eds.). (2017). International migrations and local governance: A global perspective. Palgrave Macmillan. Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., Baldersheim, H., Hlepas, N., Swianiewicz, P., Steyvers, K., & Navarro, C. (2019). Patterns of local autonomy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. Lahav, G., & Guiraudon, V. (2006). Actors and venues in immigration control. West European Politics, 29(2), 201–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/014023 80500512551 Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Explaining local Swedish refugee policy. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 15(3), 547–565. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12134-013-0294-4 Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2015). Reception of refugees in Swedish municipalities: Evidences from comparative case studies. Migration and Development, 4(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/21632324.2014.894178 Lidén, G., Nyhlén, J., & Nyhlén, S. (2015). Forced cooperation from above: The case of Sweden’s Establishment Reform. Policy Studies, 36(5), 468–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2015.1089983 Lidström, A. (2011). Sweden: Party-dominated subnational democracy under challenge? In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe. Oxford University Press. Lundh, C., & Ohlsson, R. (1999). Från arbetskraftsimport till flyktinginvandring (2., rev. uppl.). SNS. Martínez-Ariño, J., Moutselos, M., Schönwälder, K., Jacobs, C., Schiller, M., & Tandé, A. (2019). Why do some cities adopt more diversity policies than others? A study in France and Germany. Comparative European Politics, 17 (5), 651–672. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-018-0119-0 Martinsson, J., & Andersson, U. (2020). Svenska trender—1986–2019. Göteborgs Universitet. McDaniel, P. N., Rodriguez, D. X., & Wang, Q. (2019). Immigrant integration and receptivity policy formation in welcoming cities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(8), 1142–1166. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2019.1572456 Meer, N., Dimaio, C., Hill, E., Angeli, M., Oberg, K., & Emilsson, H. (2021). Governing displaced migration in Europe: Housing and the role of the “local.” Comparative Migration Studies, 9(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s40878-020-00209-x

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

25

Menjívar, C., Ruiz, M., & Ness, I. (Eds.). (2019). The Oxford handbook of migration crises. Oxford University Press. Meyers, E. (2004). International immigration policy: A theoretical and comparative analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. Money, J. (1999). Fences and neighbors: The political geography of immigration control. Cornell University Press. OECD. (2018). Working together for local integration of migrants and refugees. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085350-en Paquet, M. (2015). Bureaucrats as immigration policy-makers: The case of subnational immigration activism in Canada, 1990–2010. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(11), 1815–1835. https://doi.org/10.1080/136 9183X.2015.1023185 Paquet, M. (2019). Province-building and the federalization of immigration in Canada. University of Toronto Press. Penninx, R. (2015). European cities in search of knowledge for their integration process. In P. Scholten, H. Entzinger, R. Penninx, & S. Verbeek (Eds.), Integrating Immigrants in Europe (pp. 99–115). Springer. Penninx, R., & Garcés-Mascareñas, B. (2016). The concept of integration as an analytical tool and as a policy concept. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas & R. Penninx (Eds.), Integration processes and policies in Europe (pp. 11–29). Springer. Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (1998). Governance without Government? Rethinking Public Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), 223–243. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2020). Governance, politics and the state (2nd edition). Macmillan Education UK. Pierre, J., & Sundström, G. (2009). Samhällsstyrning i förändring. Liber. Pollitt, C., & Dan, S. (2013). Searching for impacts in performance-oriented management reform. Public Performance & Management Review, 37 (1), 7– 32. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576370101 Poppelaars, C., & Scholten, P. (2008). Two worlds apart the divergence of national and local immigrant integration policies in the Netherlands. Administration & Society, 40(4), 335–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539970 8317172 Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; or, why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all: This being a saga of the Economic development administration as told by two sympathetic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation of ruined hopes. University of California Press. Qvist, M. (2012). Styrning av lokala integrationsprogram. Institutioner, nätverk och professionella normer inom det svenska flyktingmottagandet. Linköpings universitet.

26

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Qvist, M. (2016). Activation reform and inter-agency co-operation – Local consequences of mixed modes of governance in Sweden. Social Policy & Administration, 50(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12124 Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press. Robinson, V., Andersson, R., & Musterd, S. (2003). Spreading the ‘burden’?: A review of policies to disperse asylum seekers and refugees. Policy. Rodríguez, C. M. (2008). The significance of the local in immigration regulation. Michigan Law Review, 106(4), 567–642. Sabchev, T. (2021). Against all odds: Thessaloniki’s local policy activism in the reception and integration of forced migrants. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47 (7), 1435–1454. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2020.184 0969 Scharpf, F. W. (1994). Games real actors could play: Positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(1), 27–53. Schmidtke, O., & Zaslove, A. (2014). Why regions matter in immigrant integration policies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1854–1874. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2013.867232 Scholten, P. (2020). Mainstreaming versus alienation: A complexity approach to the governance of migration and diversity. Palgrave Macmillan US. Scholten, P., & van Nispen, F. (2015). Policy analysis and the “Migration crisis”: Introduction. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 17 (1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2015.1006408 Scholten, P., & Penninx, R. (2016). The multilevel governance of migration and integration. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas, & R. Penninx, Integration processes and policies in Europe (pp. 91–108). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3319-21674-4_6 Scholten, P. W. A. (2013). Agenda dynamics and the multi-level governance of intractable policy controversies. Policy Sciences, 46(3), 217–236. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11077-012-9170-x Seawright, J. (2016). Multi-method social science: Combining qualitative and quantitative tools. Cambridge University Press. Sellers, J. M., Lidström, A., & Bae, Y. (2020). Multilevel democracy: How local institutions and civil society shape the modern state. Cambridge University Press. SFS 2010:197 (2010). Lag om etableringsinsatser för vissa nyanlända invandrare. SFS 2016:38 (2016). Lag om mottagande av vissa nyanlända invandrare för bosättning. SFS 2016:752 (2016). Lag om tillfälliga begränsningar av möjligheten att få uppehållstillstånd i Sverige.

1

INTRODUCING LOCAL IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY …

27

Søholt, S., & Aasland, A. (forthcoming). Enhanced local-level willingness and ability to settle refugees: Decentralization and local responses to the refugee crisis in Norway. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07352166.2019.1569465 Solano, G., & Huddleston, T. (2020). Migrant integration policy index 2020. Steen, A. (2009). Hvorfor tar kommunene imot ‘de fremmede’? Eliter og lokal skepsis. In J. Saglie (Ed.), Det nære demokratiet—Lokalvalg og lokal deltakelse. Abstrakt forlag. Steen, A. (2010). Crossing the local community border: Immigrant settlement in Norway. In B. Bengtsson, P. Strömblad, & A.-H. Bay (Eds.), Diversity, inclusion and citizenship in Scandinavia (pp. 187–214). Cambridge Scholars. Steen, A., & Røed, M. (2018). State governance or local agency? Determining refugee settlement in Norwegian municipalities. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 22(1), 27–52. Trix, F. (2018). Europe and the refugee crisis: Local responses to migrants. I.B. Tauris. UNHCR (2018). Global trends—Forced discplacement in 2017 . UNHCR. Varsanyi, M. W. (2010). Local and state politics of immigration. In R. Denemark (Ed.), The International Studies Encyclopedia. Blackwell. Walker, K. E., & Leitner, H. (2011). The variegated landscape of local immigration policies in the United States. Urban Geography, 32(2), 156–178. https:// doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.32.2.156 Williamson, A. F. (2018). Welcoming new Americans? Local governments and immigrant incorporation. University of Chicago Press. Wimmer, A., & Schiller, N. G. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation–state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks, 2(4), 301–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0374.00043 Zapata-Barrero, R., & Barker, F. (2014). Multilevel governance of immigration in multinational states: ‘Who governs?’ Reconsidered. In E. Hepburn, & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The politics of immigration in multilevel states: Governance and political parties. Palgrave Macmillan. Zapata-Barrero, R., Caponio, T., & Scholten, P. (2017). Theorizing the ‘local turn’ in a multi-level governance framework of analysis. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2), 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/002 0852316688426 Zuber, C. I. (2019). Explaining the immigrant integration laws of German, Italian and Spanish regions: Sub-state nationalism and multilevel party politics. Regional Studies, 54(11), 1486–1497. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404. 2019.1599845

CHAPTER 2

Theoretical Points of Departure

2.1

Introduction

In this chapter we provide the theoretical foundations for this book. In Sect. 2.2 we specify the definitions of our key concepts. This includes local migration policy and its two aspects – local immigration policy and local integration policy. In Sect. 2.3 we develop our view on the governance structures of local migration policy. From our standpoint this refers to the processes that ultimately produce specific policy outputs. Our literature review concludes in a model that is applicable to the two aspects of migration policy. Although results can differ, the proposed model is generic enough to be used on any process of governance. Moreover, we compile an overview of the actors, from various administrative tiers, that are relevant in such processes and thereby set the scene for the governance of local migration policy. In Sect. 2.4 we distinguish between types of policy output. In accordance with theoretical assumptions, such outputs distinguish between local immigration policy and local integration policy. As part of this process we exploit frequently used theoretical frameworks within this field and review the current literature through the lenses of those frameworks. Each discussion concludes with a section that conceptualises the two different types of policy output. This expanded theoretical strategy aligns with our ambitions to address both policymaking processes and policy content (Caponio & Donatiello, 2017) and will enable a procedural approach to the phenomena being studied. We © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_2

29

30

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Table 2.1 Presentation of the theoretical points of departure Theoretical stage

Definitions

Governance structures

Policy output

Relevant concepts

Local immigration policy Local integration policy

Local migration policy

Local immigration policy Local integration policy

Theoretical knowledge created

Definitions of the two concepts

A model for analysing the governance structures of local migration policy

Conceptualisations of local immigration policy and local integration policy

have summarised our theoretical approach in Table 2.1, emphasising that it broadly consists of three stages in which the scope of our relevant concepts varies. Overall, the above-mentioned theoretical elements constitute the building blocks of a theoretical framework for examining local migration policy, which is presented at the end of this chapter.

2.2

Local Migration Policy – Key Definitions

It has already been established that the focus of this book is the concept of local migration policy. The introduction of a local perspective acknowledges the importance of shifting the focus to other administrative levels than only nation states (Schiller & Caglar, 2011). With the addition of the policy concept though, we stress that it is not migration per se that is highlighted in this book but the governance and output of migration policy at the sub-national level. As stated, we delimit the concept of local migration policy to being composed of two different but related types of policies: local immigration policy and local integration policy. While the first type refers to the regulation and distribution of immigrant admission into local societies, the second comprises policies that regulate the social integration of immigrants into their new local community (Hammar, 1985). To advance the basic understanding of the concepts, we follow Varsanyi (2010) and add another dimension to distinguish between policies that originate at the national level and those that originate at the local level. Together, this creates a typology which has four different outcomes (see Table 2.2). In this publication we consistently analyse the local examples of immigration

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

31

Table 2.2 Policies of migration

Originating at the national level Originating at the local level

Immigration policy

Integration policy

National immigration policy

National integration policy

Local immigration policy

Local integration policy

Source Varsanyi (2010)

and integration policy. However, to do this we need to consider how such policies are embedded in a wider layer of policy that spans over additional administrative tiers. The vertical dynamic, that is the relations between different administrative levels, has previously been examined by a number of migration scholars from a theoretical angle (e.g., Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). The model below is primarily a schematic way to reduce complexity and, therefore, it is not always accurate in reality. As an example, there are both theoretical and empirical reasons why we cannot expect to find policies that are fully centralised, completely circumventing actors at the local level, or, in contrast, finding unique local policies that are not constrained by government politics (Scholten & Penninx, 2016). Furthermore, the dichotomy between immigration and integration policy is not always as clear in practice as in theory. Taken together, the typology should be perceived as a limited, yet parsimonious strategy for distinguishing between the two dimensions of migration policy and their administrative belonging. Although the above-mentioned dichotomy is appealing due to its analytical basis, it may still require some comments of a conceptual character. It should be noted that the chosen distinction (Hammar, 1985) is rooted in a European tradition. As stated by Filindra and Goodman (2019, p. 501) when referring to integration policy: “Immigration incorporation is one of the most productive and generative research subjects in European studies.” The backdrop to this is that European countries have long given attention to this issue, including from a local perspective (Penninx, 2015), and set up certain regulations as a consequence. Empirically, however, there is not always a distinction between immigration and integration policy (Varsanyi, 2010). Filindra and Goodman (2019)

32

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

point out that these distinct concepts are sometimes lumped together. Even if, when combined, they can be used to refer to a wider concept corresponding to a set of related policies, only treating them as one risks analytical imprecision. Maintaining an analytical distinction between these concepts is a particular challenge in cross-national research when concepts need to be able to ‘travel’ over different legislative and institutional settings. However, a more homogenous legislative and institutional setting considerably lowers such risks.

2.3

The Governance Structures of Local Migration Policy

Central to the governance perspective is the increased complexity of modern society, which has resulted in new forms of organisation and steering. In this section we discuss some of the most relevant aspects from a governance perspective. Traditionally, the realisation of policy has been understood as a process in which policy, formulated at one level, is to be implemented at another through a hierarchical structure. From this perspective, governing is recognised as a complicated process involving different levels (Bevir, 2013). However, more modern ways of understating governance in Western democracies are challenging this view. Various researchers have tried to describe this in different ways. One of the more common themes when describing the concept of governance in modern societies (Hill & Hupe, 2014) is to argue that there has been a shift from a hierarchical to a more interactive governance model – one in which governance through networks plays a central part (Piattoni, 2010; Pierre, 2001; Pierre & Peters, 2020; Sørensen & Torfing, 2007). From such a perspective the traditional forms of political responsibility and accountability therefore risk becoming obsolete. This is mainly due to the fact that more actors than before are now included in the policy-making process. Klijn (2008) argues that governance entails governing through networks, while others (Kjær, 2004) hold that the role of the central government in a governance setting is to coordinate networks. Governance can therefore be seen as a concept including both hierarchical governing and network governance (Bevir, 2013; Meuleman, 2008; Nyhlén, 2011; Pierre & Peters, 2012, 2020).

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

33

Another organisational aspect of governance in modern societies concerns processes for delegating and transferring power and responsibility down the system, through decentralisation. The decentralisation of responsibility and authority from one political level to another is prevalent in many Western democracies and has the aim of reducing the state’s burden of tasks. This strategy has been described as a coping mechanism by the state to be able to handle the increasing number of tasks assigned to governments during the post-war period (Hedlund & Montin, 2009). Researchers have increasingly focused on the complicated interaction between the central government and the local level of administration that this has created (Stoker, 1998). In early studies in the field the focus was on tasks conducted by local governments, which later developed into interest in the local community and thereafter policy networks (Rhodes, 1997). Hence this has involved an increased focus on local governance with studies directing attention to the interaction between local authorities and other actors at different levels. From this perspective the local level of governance is intimately linked to national politics in different ways and to varying degrees. The degree of independence given local authorities varies from one policy area to another, which is also true within the migration policy area. To be able to analyse relationships between levels we use the terms vertical and horizontal governance in line with Eckersley (2017), arguing that vertical governance entails power dependencies that exist between tiers of government and horizontal governance encompasses ways in which sub-national bodies as well as the state interact with other actors within, as well as between, jurisdictions.1 2.3.1

Vertical Governance

One way of understanding vertical governance is through hierarchical governing perspectives. The premise is that the lower administrative level is dependent on the higher level. The term hierarchy is used to describe legislative and executive decisions that steer democratic governmental action (Héritier & Lehmkuhl, 2008). The hierarchical model of government is associated with bureaucracy. The main elements of bureaucracy can be summarised into four words: hierarchy, impersonality, continuity, and expertise. In terms of the hierarchical elements the model builds on a clear superiority and subordination of different levels and instances. The model also advocates impersonality, meaning that bureaucracy works

34

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

according to specific rules and rarely at its own discretion. Continuity comprises officials in the bureaucracy being permanent employees who have the opportunity for advancement and are recruited on merit. The basis for the hierarchical organisation is formal and objective expertise is a necessity. The hierarchical model’s strength is its ability to execute standard operating procedures in a stable and predictable environment (Birkland, 2011; Hood & Margetts, 2007). In general, the bureaucratic model is usually understood as a hierarchical governing structure acting from the top down (Hill & Hupe, 2014; Knill & Tosun, 2012; Hedlund & Montin, 2009), meaning that political decisions are implemented by the administration and that policy-makers should be held accountable for decisions and their implementation. In theory, there is a clear division between those who make the decisions and those who implement them, which gives rise to the hierarchical model’s clear division of responsibilities. However, this division is challenged by changes primarily in production (e.g., of social services), which have been the subject of extensive restructuring during recent decades. In the hierarchical model the public administration maintains its independence from all other outside actors. It is solely dependent on its rules and the law (Peterson & Söderlind, 1993; Pierre & Peters, 2020). The hierarchical governing principle is a traditional approach in which the rule of law creates a governing principle that leads to weak self-governance and low incentives to encourage cooperation, since all cooperation is regulated by the administration. 2.3.2

Horizontal Governance

In many Western democracies it is common to try to solve complex societal problems together with non-state actors in horizontal structures (Eckersley, 2017). Networks are associated with horizontal governance, in which the actors involved cooperate in order to exchange resources. The driving force behind the networks is the different set of resources each actor possesses (Bevir, 2013). The incentives for cooperation between the different stakeholders are therefore strong. Rhodes (1997, p. 15) writes of “self-organizing, interorganizational networks characterized by interdependence, resource exchange, rules of the game and significant autonomy from the state.” Others, such as Torfing et al. (2012), stress the importance of collective action in accordance with some common objective. Such networks are neither formally assembled nor completely unstructured

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

35

(Gossas, 2006). Hertting (2003) has a similar definition of networks, referring to them as mutually dependent actors – ones that voluntarily organise themselves around functionally and/or geographically defined policy problems in informal forms of cooperation. Coordination comes through negotiation and communication on the basis of sincere information being provided in order to increase the implementation capacity of stakeholders while maintaining maximum sustained autonomy (Peters, 2015). According to these definitions, networks are seen as having sufficient resilience to elude state interference and a capacity for selforganisation (Pierre & Peters, 2020). Pierre and Peters (2020, p. 2) define networks as “formal or informal constellations of actors sharing an interest defined by function, territory or policy who interact on a regular basis.” These networks may be formed by the state or be independently created. The strong self-governance of networks does not, however, mean that the central government loses its ability to govern; rather, it loses its capacity for direct governing. From a governance perspective, government actors are conceptualised as being in a state of continual negotiation with the members of the networks, and these government actors negotiate as relative equals. Steering in the governance context is about setting priorities and defining goals rather than about direct governing (Pierre & Peters, 2020), implying that governance is a process in which several stakeholders jointly set goals. This reduces the risk of implementation of the policy failing. Decision making within governance networks relies on negotiations between actors. This is an ongoing process of resolving conflicts between the different interests and perceptions of the actors, in which competition between involved actors is continuously present. The aim is to reach agreements on issues that constitute the basis for the network (Scharpf, 1994; Sørensen, 2002; Sørensen & Torfing, 2007). This process might end not only in policy decisions but also, in relation to the whole policy discourse, include a redefinition of the actors included and the foundation upon which decisions and regulations are built (Sørensen & Torfing, 2007, p. 236). The logic of decision making in governance networks rests on a reflexive rationality, implying ongoing negotiations between the actors involved (Enroth, 2013). 2.3.3

Governance Structures Within Migration Policy

In migration research, contributions from the last decade have moved away from the dominating idea of national models being decisive for the

36

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

evolution of migration policy (Bommes & Thränhardt, 2010; Wimmer & Schiller, 2002), towards an increasing interest in the interaction between different political levels as critical elements in the governance of migration policy (e.g., Alexander, 2007; Caponio & Borkert, 2010; Schiller & Ça˘glar, 2009). Such research has advanced as a result of a request for a more complex understanding of configuring relations of governance (Scholten, 2020), including both vertical and horizontal venues (Eckersley, 2017) that, ultimately, is also supplemented by an understanding of where the two intersect. The vertical understanding of governance within migration research draws from a centralistic perspective of the state in which policies are enforced with the authority of the central government throughout the underlying administrative tiers. Traditionally, this has involved hierarchies and an understanding of superiority and subordination of different levels and instances (Pressman & Wildavsky, 1973) and been associated with the concepts of top–down implementation and government rather than governance. Within the field of migration policy, Filomeno (2017) raises the idea of vertical governance through a set of functions. This is most notable in how the central government does not hold back in its influence over decision making, and instead merely gives the subordinate levels the role of implementers of national policy (Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). Closely related to this is the fact that the central government can constrain local policy making. Scholars have illustrated that sections of policy areas have been placed under increasing national control with traits of more vertical forms of governance (Emilsson, 2015; Gebhardt, 2016). At the same time, much of the contemporary research into migration, particularly within the sub-field focused on the local level, has challenged the applicability of vertical perspectives. The mere existence of decoupling, when actors perceive policy problems differently and when conflicts emerge between different tiers, indicates that the fulfilment of a traditional vertical model can be challenging (Scholten, 2013). Empirical studies have shown the occurrence of decoupled governance in several spheres of migration policy (Jørgensen, 2012; Poppelaars & Scholten, 2008). Furthermore, Filomeno (2017, p. 51) notes that “governance gaps ” can arise at the local level since vertical forms of governance are not necessarily all-encompassing. A horizontal perspective of governance in migration research emphasises a cooperative scenario in which policies are determined through networks. For this governance structure to arise, autonomy from the

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

37

government is required, which can be exploited by self-organising and inter-organisational networks (Rhodes, 1997). Although this form of governance is more loosely structured, it is commonly perceived as institutionalised by rules, norms, and symbols in a way that is decisive to how cooperation is organised (March & Olsen, 1995). The increasing attention given to the sub-national level has resulted in scholars also acknowledging these traits of horizontal governance in migration research. For example, Filomeno (2017) reviews the literature and states that, on a general level, reaching horizontal convergence, which is crucial for successful cooperation, is dependent on local circumstances and how such processes are experienced by the actors involved. In the words of Zapata-Barrero and Barker (2014), the objective is to establish coordination that minimises the negative effects that otherwise risk arising in joint projects. However, horizontal governance is an ongoing process of resolving conflicts between the different interests and conceptions of involved actors. Reaching agreements on issues that constitute the basis for such networks in which decision making is progressed through negotiations between actors is generally challenging (Sørensen & Torfing, 2007). To be successful, this involves a governing process that is advanced through mutual trust and reliance between the actors involved. Multi-level governance has become an increasingly significant alternative perspective, and is gradually being applied within social research in general, including the migration field. There has been an explosion of research in this area in recent years, based on Hooghe and Marks’ (2003) theory of multi-level governance that is more boundless and dependent on several jurisdictions emanating from various territorial levels. Drawing on the idea that interaction between different administrative areas is increasing since having fixed divisions between functions has become less viable (Agranoff, 2018; Hendriks et al., 2011), local governments are perceived as taking on a leading role in coordinating the realisation of policies with other involved actors. In migration research in particular, scholars have acknowledged the intersection between the local perspective and the multi-level dynamic (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018; Filomeno, 2017; Schiller, 2018; Scholten & Penninx, 2016; ZapataBarrero et al., 2017; Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). In other words, within migration research multi-level governance should be perceived as recursive, interactive processes that are played out at several administrative levels (Schiller, 2018) in which policy coordination can take the form of networks that span across different administrative levels (Scholten &

38

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Penninx, 2016). Theory in this field has been developed in order to mirror how the boundaries between decision making and implementation of migration policy have shifted: upwards to intergovernmental organisations, downwards to local governments, and outwards to non-public actors (Guiraudon & Lahav, 2000). This increasing dynamic will influence the extent to which local levels of government can and will use their discretion. Building on this, scholars argue that vertical relations are insufficient to understand local migration policy. They must instead be complemented with an understanding of networks and how they function to clarify how local governments perceive these issues. In acknowledging a more complex setting, a multi-level perspective of governance challenges vertical and state-centred hierarchies in terms of how power is distributed (Walker, 2015). This perspective nonetheless shows several of the trademarks of horizontal governance. These include the interdependence of actors in such arrangements and that interaction is expressed through bargaining and negotiations between involved actors in situations in which no administrative level dominates the policy issue (Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018; Meer et al., 2021). As a result of the above-mentioned discussion, and building on research from both governance literature as well as migration studies (Pierre & Peters, 2020; Scholten, 2013; Sørensen & Torfing, 2007; Torfing et al., 2012), we end up with three modes of governance structures that can be applied to local migration research (see Table 2.3). In our ambition to create a parsimonious model that can be applied to the two aspects of migration policy, we use three elements that collectively make up the foundation of each mode of governance: policy agenda, governing process , and defining characteristic. Understanding the policy agenda is different between the vertical and horizontal perspectives. Vertical governance consists of hierarchy and top– down views that result in policy change ideas that derive from the central government level. The perceived problems to be addressed relate to a broader set of policies and are inspired by models of national formation of migration policy (Bommes & Thränhardt, 2010). In contrast, horizontal governance has a bottom–up perspective of the policy agenda based on problems found in the local community, irrespective of any linkage with national policy. In multi-level governance, problems from different political levels are considered simultaneously. Scholten (2013) proposes a way to narrow down this broad scope by arguing that problems that are multi-level in their nature are particularly relevant.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

39

Table 2.3 A model of governance structures applicable to local migration research Vertical governance

Horizontal governance

Multi-level governance

Policy agenda

Identified at the central level and related to a broader set of central policies

Identified at the local level irrespective of national issues

Identified from several administrative tiers

Governing process

Governing through detailed rules, regulations, budgets, and demands on objectives and results

Governing through organising networks maintained through negotiations and communication

Governing through organising networks maintained by negotiations and communication spanning vertically and horizontally

Defining characteristic

Authority

Trust

Interdependence

Sources Modified from Pierre & Sundström (2009), Scholten (2013), and Eckersley (2017)

The actual governing process is formal in vertical governance and is structured by instruments such as rules, regulations, and budgets that rely on a hierarchical structure. In horizontal governance, on the other hand, the governing process is built on the concept of networks that are influenced by less formal instruments, including norms and symbols, but maintained through negotiation and communication (Peters, 2015; Rhodes, 1997). Multi-level governance also includes a reliance on networks but differs in how such networks also span across different political tiers that also require vertical venues for structuring modes of governance (Scholten & Penninx, 2016). When it comes to the defining characteristic of governing processes, vertical governance is built on the notion that authority legitimises power, channelled from a monocentric government and established structures of superiority and subordination, as well as detailed governing through rules, regulations, demands, and objectives. In comparison, horizontal governance that is sustained through networks is dependent on mutual trust between involved actors as well as soft governing tools such as talking and listening (Pierre & Sundström, 2009; Rhodes, 1997). From a slightly different angle, Caponio and Jones Correa (2018) describe multi-level governance as being channelled through interdependence of involved

40

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

actors. In contrast to the notion that trust is sufficient to reach forms of cooperation, multi-level governance is based on the idea that realising a specific policy demands the involvement of actors from different administrative levels. Thus, interdependence is the defining characteristic of multi-level governance structures. 2.3.4

The Actors in Local Migration Policy

An understanding of the participating actors is required to be able to examine local migration policy. In this section we will draw on the previous work of Guiraudon and Lahav (2007) and their presentation of an “itinerary” for immigration policy (see also Pierre & Peters, 2020). However, we will modify their output in one respect by arguing that, with some adjustments, the current playing field of actors can cover the two aspects of local migration policy. Table 2.4 details relevant actors according to the following: (i) whether they mainly belong to the input or output side of the political system, (ii) whether they operate at the national or local level, and (iii) which sphere of society they represent. Our distinction between policy input and policy output is an attempt to Table 2.4 Mapping actors who affect local migration policy

National level Public actors Civil society

Policy input

Policy output

Politicians

Public authorities and public officials NGOs, religious organisations, migrant associations, labour unions Companies Public opinion, families

Business sector The public

NGOs, religious organisations, migrant associations, labour unions Companies Public opinion

Local level Public actors

Politicians

Civil society

Business sector The public

NGOs, religious organisations, migrant associations, labour unions Companies Public opinion

Note Reworked from Guiraudon and Lahav (2007)

Local administrations and local government officials NGOs, religious organisations, migrant associations, labour unions Companies Public opinion, families

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

41

divide the activity of the groups into the stages preceding and involving formation of policy and the realisation and implementation of policy. As a caveat, this categorization should be seen as a rough model to distinguish between the actors, which can facilitate both theoretical understanding and empirical work. Although we are focused on the local level and its policy making, the description needs to include those actors at the national level who can influence local policy output. The above argument, that agreeing policies in complex settings includes the involvement of various actors from different tiers, means that these actors should not be seen in isolation from each other. On the contrary, we endorse the idea advocated that policy making requires interdependent relations between involved actors (e.g. Caponio & Jones-Correa, 2018). Public actors are found at both national and local levels and the vertical dynamic between them can be expressed through different regimes of governing. The traditional division between politicians, those taking decisions, and public administration, those implementing such decisions, is a reasonable starting point. However, this has been perceived as too simple a description since politicians can be tempted to get involved in the implementation of policy just as public officials can initiate policy (Svara, 2006). Both tendencies have also been evident in the migration policy field (Caponio, 2010a; Filomeno, 2017; Paquet, 2020). Yet, substantial policy changes ultimately require decisions to be taken by politicians, which means that the composition of parties in local municipal councils and the salience of the migration issue in the polity will be relevant (Money, 1999). The potential influence of anti-immigration parties on national (Carvalho, 2014) or local immigration policy (Bolin et al., 2014; Folke, 2014) has become increasingly relevant. Local government officials within public administrations are key actors in the implementation of policies. Prior studies have noted that empirical research has overlooked this dimension of local immigration policy (Caponio & Borkert, 2010). This is particularly troublesome since it otherwise would have been shown that local government officials often have significant discretion over such matters and that they can adopt different roles that, as a whole, have an important influence on how changes in policy are brought about (Campomori & Caponio, 2017; Filomeno, 2017; Paquet, 2015). Influence over immigration policy has also increasingly shifted out to non-governmental actors (Guiraudon & Lahav, 2000). Although representatives from civil society are mainly important in how policies are determined, they may also influence the output that is created. These types of

42

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

organisations play an important role in a political system, including relations in the local arena, by aggregating and channelling opinions from their members (Teles et al., 2021). As originally stated by Freeman (1995) and later modified by Joppke (1998), a form of “client politics ” can arise in this area in which well-organised groups can exert substantial influence over policy results. The reason for this is that the benefits of immigration are more closely linked to groups in civil society while the related costs are distributed through several sectors of society. Thus, it is easier for proponents to form joint coalitions. Caponio (2010b) has argued that in the local arena close ties between representatives of such organisations and politicians and local government officials create the right conditions for them to have an influence. Even if reviews and comparative work have been reluctant to acknowledge that civil society organisations also possess some real influence (Teles et al., 2021; Zincone & Caponio, 2005), others have questioned this. Results from European studies reveal that actors from civil society can be crucial in a range of matters, from putting pressure on decision makers, to functioning as advocates for immigrants’ interests and being key providers of welfare services. In a study examining the situation in the United States, Steil and Vasi (2014) emphasise that pro-immigrant associations influence local governments to take more liberal stances on local immigration policy by functioning as mediators between groups with different views. Hence, either through cooperation with the government through subsidised forms or partnerships or based on their own agenda, these actors can potentially also play a role in the realisation of policy (Ambrosini & Boccagni, 2015; Flamant, 2020). Turning to the business sector, one of the pivotal arguments in favour of migration policy derives from a view of immigrants as an inflow to the workforce. This is an argument that is relevant to both national and local policy. Generally, it is in the interest of the business sector and the organisations that represent the sector to ensure that there is a supply of labour that has the right qualifications and that can work for the lowest cost possible. Thus, representatives of the private sector can both influence the policies that are agreed, by influencing the input side of the political system, and participate in how policies are implemented. The demand for labour is also dependent on the character of the labour market, in terms of how regulated it is, and the mobility of capital (Money, 1999). Therefore, depending on the state of the labour market, companies in the business sector and the joint associations that represent them will lobby for their interests to be taken into account when policies are being decided

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

43

(Cornelius & Rosenblum, 2005). The business sector can also play a vital role in the creation of local integration policy, such as participating in the realisation of sub-national policy stances (McDaniel et al., 2019). Finally, a democratic political system gains its legitimacy from its citizens. We therefore need to highlight the importance of the public in relation to local immigration policy. The preferences of the public are clearly important in terms of the formation of national and local political standpoints. Traditional theories on how parties will converge toward public opinion over time are also salient within this policy field (Money, 1999). However, since comparative studies show that citizens’ opinions concerning immigrant reception appear to be far more restrictive than actual policy output (e.g., Facchini & Mayda, 2008), there must be other reasons for the divergences between parties and voters. Understandably, the process is more iterative than the traditional views of parties following voters. It is most likely that the role played by civil society (Freeman, 1995; Joppke, 1998), as noted above, and political elites (Zaller, 1992) will mediate in such processes. The public will also be important in the implementation of local migration policy. In contrast to how public opinions from the input side can often be restrictive, the influence of the public in the implementation stage quite often leads to more liberal standpoints. This creates a somewhat paradoxical situation in which local government officials who have implemented the more restrictive policy of local immigration policy are faced with criticism for upholding these policies. The deportation of individuals is an example of the delicate nature of these issues (Ellermann, 2006). Ordinary families can also be relevant in the implementation of local immigration policy by assisting the government in the admission of immigrants such as in the case of unaccompanied children.

2.4

The Policy Output of Local Migration Policy

In this section we leave the discussion on the governance of local migration policy and instead direct our attention towards the output created. Since the aims of local immigration and integration policies differ, they cannot be handled simultaneously. We therefore discuss each in turn in several stages. We present theoretical assumptions that are relevant to clarify the concepts, review relevant literature based on the theoretical perspectives provided by such assumptions, and finally we conceptualize the potential output of each policy sphere.

44

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

2.4.1

Local Immigration Policy and the Output Created

Any analysis of migration policy starts most naturally with a discussion of immigration policy. Hammar et al. (1985, p. 7) describe this policy area with the following words: “Regulation of immigration is the oldest, the most obvious and according to some people the only aspect of immigration policy.” The foundations for such policies derive from the general idea that all sovereign countries themselves regulate whether and how foreign citizens are allowed to enter their territory. Another similar concept to immigration policy used within this research field is immigration control, which refers to an acknowledgement that communities can take measures to determine the levels and composition of immigration. The concept has been elaborated further using a similar logic to the distinction made by Hammar et al. (1985). For example, Brochmann (1999) argues that immigration control refers to “the rules and procedures governing the selection, admission and deportation of foreign citizens.” This implies a policy in which the concept is understood as being politically generated as it consists of a number of coherent political measures that have been taken. This broad concept can be further broken down into policies that relate to external control and those relating to internal control (see also Gilligan, 2015). Whereas the first is related endeavours to control access to the territory, the latter refers to those measures taken with regard to immigrants already located within the polity (Zolberg, 2002). A quick glimpse at the world indicates that there are great variations between countries in the West concerning their design of policies that regulate the admission of immigrants (Castles et al., 2014). What will be discouraging for policy makers though is that research has long emphasised that policy failures are frequent. This is based on the idea that although the public in general demands a restrictive immigration policy (e.g., Ceobanu & Escandell, 2010), many liberal states have witnessed a substantial amount of immigrants being admitted. Reasons given for such policy gaps include that the flow of immigration is to some extent beyond the reach of the political system (Castles, 2004) and in countries that have the possibility to implement more efficient measures, the ability to do so is cyclical and dependent on contextual conditions (Freeman, 1994) and also limited by legal and constitutional frameworks (Joppke, 1998). Later research (Helbling & Leblang, 2019) has proven that if a society actually decides to adopt a more restrictive policy, then it will have greater success if labour market conditions are right.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

45

One explicit example of these types of policy measure is the idea of ‘burden sharing’, that is the dispersal of immigrants to different geographical areas. Several countries have adopted policies for dispersing asylum seekers and immigrants throughout sub-national entities (Robinson et al., 2003). The sub-national mandate concerning local immigration policy can vary starkly, from having full autonomy to decide for themselves on the reception of immigrants, to having no choice at all. In addition to local autonomy, other aspects of state–local relations are important for how local immigration develops. Walton-Roberts et al. (2019) emphasise that the formation of local partnerships has been crucial for coordination and for preparing local communities for receiving immigrants. Although these matters are seldom left completely at the discretion of the states, a restrictive or generous standpoint on immigration policy is also dependent on how the target group of immigrants is perceived. Policies can be conditional on the kind of immigrants who are expected to come to a community. For instance, Meyers (2004) makes two distinctions. First is the number of immigrants to accept, ranging from liberal policies to receive more immigrants to restrictive policies that indicate fewer will be received. The second issue concerns which types of immigrants to accept. Here, a more liberal policy is characterised by a greater acceptance of the admission of immigrants who are dissimilar to the receiving community. In contrast, a restrictive policy is characterised by a desire to receive immigrants who are similar to the community. This division is connected to how immigration is perceived by the public. Studies have pointed out that the actual output of policy can be dependent on the characteristics of the immigrants (e.g., Gilligan, 2015; Hellwig & Sinno, 2017). This latter point leads to a discussion on how policies can be distinguished based on different reasons for immigration. Since the focus of this book is on policies regulating the admission of refugees or immigrants whose background fits with the category of protection,2 it should be emphasised that this is determined by international agreements. Countries that have signed the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and member states of the EU (there are common rules within the union) are required to ensure that individuals will receive protection if they meet the relevant criteria. While these international agreements should entail equal treatment for all individuals applying for asylum, great variations in decisions taken on asylum applications have been reported by the United Nations (UNHCR, 2018). Scholars refer to the fact that national policy

46

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

processes can be used to circumvent international covenants (Goldin et al., 2011). Research on the Local Perspective of Immigration Policy – Analysed Through the Lens of Assumptions on Policy Outputs From our viewpoint, regulation of immigration policy at the local level is crucial. As we argue in Chapter 1, the distribution of immigrants is rarely random nor free of the influence of policy measures. Money (1999) describes some of the underlying elements that help explain variations at the sub-national level. Most importantly, she emphasises that each local community is its own local political system, characterised by its own institutional elements and composition of politicians, each with their unique preferences, and all this jointly creates certain policy outputs. In compiling these different elements into a research model, Money (1999) assumes that the consequences of policy are dependent on both policy preferences and political salience. Whereas preferences reflect the conditions in the local community, the salience of such issues also takes the national agenda into consideration. Scholars who examine the influence of local institutions on local immigration policy have verified the effect of a range of economic, demographic, political, and sociocultural factors. In terms of economic motives, assumptions are based on the characteristics of the local labour market and thereby primarily identify immigrants as a potential contribution to the workforce. The theoretical background to this is Piore’s (1979) identification of a “dual labour market theory” as an explanation of why a permanent demand for labour exists in more developed countries, meaning that migrants are ‘pulled’ to these areas. Such individuals are in demand for a secondary and less formal labour market. How such elements play out, and indirectly effect local policy, mainly depends on two interrelated factors – unemployment rates and wage levels. From the local government perspective, Jacobsen (1996) argues that a stronger economic capacity will make it possible for local societies to manage the resource demands that arise from the influx of immigrants. Later empirical studies have shown that labour market demand (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Walker & Leitner, 2011) and a stronger economic capacity of the local community (Steen & Røed, 2018) are positively associated with a more liberal local immigration policy. Demographic factors are closely related to the above. Several welfare states are increasingly facing a challenging population development. In many Western countries it is common that the proportion of individuals

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

47

making up the labour force will struggle to finance all welfare commitments. Obviously, the assumed demand for labour, influenced by the demographical composition in a society, also draws from theories of dual labour market theory (Massey et al., 1993). Even if the findings of empirical studies are not always consistent, they still underline the importance of demography (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Rodríguez, 2008; Steen & Røed, 2018; Wennström & Öner, 2015). In terms of motivations, studies have shown, for instance, that a restrictive standpoint can be related to costs for the municipality or to a limited labour market, while a liberal standpoint can be linked to a necessary inflow of new citizens that in the long term can also be vital to economic development (Hudson & Sandberg, 2021; Lidén & Nyhlén, 2015; Williamson, 2018). Irrespective of how far the local mandate for deciding on immigration policy extends, political dimensions will influence the views of decision makers. In political systems in which the local arena decides itself on how to formulate its immigration policy, the ideological positions of local politicians and parties can be expected to have a direct influence. In contemporary political science, the political dimension, which has also been described as a cultural one, extends from culturally liberal policies, including those on immigration, to the defence of authoritarian values (Kriesi et al., 2006). As an analogy, centre–right parties are usually expected to pursue a stricter immigration policy than their equivalents to the left (Bale, 2008). However, Ellermann’s (2021) caution on uncertainties of the impact and direction of such effects should not be ignored. Empirically, it has been shown that, under the right conditions, anti-immigration parties (Bolin et al., 2014; Folke, 2014; Steen, 2009) or traditionally conservative parties (Gulasekaram & Ramakrishnan, 2015; Walker & Leitner, 2011) can influence local immigration policy towards being more restrictive. Taking illustrative examples from the United States, scholars have argued that local actors take advantage of the rise of party polarisation and ethnic nationalism to enforce a restrictive local immigration policy. While the polarisation between parties makes it harder to reach compromises, the notion of ethnic nationalism is used, first and foremost, as a way to emphasise the need for domestic security. Findings indicate that support for conservative parties is associated with tougher stances on immigration both at the local and the state level (Gulasekaram & Ramakrishnan, 2015), and a more restrictive stance among conservative politicians has been later verified

48

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

(Williamson, 2018). However, the context is a determining factor. Findings from the consensus-oriented Swedish model show that only when margins of power in the local council are substantial for either political bloc, centre–right or centre–left coalitions, is it possible for them to pursue their ambitions (Jutvik, 2020). The mechanisms that lead to a more generous stance have been linked to expressions of solidarity and humanity (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2015; Qvist, 2012), without highlighting party affiliations. Findings also note that political preferences, particularly at the local level, are downplayed since a pragmatic approach is often prevalent that disregards political differences (Steen, 2016). Sociocultural factors also create local opportunities for shaping refugee policy, specified through migration networks. Such networks consist of interpersonal ties that connect former and current immigrants with each other, which increases the likelihood of future immigration to a community in which the network is present (Arango, 2000; Massey et al., 1998). In relation to policy, greater exposure to a foreign-born population can increase the chances of a policy that enables future immigration. To some extent this can be self-perpetuating, since established migrant networks create the right social structure for continued migration, whereas societies with few external cultural links and that are more homogenous are less likely to accept immigration. Previous research gives some indication as to how prior experience of a more ethnically heterogeneous population (Rodríguez, 2008) or experience in receiving refugees (Steen & Røed, 2018; Williamson, 2018) can influence a more liberal outcome of local immigration policy. However, more precise measurements of sociocultural factors have hitherto been absent in this field. The Conceptualisation of Policy Output of Local Immigration Policy Our analysis of local immigration policy results in one main distinction, summarised below: • Local immigration policy can be either liberal or restrictive. Although there is no exact way to define the limits of these policy alternatives, we can get closer to a definition through a contextual analysis that involves comparison of the polities being studied. The distinction between liberal and restrictive policy stances on local immigration policy follows theoretical work on immigration policy (Hammar, 1985; Meyers,

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

49

2004), including research at the local level (Money, 1999). While this distinction may appear to be clear-cut in theory it is far more intricate in reality, not least due to variations in countries’ migration regimes. Such complexities arise when one poses questions regarding which individuals are covered by local immigration policy, and how the political mandate is distributed over various administrative tiers. The peculiarities of the Swedish situation can function as an illustrative example. The involvement of local government is almost completely restricted when it comes to the distribution of asylum seekers since this aspect is managed by the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) and the property owners the agency contracts. With regard to the placement of immigrants with residence permits, the situation before the Establishment Reform of 2016 entailed municipal negotiations with the government on the levels of immigrants to be received. Thereafter, this level of autonomy has ceased to exist and the only possibility to redistribute immigrants in a way that deviates from quotas set up by the government is when municipalities within the same region agree to do so. In addition, and parallel to this, immigrants who organise their own accommodation are free to settle wherever they want in the country. This settlement is far from random. As a foundation for understanding how local immigration policy output can result in either a liberal or a restrictive stance, Steen (2010, 2016) proposes that output can be traced back to argumentation based on symbolic or instrumental reasons. The symbolic line of argumentation does not draw from material circumstances and results in either restrictive policy outputs that are related to xenophobic views, or liberal policies appealing to senses of solidarity. The sense of solidarity can be attributed to different factors than those that cause xenophobic attitudes, which are clearly based on fear and hatred of foreigners and strangers. Steen (2010, 2016) argues that attitudes of solidarity can be due to loyalty to the central government, as well as sympathy for the exposed group in question. Politically, this standpoint can also be rationalised by alluding to the solidarity of local citizens and thereby reinforcing political support. However, some of the key reasons stem from the various perceptions of how local immigration policy can affect the local economy and its welfare state. A generous policy could be justified by the demands of the local labour market, by the potential long-term increase in the number of taxpayers, or by the perceived abundant government compensation for the admission of immigrants. In contrast, a restrictive view derives from an understanding that admission of immigrants can put direct pressure

50

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

on the municipal economy which is not covered by government funding, including risks of individuals being unemployed and requiring other social aid. As stated by Robinson et al. (2003), local governments can connect such welfare costs to both the additional pressure on existing welfare services and specific services required for the immigrant population. 2.4.2

Local Integration Policy and the Output Created

As integration policy potentially comprises all matters that influence the conditions of immigrants in their new society, it is evident nowadays that integration clearly involves actions that are taken at the local level (Caponio & Borkert, 2010). Besides this administrative orientation, there are other substantial ideas surrounding the concept that cannot be ignored. First, integration processes concern two sections of society: representatives of the immigrants themselves and representatives of the host society (Ager & Strang, 2008). These representatives can be described as belonging to a micro level, as specific individuals, or as a collective or institutional grouping (Penninx & Garcés-Mascareñas, 2016). Second, integration policies are comprised of different dimensions that together reflect various aspects of social life. As stated elsewhere, our attention is on the socioeconomic dimension, but we briefly discuss other dimensions too. Third, both the means and the objective for integration policies have taken various forms in different settings. While two extreme positions can be noted – assimilation and multicultural policy (Castles et al., 2014) – additional policy stances exist that lay the foundation for the specific policy measures that are preferred. Integration Processes from Two Perspectives and Covering Several Dimensions Similar to how integration can be perceived from the perspective of the individual immigrant or from a structural viewpoint, the two perspectives are always relevant when analysing the processes of integration. The procedural perspective of integration processes, according to Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016), suggests that the interplay between representatives of the immigrants themselves and representatives of the host society can be examined over time and space as a way to capture the process of integration. Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016) argue that both immigrants and those representing the receiving society can be placed at different analytical levels. At the most detailed level, immigrants

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

51

and those residing in host countries are individuals. Local integration policies will ultimately try to influence them and their behaviour. The next level up analyses organisations that can schematically be described as being composed of either immigrants or the native population. These organisations can either facilitate or hinder integration processes and are also a target of the policies trying to influence such processes. Institutions are then positioned at the highest level of analysis. Penninx and GarcésMascareñas (2016) refer to two institutions of particular relevance for integration policy. The first represents the general political institutions of the receiving society that are expressed through laws, regulations, executive organisations, and also less formal unwritten rules and practices. The second type of institutions are those that specifically deal with immigrants and that are found within the integration policy sphere. An important question to address in relation to local integration policy is which policy areas will integration efforts need to cover? Since the concept of integration by its nature is vague and lacks a universal definition (Bartram et al., 2014), specifying it is somewhat challenging. From one perspective, integration can be seen as encompassing all sorts of social life. Being fully integrated in a new society would then require actions that lead to the individual feeling accepted in all parts of this society (Ager & Strang, 2008). Although such a broad perspective can be justified from a humanitarian perspective, it is hard to apply in empirical studies of local integration policy. We adhere to the distinction made by Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016) when they refer to three different dimensions that can be applied in the study of integration policies (for a similar typology see Alexander, 2007). They propose that integration can be evaluated based on the extent to which immigrants experience that they are an accepted part of society within these dimensions. The legal–political dimension refers to “the extent to which immigrants are regarded as fully-fledged members of the political community” (Penninx & Garcés-Mascareñas, 2016, p. 13). This encompasses matters of residence and political rights. From the legal–political dimension, full integration could be deemed as the granting of citizenship that would give immigrants the same formal rights as the majority population. The socioeconomic dimension concerns the social and economic position of immigrants. Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016, p. 15) delineate these two vague concepts as immigrants’ access to resources for finding work, housing, education, and health care. These spheres of social

52

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

life are ever present in the discussion on integration policy, in particular labour market integration which is a major consideration for policy makers. The cultural–religious dimension involves both perceptions and practices of cultural and religious circumstances. As stated by Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016), at the core of such an analysis is the interplay between how the two different groups – the immigrants and the population that makes up the majority society – perceive each other. If we see policy choices as a continuum there are two extreme outcomes. Successful assimilation policies will ultimately erase cultural differences through immigrants’ complete adaptation to the hosting society (Alba & Nee, 1997). In contrast, a policy of multi-culturalism would allow every ethnic minority to retain and express its own cultural and religious perceptions (Taylor et al., 1994). In the following section we look closer into the theories underpinning local integration policy and thereafter discuss strategies for conceptualising such policies. The Host–Stranger Relation and a Model for Local Integration Policy In a framework that derives from the interplay between the individual and the local society, Alexander (2003) draws from theories of Simmel and Bauman focusing on the host–stranger relation. This theoretical model was later used to compare the policies of four larger cities (Alexander, 2007). In terms of the perception of the individual, the framework bases the host–stranger dichotomy on Simmel (1908) and Bauman (1995a, 1995b) and the categories of ‘otherness’ and ‘strangers’ to understand the relation between the receiving society and those who enter it. Alexander (2007, pp. 12–13) defines host–stranger relations as “the assumptions, expectations and attitudes of the local host society, represented by local authority towards strangers.” Simmel (1908) introduced the concept of “the stranger” in sociological literature and showed that the notion implies a relation that should be understood in relation to a “self ”. In other words, a stranger can only be seen in relation to a self but there is no self in stranger. The dominant groups in societies tend to define what is considered as normal and what is perceived as deviating. Hence strangers can be defined differently, depending for example on the norms of the dominant group in society. Alexander (2007) refines such ideas by stating

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

53

that the host–stranger relation consists of three dimensions: temporality, otherness, and the spatial separateness of strangers. The first dimension – temporality – relates to the expectation of hosts regarding the length of time the stranger will be present. Alexander builds upon Bauman (1995a, 1995b) and argues that the modern view is to perceive the stranger as a temporary phenomenon. The stranger will either disappear or otherness will dissolve, through assimilation, or be spatially separated, through segregation. When examining irregular immigration in particular, Ambrosini (2018) makes a similar distinction in that the receiving society can refrain from socially recognising immigrants. The second dimension – otherness – concerns attitudes towards otherness that are invoked in relation to the stranger and how to accept the otherness of strangers. Alexander (2007) describes two options for the host population. They can either embrace otherness, as exemplified in multicultural societies, or repudiate it: the xenophobic response. The third dimension – spatial separation – is connected to the other two in that that they are concerned with segregation. These dimensions can further be linked to Bauman’s (1995a, 1995b) division of society according to modern and post-modern values. It is argued that in modern societies the most natural solution to handling strangers is to separate them from the dominant population. In contrast, post-modern society entails openness and fragmentation of spaces in which individuals with different backgrounds and lifestyles and where the boundaries are either non-existent or fluid. Based on the host–stranger relation discussed above, Alexander (2003, 2007) presents four different policy outputs of local integration policy: non-policy, guest-worker policy, assimilationist policy, and pluralist policy. We propose a number of analytical approaches to better understand these different policy choices. First, it is essential to differentiate between non-policy and different types of policy measures. Whereas a non-policy output refers to how local authorities ignore the situation of immigrants in the local community, either due to actual ignorance of this group or due to policy prioritisation, all the other alternatives involve specific policy measures (Hammar, 1985; Williamson, 2018). We argue that while nonpolicy may be due to sheer ignorance it may also be due to actors using their power and influence to prevent decisions being made, as proposed in the classic article by Bachrach and Baratz (1963). Nonetheless, establishing whether policy exists or not is a baseline criterion in the assessment of local policy.

54

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Second, there is a logical difference in how extensive efforts made to enact each policy are. A non-policy standpoint entails the municipality having no ambitions. In such scenarios, immigrants are completely dependent on other actors for their support. Perceiving immigrants as temporary guest-workers involves distributing policy amongst several actors, with local authorities taking some responsibilities and employers, public authorities, and NGOs taking others (Hammar, 1985). Although welfare services provided can differ in scope, they are normally limited to basic needs. An assimilationist policy, on the other hand, entails specific welfare and housing policies that endeavour to ignore any specific ethnic factor and instead provide service in accordance with universal criteria. In contrast, a pluralist policy involves policy measures that address the special cultural needs of minority groups and strengthen their empowerment in the community. Following on from this, the different alternatives require an intensification of ambitions and resources (Alexander, 2007) in terms of policy measures. Third, in accordance with the theoretical explanation above, the temporal perspective of immigrants varies sharply. While the non-policy and guest-worker policy modes consider immigrants as only being temporary, assimilationist and pluralist policies stem from a view of immigrants being a permanent phenomenon in the new society. Hammar (1985) stresses that different traditions in societies influence such outcomes. Fourth, the different outputs of policy have varying theoretical backgrounds. Whereas non-policy and assimilationist policies assume that the otherness that immigrants represent will vanish, guest-worker and pluralist policies build upon the notion that otherness will continue to exist. Put more concretely, a non-policy standpoint regards immigrants as a transient problem that will disappear. Although an assimilationist policy does not consist of the idea that immigrants per se will disappear, their otherness will do so under the influence of policies taken. On the other hand, a guest-worker policy is founded on acknowledging otherness and handling it through policies that aim to segregate immigrants from other citizens. Finally, while it recognises otherness a pluralist policy embraces the element of different cultures, but perceives it as something that enriches host countries (Alexander, 2007).

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

55

Research on the Local Perspective of Integration Policy – Analysed Through the Lens of Assumptions of Policy Outputs In terms of previous empirical research on the local arena, there are contributions in this field that can advance our understanding of the different variants of policy outputs discussed. We address this literature through an understanding of Alexander’s (2007) models of local integration policy and review relevant literature within the field of local integration policy. In cross-national comparisons of local integration policy, scholars have revealed interesting patterns but the findings have not been uniform. In examining the occurrence of a multi-level governance setting, Schmidtke and Zaslove (2014) and Dekker et al. (2015) reach contrasting conclusions. Whereas Schmidtke and Zaslove (2014) highlight that sub-national circumstances affect local policy making, Dekker et al. (2015) emphasize that multi-level relations impact the design of policy. In terms of policy content, Dekker et al. (2015) demonstrated that the local integration policies in three European cities were based on similar philosophies. While qualitative analysis points to slight differences, Berlin, Rotterdam, and Malmö are similar enough to all be classified as maintaining a universalistic and pluralistic policy. Still, it cannot generally be expected that local governments in every situation pursue their own policy. In surveys and case studies of local European governments conducted by the OECD (2018), it is evident that only slightly more than half of the cases have adopted a strategy aimed at coordinating policy measures. A smaller proportion also responded that such strategies entail actions to be taken, followed up with metrics and allocated responsibilities. It is uncertain whether these data explain the growing mainstreaming of integration policy or not (van Breugel, 2020). Recently, quantitative assessments do indeed demonstrate that great variations in local integration policy can also exist between European local governments. From a European perspective, the Council of Europe’s Intercultural Cities Index has been used to measure local integration policies. Correlation statistics verify that positive patterns are found between the index and countries with more established immigration (OSCE, 2017). Martínez-Ariño et al. (2019) provide some explanations through a comparison of the extent to which French and German cities maintain a pluralist policy. They based their findings on data collected from surveying people involved in local politics. Although pluralist policies appear to be common at the local level in both countries’ cities, the authors still emphasise that the variations

56

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

between them are due to country-specific processes. In German cities the existence of pluralist policies is related to the proportion of foreign-born individuals in the community and the percentage of councillors with an immigrant background. The local situation in France, however, appears to be dependent on the composition of the local council, namely a dominance of centre–left and left parties and the absence of anti-immigration parties. From a somewhat different angle, Zuber (2019) conducted a content analysis of German, Italian, and Spanish regions’ local integration policies and found variations between them, particularly in how regions position themselves concerning either assimilationist or pluralist stances. In an explanatory section of the study, the author reveals that a higher proportion of nationalist parties in the sub-state council makes regions less inclined to execute a more extensive socioeconomic policy or adopt a pluralist policy. Differences in local integration policy cannot solely be attributed to national characteristics. Studies comparing policy outputs within the same national context have still found significant variations between regional or sub-national administrations. Schammann et al. (forthcoming) examine whether German local governments have adopted integration plans or not and particularly point out the effects posed by structural and institutional factors on such policy output. As cities were found to be more inclined to adopt local integration policy than rural communities, experiences of depopulation appeared to be another trigger. Scholten (2013) examines the Netherlands by comparing the tradition of a pluralistic policy in the city of Amsterdam with an assimilationist policy in Rotterdam. In a later study, van Bruegel (2020) underlines that variations between local policies have long existed in the Netherlands. Similarly, Jørgensen (2012) compares the local integration policies of a number of Danish municipalities. Although variations are less substantial compared with the broad categories proposed by Alexander (2007), he still notes differences in policy objectives, ranging from diversity and empowerment goals in two of the studied cases to self-sufficiency and cultural conformity in the other two. In an analysis of regional-level policies in Italy, Campomori and Caponio (2013) identify three versions of policy frameworks and classify regions within them, notwithstanding the fact that it is not unusual for policies to change over a longer timeframe. First is the view of immigrants as part of a global precariat of guest-workers requiring certain social support. Second, they identify a more temporary view of

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

57

immigrants in regions in which integration policy is set in an assimilationist framework. In these regions immigrants are mostly perceived as an important contribution to the workforce that, ultimately, should return home, but during their visit ought to adjust to the local culture. Finally, a number of regions consider immigrants as more permanent settlers who also have the right to retain their own culture. From a North American perspective, Paque (2019) compares the migration policy of Canadian provinces and notices variations in how extensive policy efforts are and what they aim to achieve. Among other things, she notices differences in the perception of immigration, either as an all-encompassing phenomenon affecting society building, or solely as a matter for the local labour market. The notion of ‘welcoming cities’ has emerged from the United States to become a broader perspective of local integration policies. The aim of the association representing such local governments is to offer a warmer reception and to incorporate immigrants socially and economically, thereby deviating from policies focused on law enforcement and legal status. Huang and Liu (2018) demonstrate that the characteristics of these local governments are that they are composed of a larger share of minority populations – with more highly educated citizens but lower levels of median income – than other cities. Further, these local governments have greater fiscal and institutional strength and politically more liberal citizens. From a qualitative standpoint, McDaniel et al. (2019) particularly emphasise that policy outputs of this character are facilitated by transforming the discourse about immigration into a broader topic, including the situation for local communities and groups. They also point out that the ‘welcoming cities’ network has created an essential nurturing ground for the enforcement of policy. Researchers have also applied more of a micro perspective, addressing questions related to how policies are actually brought about through a focus on actors’ behaviours, individually or collectively. While some studies highlight the role played by either officials or politicians respectively, others approach policy making from a more holistic perspective, studying different actors and their joint actions. Several scholars have emphasised that at the local level the role played by elected politicians is vague. Filomeno (2017) argues that politicians are seldom responsive to the needs of immigrants since they are not, at least yet, part of the electorate. Hence in such contexts they have negligible gain from policy making in this area. Caponio (2010a) outlines similar motives, suggesting that this policy area takes a subordinate position. Hence the politicisation

58

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

of the migrant and integration issue that can be found at the national level is not always present at sub-national levels, where more of a pragmatic approach is often taken instead (e.g., Schmidtke & Zaslove, 2014). As a consequence, local policies are handed over to the local municipal administration that can nevertheless still be a significant actor. This assumption is verified in empirical studies. Paquet (2015) analyses the role played by public officials in her study of the sub-national arena in Canada. In her findings local government officials take on roles as entrepreneurs and push forward specific local integration policies. Paquet emphasises that this is made possible through increased local autonomy concerning this area of policy. These entrepreneurs can have different motivations for policy change, either from the perspective of finding policy solutions or identifying policy problems. Similarly, Campomori and Caponio (2017) stress the importance of the internal local administration charged with managing policies. A professional local administration with expertise and experience will be more prone to participate in those networks that are essential to how policies are both agreed and implemented. Campomori and Caponio (2017, p. 317) also highlight the importance of individual public officials as “playing a significant role in shaping governance arrangements.” Flamant (2020) corroborates this in a comparison of three major cities in France, but states that although public officials shape the agenda and influence the measures taken, they alone do not advance policy. The author points out that policies are agreed in consensus and jointly with organisations from civil society. The Conceptualisation of the Policy Output of Local Integration Policy There are two different aspects to our conceptualisation of local integration policy. We distinguish between policy dimensions and policy outputs and make important classification choices for each. In terms of the policy dimensions of local integration policy, in Chapter 1 we already stated that of the three aspects of policy dimension proposed by Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016), our interest is in the socioeconomic dimension. Our principal reason for this is that the main responsibility and potential for impact on local societies is in enhancing the situation for immigrants from a social and economic perspective (Alexander, 2007). As we will see throughout this book, such ambitions can be realised in areas such as the labour and housing market and the educational system. Other areas are either mainly decided at

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

59

the national level (e.g., legal–political dimensions) or are much harder to capture empirically (e.g., cultural and religious dimensions). When analysing the output of socioeconomic dimensions of integration, we do so particularly by addressing integration within three spheres of society: the labour market, the education system, and the housing market. In doing this, we end up with one main distinction that can nonetheless be further elucidated: • A local integration policy either exists or does not exist. Hence we categorise policy into non-policy and active policy. Active policy builds on the perception of immigrants as either a temporary or a permanent phenomenon. As seen, this parsimonious conceptualisation is performed in two steps. In the first, we follow the distinction put forth by Alexander (2007) which separates non-policies from all other examples of active local integration policy (see also Schammann et al., forthcoming; Williamson, 2018). On a general theoretical level, Alexander’s (2007, p. 41) description of this non-policy output is accurate: “… the municipality turns a blind eye to the problem. In effect, it passes the responsibility to others: employers, civic society, government agencies.” Furthermore, he adds that potential measures taken in this regard are agreed through an ad hoc approach. However, the constitution of a non-policy can vary between different legal and institutional settings and the concept therefore needs to be contextualised to be appropriate. We specify our perspective further by stating that a non-policy alternative is only viable in situations when a municipality refrains from taking any systematic measures that go beyond those that are decreed as compulsory by the government (Williamson, 2018).3 In summary, a non-policy of local integration policy output exists when a municipality lacks a guiding strategy that directs the orientation for measures to be taken and only implements that which is decreed as compulsory by the government. If a local integration policy exists, then it can have different traits and characteristics. As shown in the review in the previous section, most scholars in this field still apply a distinction that is similar to that of Alexander (2007). Our perspective is that the different models of guestworker policy, assimilationist policy, and pluralist policy are not easily translatable into the context studied. This is due to the fact that legal

60

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

and institutional settings vary and that Alexander explores labour market integration, whereas our focus is different. To solve this issue, we exploit just one of the aspects found in Alexander’s (2007) host–stranger model, namely the issue of temporality. As argued by Alexander, otherness can be perceived as a temporary phenomenon that is either resolved through the disappearance of the immigrant, through assimilation, or handled spatially through segregation. However, our view is somewhat different. We examine whether municipalities that are found to have an active local integration policy perceive immigrants as a temporary or permanent phenomenon, or act in such a way that they can be assessed as such. While a permanent perspective of immigrants builds upon the idea of their constituting a resource to the local community, a temporary view instead perceives immigrants as a transient phenomenon of the community.4

2.5 Concluding Remarks on Theoretical Positions In this chapter we have specified the theoretical foundations for this project step by step. These can now be summarised into a framework (see Table 2.5). The framework lays the foundation for a procedural and theoretically grounded analysis that examines governance structures and policy output in both local immigration and local integration policy and does so both before and after our cut-off point, as indicated in the table. When discussing the governance structure of this policy sector, we find it appropriate to apply a generic theoretical view that includes Table 2.5 Theoretical framework for examining local migration policy Local immigration policy Governance structures (V, H, MLG)

Governance structures (V, H, MLG)

Policy output (L, R)

Governance structures (V, H, MLG)

Policy output (L,R)

Policy Governance structures (V, H, MLG) output (N-P, A-P-T, A-P-P)

Policy output (N-P, A-P-T, A-P-P)

Local integration policy Note V = Vertical governance, H = Horizontal governance, MLG = Multi-level governance, L = Liberal local immigration policy, R = Restrictive local immigration policy, N-P = No local integration policy, A-P-T = Active local integration policy with immigrants constituting a temporary element, A-P-P = Active local integration policy with immigrants constituting a permanent element.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

61

both aspects of local migration policy. Hence our viewpoint assumes that governance processes can bear traits of either vertical, horizontal, or multi-level governance and that they can vary between policy sectors. We do not necessarily expect to find holistic versions of these theoretical constructions in the empirical reality, and thereby acknowledge that in reality governance structures can comprise configurations of attributes concerning policy agenda, governing processes, and the defining characteristic of the governing processes. In the second part we direct our interest at the assumed output of policies and thereby distinguish between local immigration and local integration policy. In terms of local immigration policy, we distinguish between whether they are liberal or restrictive and propose that such policy choices can be framed by either symbolic or instrumental lines of reasoning. Turning to local integration policy, we make a similar parsimonious distinction using two alternatives, there is either a situation of non-policy or active policies. The latter alternative enables us to add more nuance by proposing that local integration policies can be analysed from the perspective of whether immigrants are perceived as a temporary or permanent element of the local community.

Notes 1. Other ways of understanding the analytical dimensions are the terms hierarchical and network governance (Pierre & Peters, 2020). We use the terms vertical and horizontal governance in line with how these have been applied within migration research (e.g., Filomeno, 2017; Glorius & Doomernik, 2020; Guiraudon & Lahav, 2000). 2. Including individuals who are granted a residence permit due to subsidiarity protection or extraordinary circumstances, as well as relatives of such groups. 3. It should be kept in mind that in the Swedish context there is no requirement for municipalities to uphold a specific policy but to assure housing for assigned immigrants and to make sure that Swedish language training (SFI, Swedish For Immigrants) and civic orientation (CO) are provided. 4. Although common within this line of research, we will not proceed with a distinction that theoretically emanates from the distinction between assimilation or pluralism policy since we do not find this to be a reasonable strategy in relation to our empirical case. Differences

62

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

in policy in the Swedish case are instead expected in other categories, predominantly reflecting the long-term outlook of immigrants.

References Ager, A., & Strang, A. (2008). Understanding integration: A conceptual framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21(2), 166–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/ jrs/fen016 Agranoff, R. (2018). Local governments in multilevel governance: The administrative dimension. Lexington Books. Alba, R., & Nee, R. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 31(4), 826–874. Alexander, M. (2003). Local policies toward migrants as an expression of HostStranger relations: A proposed typology. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 29(3), 411–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691830305610 Alexander, M. (2007). Cities and labour immigration. Ashgate. Ambrosini, M. (2018). Irregular immigration in Southern Europe: Actors, dynamics and governance. Palgrave Macmillan. Ambrosini, M., & Boccagni, P. (2015). Urban multiculturalism beyond the ‘backlash’: New discourses and different practices in immigrant policies across European cities. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 36(1), 35–53. https://doi. org/10.1080/07256868.2014.990362 Arango, J. (2000). Explaining migration: A critical view. International Social Science Journal, 52(165), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451. 00259 Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1963). Decisions and nondecisions: An analytical framework. The American Political Science Review, 57 (3), 632–642. https:// doi.org/10.2307/1952568 Bale, T. (2008). Turning round the telescope. Centre-right parties and immigration and integration policy in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(3), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701847341 Bartram, D., Poros, M. V., & Monforte, P. (2014). Key concepts in migration. SAGE Publications. Bauman, Z. (1995a). Life in fragments: Essays in postmodern morality. Blackwell. Bauman, Z. (1995b). Making and unmaking of strangers. Thesis Eleven, 43(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/072551369504300102 Bevir, M. (2013). Governance as theory, practice, and dilemma. In Handbook of Governance. SAGE Publications. Birkland, T. A. (2011). An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. M.E. Sharpe.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

63

Bolin, N., Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Do anti-immigration parties matter? The case of the Sweden democrats and local refugee policy. Scandinavian Political Studies, 37 (3), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/14679477.12031 Bommes, M., & Thränhardt, D. (Eds.) (2010). National paradigms of migration research. V&R Unipress, Universitätsverlag Osnabrück. Brochmann, G. (1999). The mechanisms of control. In G. Brochmann & T. Hammar (Eds.), Mechanisms of immigration control: A comparative analysis of European regulation policies (pp. 1–29). Berg. Campomori, F., & Caponio, T. (2013). Competing frames of immigrant integration in the EU: Geographies of social inclusion in Italian regions. Policy Studies, 34(2), 162–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2013.767586 Campomori, F., & Caponio, T. (2017). Immigrant integration policymaking in Italy: Regional policies in a multi-level governance perspective. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2), 303–321. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0020852315611238 Caponio, T. (2010a). Conclusion: Making sense of local migration policy arenas. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam University Press. Caponio, T. (2010b). Grassroots multiculturalism in Italy; Milan, Bologna and Naples compared. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam University Press. Caponio, T., & Borkert, M. (Eds.). (2010). The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam University Press. Caponio, T., & Donatiello, D. (2017). Intercultural policy in times of crisis: Theory and practice in the case of Turin, Italy. Comparative Migration Studies, 5(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-017-0055-1 Caponio, T., & Jones-Correa, M. (2018). Theorising migration policy in multilevel states: The multilevel governance perspective: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(12), 1995–2010. Carvalho, J. (2014). Impact of extreme right parties on immigration policy: Comparing Britain, France and Italy. Routledge. Castles, S. (2004). The factors that make and unmake migration policies. International Migration Review, 38(3), 852–884. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1747-7379.2004.tb00222.x Castles, S., De Haas, H., & Miller, M. J. (2014). The age of migration: International population movements in the modern world. Palgrave Macmillan. Ceobanu, A. M., & Escandell, X. (2010). Comparative analyses of public attitudes toward immigrants and immigration using multinational survey data: A review of theories and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 36(1), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102651

64

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Cornelius, W. A., & Rosenblum, M. R. (2005). Immigration and politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 8(1), 99–119. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.polisci.8.082103.104854 Dekker, R., Emilsson, H., Krieger, B., & Scholten, P. (2015). A local dimension of integration policies? International Migration Review, 49(3), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12133 Eckersley, P. (2017). A new framework for understanding subnational policymaking and local choice. Policy Studies, 38(1), 76–90. Ellerman, A. (2021). The comparative politics of immigration—Policy choices in Germany, Canada, Switzerland and the United States. Cambridge University Press. Ellermann, A. (2006). Street-level democracy: How immigration bureaucrats manage public opposition. West European Politics, 29(2), 293–309. https:// doi.org/10.1080/01402380500512627 Emilsson, H. (2015). A national turn of local integration policy: Multi-level governance dynamics in Denmark and Sweden. Comparative Migration Studies, 3(7), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-015-0008-5 Enroth, H. (2013). Policy network theory. In M. Bevir, The Sage Handbook Governance. SAGE Publications. Facchini, G., & Mayda, A. M. (2008). From individual attitudes towards migrants to migration policy outcomes: Theory and evidence. Economic Policy, 23(56), 651–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0327.2008.00212.x Filindra, A., & Goodman, S. W. (2019). Studying public policy through immigration policy: Advances in theory and measurement. Policy Studies Journal, 47 (3), 498–516. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12358 Filomeno, F. A. (2017). Theories of local immigration policy. Palgrave Macmillan. Flamant, A. (2020). The local turn in integration policies: Why French cities differ. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 43(11), 1981–2000. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01419870.2020.1738522 Folke, O. (2014). Shades of brown and green: Party effects in proportional election systems. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(5), 1361–1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12103 Freeman, G. P. (1994). Can liberal states control unwanted migration? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 534(1), 17–30. Freeman, G. P. (1995). Modes of immigration politics in liberal democratic states. International Migration Review, 29(4), 881–902. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2547729 Gebhardt, D. (2016). When the state takes over: Civic integration programmes and the role of cities in immigrant integration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(5), 742–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2015. 1111132

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

65

Gilligan, C. (2015). The public and the politics of immigration controls. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(9), 1373–1390. https://doi.org/10. 1080/1369183X.2015.1021584 Glorius, B., & Doomernik, J. (Eds.). (2020). Geographies of asylum in Europe and the role of European localities. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-030-25666-1 Goldin, I., Cameron, G., & Balarajan, M. (2011). Exceptional people: How migration shaped our world and will define our future. Princeton University Press. Gossas, M. (2006). Kommunal samverkan och statlig nätverksstyrning. Örebro universitet. Guiraudon, V., & Lahav, G. (2000). A reappraisal of the state sovereignty debate the case of migration control. Comparative Political Studies, 33(2), 163–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414000033002001 Guiraudon, V., & Lahav, G. (2007). Immigration policy in Europe: The politics of control. Routledge. Gulasekaram, P., & Ramakrishnan, S. K. (2015). The new immigration federalism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978131 6282410 Hammar, T. (Ed.). (1985). European immigration policy: A comparative study. Cambridge University Press. Hedlund, G., & Montin, S. (2009). Governance på svenska. Santerus Academic Press. Helbling, M., & Leblang, D. (2019). Controlling immigration? How regulations affect migration flows. European Journal of Political Research, 58(1), 248– 269. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12279 Hellwig, T., & Sinno, A. (2017). Different groups, different threats: Public attitudes towards immigrants. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 43(3), 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1202749 Hendriks, F., Loughlin, J., & Lidström, A. (2011). Comparative reflections and conclusions. In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Local and Regional Democracy in Europe. Oxford University Press. Héritier, A., & Lehmkuhl, D. (2008). The shadow of hierarchy and new modes of governance. Journal of Public Policy, 28(01), 1–17. https://doi.org/10. 1017/S0143814X08000755 Hertting, N. (2003). Samverkan på spel. Rationalitet och frustration i nätverksstyrning och svensk stadsdelsförnyelse. Uppsala universitet. Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2014). Implementing public policy (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. Hood, C., & Margetts, H. C. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan.

66

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97 (2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649 Huang, X., & Liu, C. Y. (2018). Welcoming cities: Immigration policy at the local government level. Urban Affairs Review, 54(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1078087416678999 Hudson, C., & Sandberg, L. (2021). Contested hope for the future—Rural refugee reception as municipal survival? Journal of Rural Studies, 82, 121– 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.005 Jacobsen, K. (1996). Factors influencing the policy responses of host governments to mass refugee influxes. International Migration Review, 30(3), 655–678. Joppke, C. (1998). Why liberal states accept unwanted immigration. World Politics, 50(2), 266–293. Jørgensen, M. B. (2012). The diverging logics of integration policy making at national and city level. International Migration Review, 46(1), 244–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2012.00886.x Jutvik, K. (2020). Unity or distinction over political borders? The impact of mainstream parties in local seat majorities on refugee reception. Scandinavian Political Studies, 43(4), 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/14679477.12175 Kjær, A. M. (2004). Governance. Polity Press. Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Complexity theory and public administration: What’s new? Public Management Review, 10(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/147 19030802002675 Knill, C., & Tosun, J. (2012). Public policy: A new introduction. Palgrave Macmillan. Kriesi, H., Grande, E., Lachat, R., Dolezal, M., Bornschier, S., & Frey, T. (2006). Globalization and the transformation of the national political space: Six European countries compared. European Journal of Political Research, 45(6), 921–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00644.x Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Explaining local Swedish refugee policy. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 15(3), 547–565. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12134-013-0294-4 Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2015). Reception of refugees in Swedish municipalities: Evidences from comparative case studies. Migration and Development, 4(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/21632324.2014.894178 March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1995). Democratic governance. Free Press. Martínez-Ariño, J., Moutselos, M., Schönwälder, K., Jacobs, C., Schiller, M., & Tandé, A. (2019). Why do some cities adopt more diversity policies than others? A study in France and Germany. Comparative European Politics, 17 (5), 651–672. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-018-0119-0

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

67

Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and Development Review, 19(3), 431–466. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2938462 Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1998). Worlds in motion: Understanding international migration at the end of the millennium. Oxford University Press. McDaniel, P. N., Rodriguez, D. X., & Wang, Q. (2019). Immigrant integration and receptivity policy formation in welcoming cities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41(8), 1142–1166. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2019.1572456 Meer, N., Dimaio, C., Hill, E., Angeli, M., Oberg, K., & Emilsson, H. (2021). Governing displaced migration in Europe: Housing and the role of the “local”. Comparative Migration Studies, 9(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s40878-020-00209-x Meuleman, L. (2008). Public management and the metagovernance of hierarchies, networks and markets. Physica-Verlag. Meyers, E. (2004). International immigration policy: A theoretical and comparative analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. Money, J. (1999). Fences and neighbors: The political geography of immigration control. Cornell University Press. Nyhlén, J. (2011). Styrideal och konflikt- Om friskoleetablering i tre norrländska kommuner. Mittuniversitet. OECD. (2018). Working together for local integration of migrants and refugees. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085350-en OSCE. (2017). Local and central government co-ordiniation on the process of migrant integration: Good practices from selcted OSCE participating States. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. Paquet, M. (2015). Bureaucrats as immigration policy-makers: The case of subnational immigration activism in Canada, 1990–2010. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(11), 1815–1835. https://doi.org/10.1080/136 9183X.2015.1023185 Paquet, M. (2019). Province-building and the federalization of immigration in Canada. University of Toronto Press. Paquet, M. (2020). Immigration, bureaucracies and policy formulation: The case of quebec. International Migration, 58(1), 166–181. https://doi.org/10. 1111/imig.12555 Penninx, R. (2015). European cities in search of knowledge for their integration process. In P. Scholten, H. Entzinger, R. Penninx, & S. Verbeek (Eds.), Integrating immigrants in Europe (pp. 99–115). Springer. Penninx, R., & Garcés-Mascareñas, B. (2016). The concept of integration as an analytical tool and as a policy concept. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas & R. Penninx (Eds.), Integration processes and policies in Europe (pp. 11–29). Springer.

68

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Peters, B. G. (2015). Pursuing horizontal management: The politics of public sector coordination. University Press of Kansas. Peterson, O., & Söderlind, D. F. (1993). Förvaltningspolitik. Publica. Piattoni, S. (2010). The theory of multi level governance: Conceptual, empirical and normative challenges. Oxford University Press. Pierre, J. (2001). Decentralisering, governance och institutionell förändring. In B. Rothstein (Ed.), Politik som organisation. Förvaltningspolitikens grundproblem. SNS Förlag. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2012). Urban governance. In K. Mossberger, S. E. Clarke, & P. John, The Oxford Hanbook of urban politics. Oxford University Press. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2020). Governance, politics and the state (2nd ed.). Macmillan Education UK. Pierre, J., & Sundström, G. (2009). Samhällsstyrning i förändring. Liber. Piore, M. J. (1979). Birds of passage: Migrant labor and industrial societies. Cambridge University Press. Poppelaars, C., & Scholten, P. (2008). Two worlds apart the divergence of national and local immigrant integration policies in the Netherlands. Administration & Society, 40(4), 335–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539970 8317172 Pressman, J. L., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1973). Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland; or, why it’s amazing that federal programs work at all: This being a saga of the economic development administration as told by two sympathetic observers who seek to build morals on a foundation of ruined hopes. University of California Press. Qvist, M. (2012). Styrning av lokala integrationsprogram. Institutioner, nätverk och professionella normer inom det svenska flyktingmottagandet. Linköpings universitet. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press. Robinson, V., Andersson, R., & Musterd, S. (2003). Spreading the ‘burden’?: A review of policies to disperse asylum seekers and refugees. Policy. Rodríguez, C. M. (2008). The significance of the local in immigration regulation. Michigan Law Review, 106(4), 567–642. Schammann, H., Gluns, D., Heimann, C., Müller, S., Wittchen, T., Younso, C., & Ziegler, F. (forthcoming). Defining and transforming local migration policies: A conceptual approach backed by evidence from Germany. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2021. 1902792 Scharpf, F. W. (1994). Games real actors could play: Positive and negative coordination in embedded negotiations. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 6(1), 27–53.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

69

Schiller, M. (2018). The local governance of immigrant integration in Europe: The state of the art and a conceptual model for future research. In T. Caponio, P. Scholten, & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the governance of migration and diversity in cities (pp. 204–215). Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9781351108478-20 Schiller, N. G., & Ça˘glar, A. (2009). Towards a comparative theory of locality in migration studies: Migrant incorporation and city scale. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(2), 177–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/136918 30802586179 Schiller, N. G., & Caglar, A. (Eds.). (2011). Locating migration: Rescaling cities and migrants. Cornell University Press. Schmidtke, O., & Zaslove, A. (2014). Why regions matter in immigrant integration policies. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40(12), 1854–1874. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2013.867232 Scholten, P. (2020). Mainstreaming versus alienation: A complexity approach to the governance of migration and diversity. Palgrave Macmillan. Scholten, P., & Penninx, R. (2016). The multilevel governance of migration and integration. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas & R. Penninx, Integration processes and policies in Europe (pp. 91–108). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3319-21674-4_6 Scholten, P. W. A. (2013). Agenda dynamics and the multi-level governance of intractable policy controversies. Policy Sciences, 46(3), 217–236. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11077-012-9170-x Simmel, G. (1908). The stranger. In K. H. Wolff, The sociology of Georg Simmel (pp. 402–406). Free Press. Sørensen, E. (2002). Democratic theory and network governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 24(4), 693–720. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806. 2002.11029383 Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2007). Theories of democratic network governance. Palgrave Macmillan. Steen, A. (2009). Hvorfor tar kommunene imot ‘de fremmede’? Eliter og lokal skepsis. In J. Saglie (Ed.), Det nære demokratiet—Lokalvalg og lokal deltakelse. Abstrakt forlag. Steen, A. (2010). Crossing the local community border: Immigrant settlement in Norway. In B. Bengtsson, P. Strömblad, & A.-H. Bay (Eds.), Diversity, inclusion and citizenship in Scandinavia (pp. 187–214). Cambridge Scholars. Steen, A. (2016). Deciding refugee settlement in Norwegian cities: Local administration or party politics? Journal of Refugee Studies, 29(4), 464–482. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/few032 Steen, A., & Røed, M. (2018). State governance or local agency? Determining refugee settlement in Norwegian municipalities. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 22(1), 27–52.

70

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Steil, J. P., & Vasi, I. B. (2014). The new immigration contestation: Social movements and local immigration policy making in the United States, 2000– 2011. American Journal of Sociology, 119(4), 1104–1155. https://doi.org/ 10.1086/675301 Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as theory: Five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/14682451.00106 Svara, J. H. (2006). Politicians and administrators in the political process—A review of themes and issues in the literature. International Journal of Public Administration, 29(12), 1065–1090. Taylor, C., Gutmann, A., Appiah, A., & Habermas, J. (1994). Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of recognition. Princeton University Press. Teles, F., Gend´zwiłł, A., St˘anus, C., & Heinelt, H. (Eds.). (2021). Close ties in European local governance: Linking local state and society. Palgrave MacMillan. Torfing, J., Peters, G., Pierre, J., & Sörensen, E. (2012). Interactive governance. Advancing the paradigm. Oxford University Press. UNHCR. (2018). Global trends—Forced discplacement in 2017 . UNHCR. van Breugel, I. (2020). Towards a typology of local migration diversity policies. Comparative Migration Studies, 8(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878020-00179-0 Varsanyi, M. W. (2010). Local and state politics of immigration. In R. Denemark (Ed.), The International Studies Encyclopedia. Blackwell. Walker, K. E. (2015). The spatiality of local immigration policies in the United States. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 106(4), 486–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12130 Walker, K. E., & Leitner, H. (2011). The variegated landscape of local immigration policies in the United States. Urban Geography, 32(2), 156–178. https:// doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.32.2.156 Walton-Roberts, M., Veronis, L., Wayland, S. V., Dam, H., & Cullen, B. (2019). Syrian refugee resettlement and the role of local immigration partnerships in Ontario, Canada. The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, 63(3), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12561 Wennström, J., & Öner, Ö. (2015). Den geografiska spridningen av kommunplacerade flyktingar i Sverige. Ekonomisk Debatt, 43(4), 52–68. Williamson, A. F. (2018). Welcoming new Americans? Local governments and immigrant incorporation. University of Chicago Press. Wimmer, A., & Schiller, N. G. (2002). Methodological nationalism and beyond: Nation–state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks, 2(4), 301–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0374.00043 Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.

2

THEORETICAL POINTS OF DEPARTURE

71

Zapata-Barrero, R., & Barker, F. (2014). Multilevel governance of immigration in multinational states: ‘Who governs?’ Reconsidered. In E. Hepburn & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The politics of immigration in multilevel states: Governance and political parties. Palgrave Macmillan. Zapata-Barrero, R., Caponio, T., & Scholten, P. (2017). Theorizing the ‘local turn’ in a multi-level governance framework of analysis. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2), 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/002 0852316688426 Zincone, G., & Caponio, T. (2005). The multilevel governance of migration. State of the art—Report Cluster C9. International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe. Zolberg, A. R. (2002). Guarding the gates. In C. Calhoun, P. Price, & A. Timmer (Eds.), Understanding September 11 (pp. 285–299). The New Press. Zuber, C. I. (2019). Explaining the immigrant integration laws of German, Italian and Spanish regions: Sub-state nationalism and multilevel party politics. Regional Studies, 54(11), 1486–1497. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404. 2019.1599845

CHAPTER 3

Governing Swedish Immigration and Integration Policy

3.1

Introduction

In this chapter we investigate how Swedish migration and integration policy has altered through the years and the practical impact of changes on governing within the areas of policy. Over time different goals have been prioritised in this policy area. We focus on governance aspects in the policy area with particular emphasis on the state–local dimension. The empirical material consists of interviews as well as policy materials such as investigations, bills, and propositions from the government. The interviews were conducted with investigators, managers, and decision makers at the relevant ministries and public authorities responsible for immigration and integration issues. A total of nine interviews were carried out from 2018 to 2020. The interviews took approximately one hour each. Initial contact with participants was made by email when information about the project was shared. All participants were also informed of their rights and told they could withdraw their participation whenever they wanted. The questions that were asked concerned the Swedish migration system and the changes that the reception policies have undergone in recent years. Furthermore, themes were discussed regarding integration policy and integration policy organisation as well as the consequences of reforms in recent years. In the interviews questions were also asked about cooperation between public authorities at the central level of

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_3

73

74

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

government and cooperation between public authorities and municipalities. A list of participants as well as the interview guide are provided in Appendix B. In line with Chapter 2 we employ a theoretical framework of governance structures in this chapter. This includes vertical and horizontal governance as well as multi-level governance focusing on governance issues and responsibilities between different levels within the Swedish political administrative system. Immigration policy and integration policy are described separately. We start with the development of immigration policy.

3.2 The Historical Evolution of Swedish Immigration Policy When it comes to immigration policy the municipalities have always been significantly involved but their responsibilities have shifted over the years. This must be put in context; Sweden is characterised as a decentralised unitary state where municipalities have a high degree of autonomy and their self-government is ensured in the constitution (Ladner et al., 2019; Lidström, 2011). This particularly manifests itself in the fact that local authorities have extensive welfare commitments, combined with the power to tax their citizens (Hansen, 2014). Although municipalities have great autonomy and discretion over immigration policy, relations between the central and the local level of government are very complex. Before the Settlement Act, which was implemented in 2016, the responsibility of municipalities in the immigrant reception system could be described as a complex relationship between central and local governments (Qvist, 2012). The background to immigration policy can be traced to the beginning of the 1980s, when the uneven distribution of immigrants between municipalities was noticed and raised as a problem. Reforms were then decided upon that increased the responsibilities of local governments. Through better planning and control of where immigrants would live, the aim was to promote faster integration into Swedish society. One feature of this change was that the Swedish Immigrant Board (SIB), later transformed into the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA), was allocated the role of establishing agreements with municipalities to ensure immigrant placement. The funding for this was provided by the national government (Borevi, 2012). Initially, there was no problem finding a

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

75

sufficient number of municipalities to take part in the reception of immigrants (Geddes & Scholten, 2016). However, in specific years there was both a lack of capacity to receive and disparities in the geographical distribution of immigrants (Robinson et al., 2003). In the middle of the 1980s the government launched a new policy labelled the “Whole of Sweden Strategy” which reduced the level of local self-government and permitted the government to place immigrants in all municipalities (Borevi, 2012). The aim was to break the concentration of immigrants in metropolitan areas. With this strategy implemented the vast majority of immigrants were assigned to municipalities as predetermined by the government. The most important factor for immigrant deployment was the availability of housing. However, the strategy was to some extent unsuccessful as many of the allotted immigrants chose to relocate once they received their residence permit. They often moved to the larger cities where there were better job opportunities and more fellow countrymen but fewer openings for housing. This strategy prevailed between 1985 and 1994 (Edin et al., 2004; SCB, 2008). The “Whole of Sweden Strategy” was later abandoned and a system was established in which the government negotiated with the municipalities on the reception of immigrants (Hudson et al., 2021). This made the local authorities more active and gave them a key role in Sweden’s reception of immigrants. During this period, municipalities negotiated with the central government to agree on reception numbers, which has been described by researchers as a complex bargaining relationship between those involved (Qvist, 2012). The municipalities were responsible for the receiving process and housing provision pursuant to the act relating to the municipal housing of immigrants (SFS 2000:1383, 2000). If requested, they were also responsible for providing practical assistance in connection with settlement and education, civic orientation (CO), and other adult education. The municipalities were also in charge of providing education, including pre-school education, childcare, and other programmes for children and adolescents, and for the supply of these services (Hudson et al., 2021). One of the most debated laws in Sweden is the so-called EBO Act (SFS 1994:137, 1994) that is still in force. The act provides for asylum seekers to choose to arrange their own accommodation instead of living at an SMA facility. It also states that when these immigrants receive their residence permit they automatically stay in the municipality where the accommodation is located and are offered establishment support in that

76

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

municipality (Holmqvist et al., 2020). The law was introduced by the then centre–right government in 1993. The objectives of the law were to reduce public ‘care’ of immigrants, increase the individual’s responsibility, and ensure immigrant reception could be organised such that asylum seekers primarily lived outside of the SIB placement system and took responsibility for their own lives. This would make it easier to integrate into Swedish society (Prop. 1993/94:94, 1993). However, the law resulted in many immigrants choosing to settle in the larger cities together, creating strong housing segregation in such communities, which in many places has hampered integration. In that sense the aims of the law have not been achieved. In July 2020 the regulation allowing asylum seekers to organise their own accommodation was modified.1 Between 1996 and 2005 the Swedish reception of immigrants was relatively limited compared with the early 1990s (Qvist, 2012, pp. 77–78). In the early 1990s the number of immigrants in Sweden increased as a result of the Balkan war in the former Yugoslavia. Later, in 2006, admission increased again as a result of a temporary amnesty that accompanied the new Alien Act in 2005 (SFS 2005:716, 2005). The purpose of that law was to give certain families with children and people subject to removal decisions that could not be implemented new opportunities to obtain a residence permit. Against this backdrop the central government authorities tried to mobilise municipalities into increasing their reception of immigrants. According to Qvist what seemed to re-emerge was a repackaged “Whole of Sweden Strategy”, deemed by many a soft governance instrument (Qvist, 2012). From 2006 to 2011 the number of immigrants decreased in Sweden and did not start to rise again until 2012 (see Chapter 5). During 2015 and 2016 the level of reception of immigrants in Sweden increased again during the European migrant crisis. In the years thereafter Sweden received a large number of immigrants primarily from war-torn Syria. In the aftermath of this wave of primarily asylum seeker refugees, the related Swedish regulatory framework was changed. In the autumn of 2015 the government introduced temporary border controls at Sweden’s intra-Schengen borders as a result of the immigration situation, which saw Sweden receive approximately 163,000 asylum seekers for the complete year. These border controls were prolonged into 2016 and 2017 and have now been extended. The border controls mean that persons entering Sweden at the border crossing, within Schengen, are required to show

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

77

proof of their right to enter and stay in the country by providing either a passport or a national ID card (Hudson et al., 2021). In 2016 the municipalities’ autonomy in immigration policy was heavily reduced as a result of a legislative change concerning the reception of immigrants, known as the Settlement Act (SFS 2016:38, 2016). Prior to this, the Swedish municipalities had significant autonomy within this policy area (Hernes, 2017). As stated, until 2016 it was voluntary for the municipalities to receive immigrants through agreements with the particular County Administrative Board. One of the reasons for the change in regulation was that the outcome of the previous regulation was a fairly uneven reception of newly arrived immigrants in Swedish municipalities (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014). In brief, the Settlement Act entails obliging Swedish municipalities to receive immigrants (SFS 2016:38, 2016). The act covers newly arrived persons who have either been granted a residence permit as refugees or are in need of protection according to the Alien Act (SFS 2005:716, 2005). This also includes relatives of those who have been granted a residence permit and who are part of the same household. Those who are allocated as residents to municipalities are individuals who live in arranged government accommodation as well as quota refugees who need resettlement. The immigrants are then resettled in municipalities and the number of individuals each municipality receives is calculated according to a distribution model. The model is based on the municipality’s population size, the local labour market situation, and how many asylum seekers are already residing in the municipality.2 The government proposes the number of immigrants for each region and municipality to receive. Deviations from this proposal can only be accepted if it does not violate the quota that the region is obliged to admit.3 The County Administrative Board handles the next stage of the process, including any renegotiations between the municipalities involved. As mentioned earlier, there is a possibility for migrants who come to Sweden to arrange their own accommodation. Once they have received a residence permit, such individuals are not covered by the municipality’s placement under the Settlement Act. Other changes of a restrictive character were also introduced in 2016. For example, in June 2016 the Reception of Asylum Seekers Act (SFS 1994:137, 1994) was altered such that an asylum seeker whose application for asylum is refused automatically loses the right to aid if the person does not leave the country voluntarily. Once a definitive decision has been made for the asylum seeker to be expelled or deported,

78

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

the right to a daily allowance and to asylum accommodation paid for by the SMA is withdrawn. An exception is made for families with children under the age of 18 who still have the right to aid until they leave the country (Hudson et al., 2021). Also in July 2016 a new approach to residence rights was introduced under a temporary law (SFS 2016:752, 2016) which made temporary rather than permanent residence permits the norm. Under previous legislation, all persons in need of protection generally received a permanent residence permit. According to the new legislation, individuals who are granted refugee status receive a threeyear residence permit, and those who obtain the status of persons eligible for subsidiary protection receive a 13-month residence permit. When the permit runs out, the possibility of repatriating the person to his or her country of origin is re-evaluated. This temporary law (SFS 2016:752, 2016) also limits the ability of immigrants to reunite with their families. Only those who receive refugee status and a three-year residence permit will be given the opportunity for family reunification, which means that such reunification is only be permitted if the person applying can provide for those arriving. This law covering family regulation was liberalised in July 2019 when the temporary regulation on restrictive immigration was modified and extended. The asylum seeker also needs to have a home of a standard and size that is appropriate for those people who are going to live there (Hudson et al., 2021). In July 2021 this temporary law was replaced by a new permanent legislation. Compensation for the reception of immigrants from the central government to the municipalities consists of two parts: one part for which the municipalities can apply and another that they receive automatically. If the municipalities apply for it, then items that the state reimburses include arrival accommodation for unaccompanied children while they wait to be allotted a municipality, extraordinary costs for unaccompanied children, special costs for children and pupils in compulsory schooling and preschool, extraordinary education costs, and compensation for social aid for immigrants who cannot partake in the establishment programme. Municipalities can also apply for compensation for certain costs they have incurred for people who apply for a residence permit in Sweden for reasons other than protection. Furthermore, compensation is given to the municipalities without their having to apply. This applies to immigrants with residence permits, both adults and children. Compensation covers reception and practical help with accommodation, Swedish language training (SFI, Swedish For Immigrants) education,

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

79

civic orientation, adapted municipal adult education for new arrivals. Such compensation is covered by the ordinance on establishment initiatives, interpreters, other municipal initiatives to facilitate establishment in society, and certain costs for financial assistance and administration. These benefits are paid according to an established model in which the compensation level in 2020 for people younger than 65 years was SEK 146,100 and for people older than 65 years it was SEK 82,100 (SFS 2010:1122, 2010).

3.3 Historical Evolution of the Swedish Integration Policy The year 1975 was important in the history of Swedish integration policy. It was the year in which a specific, cohesive policy area focusing on immigrants, their rights and responsibilities, and their paths to inclusion in Swedish society was created. The themes of the reform were equality, freedom of choice, and partnership. In addition, this entailed a number of immigrant rights including one in which immigrants would enjoy the same rights as native workers (Bengtsson & Borevi, 2016; Borevi, 2012). While it may appear that current policy programmes treat the issue of employment status as something new to integration policy, previous research has revealed that this is not the case. The 1975 reform shows that labour market integration was important right from the beginning of Swedish integration policy, with the 1980s as the only exception. During that period the general responsibility for policy making and implementation was placed on the SIB, and the focus on workfare was downplayed (Borevi, 2012). The focus on integration through the labour market has also been part of a general activation policy that has had an impact on several other policy areas in Sweden as well as in wider Europe.4 At the same time this approach has also been criticised over time as being too caring and creating passivity amongst the immigrants. It has been argued that activities have a lock-in effect that makes immigrants more dependent on the state and less inclined to work (Qvist, 2012). During the 1980s, reforms implemented in the area were a response to some of this criticism. During the 1980s, integration policy was reformed once again and municipalities were given greater responsibility for both the reception and integration of immigrants, while the SIB and SNLB were given overall responsibility. At this time immigrant reception and integration

80

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

were part of the same policy area. Moreover, immigration changed character during this period (Prop. 1983/84:125, 1983). As immigration to Sweden successively changed from mainly labour immigration to refugee immigration in the 1970s and 1980s, refugee immigrants were considered to have more and different needs than the previous group (Qvist, 2012). In many municipalities, these issues ended up under the remit of social services departments, and efforts were therefore based on working methods derived from the social services area based on the Social Services Act (Qvist, 2012; Soininen, 1992). During the 1980s and 1990s, unemployment among immigrants increased, resulting in subsequent criticism of existing policies and demands to reform policies to strengthen opportunities for work among immigrants. The criticism also had an ideological backdrop, coming from the neoliberal wave of the 1980s in which immigrants had increasingly become perceived as a problem and a financial burden (Qvist, 2012). This meant that the reform that came at the end of the 1980s was intended to create incentives for municipalities to develop more active measures to balance employment among other immigrants (Prop. 1989/90:105, 1989). Towards the end of the 1980s and during the 1990s, labour market integration again became the main focus of Swedish integration policies. However, it had a tendency towards responsibilities rather than the right to work. At the end of the 1990s, integration was given its own policy area in Sweden, as a solution to what was seen as the increasing marginalisation of immigrants. A government proposition stressed that integration policy should aim to support individuals and make it easier for newcomers to achieve self-sufficiency and participate in Swedish society. This proposition also underscored support for democratic values and for combatting discrimination (Prop. 1997/98:16, 1997). All of this demanded a shift from what had been called ‘immigrant policy’ to ‘integration policy’, which not only focused on individuals’ positions in society and enhanced their rights, but also emphasised their responsibilities within society (Lidén et al., 2015; Schierup et al., 2006). However, a government proposition called for newly arrived immigrants to be guaranteed a two-year introductory period administered by local governments to help them integrate into Swedish society (Prop. 1997/98:16, 1997). Although it could be said that labour market integration has been a key feature of Swedish integration policy over time, there was once again a stronger emphasis on such issues in the mid-2000s. Although

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

81

the ideology underpinning the policy of integration had already begun to change before the Swedish government shifted from the Social Democrats to a centre–right alliance in 2006, this new orientation marked an explicit shift in Swedish integration policy. In order to highlight this policy shift in practice, the government moved matters related to integration from the Ministry of Integration and Equality to the Ministry of Labour. After the centre–right government won the election in the autumn of 2006, the first spring budget it presented contained an integration package with specific measures to increase integration success and overcome exclusion (i.e., remaining outside the labour market). In Sweden, as in the European Union (EU) in general, integration policies were closely linked to the European employment strategy (Hansen, 2008; Larsson, 2015). Paid work was seen as the path to inclusion in society, and the concepts of social inclusion and exclusion were constantly repeated in the EU’s social and employment policy, such as the Europe 2020 strategy, to explain an individual’s status (European Commission, 2010). After this refocus on labour market integration in 2006, emphasis was placed on the workfare programme, which proposed that if newly arrived immigrants were given the opportunity to quickly enter the labour market, then there would be less risk of exclusion. Moreover, the government stressed that workfare should be aimed at immigrants (Dahlstedt, 2009: p. 31). Recentralisation and marketisation of integration policy were seen as ways to strengthen the focus on labour market integration and Establishment Reform was introduced in 2010. The introduction of reform meant that the responsibility for immigrants as well as integration policy was transferred from municipalities to the central government, more specifically the Public Employment Service (PES) (Prop. 2009/10:60, 2009). Reform was designed to enable immigrants to establish themselves quicker in society and involved a rhetorical shift: the former purpose of ‘introduction’ was replaced with the ‘reception’ and ‘establishment’ of immigrants, with the responsibilities of immigrants being increasingly stressed (Lidén et al., 2015; Ugland, 2014). The shift in policy also meant that more agencies and actors than ever before would be involved in helping newly arrived immigrants in Sweden get established. This includes the PES, the Swedish Social Security Agency, county administrative boards, local municipalities, and additional organisations offering job qualification and portfolio training. Different projects and activities to support immigrants become established in their new lives were part of an introduction plan, which was to

82

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

be co-created by a newly arrived immigrant and an employment agency officer together to specify the two-year establishment period (Larsson, 2015). An introductory plan called for specific measures and activities to be formulated to help the immigrant become more employable, such as instruction in Swedish language, preparatory studies, vocational training, and other employment-oriented measures (Prop. 2009/10:60, 2009). Establishment Reform also entailed a form of marketisation of integration policy and transferred the responsibility of implementing the integration policy to private firms, adding an element of freedom of choice. Such reform marked the rise of ‘introduction guides’ or companies chosen by newly arrived immigrants to aid them in their job searches (SFS 2010:197, 2010). Overall, the introduction guide system was highly criticised (Riksrevisionen, 2014). Companies operating in the integration market were not closely monitored, and an ineffective governing system that in some cases even worked against the stated aims was thus created (Lidén et al., 2019). Unsurprisingly, introduction guides were discontinued by the government in 2015. In contrast, the SFI has become the attention for reforms. Since 2017 it has been integrated with the other parts of municipal adult education and during the very same year a new course curriculum was introduced. Although the SFI contains four courses, the student can jump directly to course 2 or 3 because it is based on the educational background of the individual (Righard et al., 2019). New regulation has been in place since January 2018, which has meant that the same rules and requirements apply to newly arrived immigrants as to all other job seekers (SFS 2017:584, 2017). The new regulation also states that there must be a plan of activities that the immigrant has to follow, such as courses in Swedish and applying for suitable jobs. The provisions of the new regulation mean that immigrants are more equal to other job seekers than before and, just like other job seekers, they must send an activity report to the PES every month stating what they have done and the progress they have made. Previously, such a report had to be submitted every six months. If an immigrant fully participates in the two-year programme, he or she may be eligible for support from the Swedish Social Security Agency (Hudson et al., 2021). Other changes that were decided by the government and implemented in 2018 include an education obligation for immigrants with a low level of education. The PES can demand that immigrants who are taking part in establishment efforts participate in regular adult education. This aims to increase

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

83

their skills. Those who do not adhere to the PES’s instructions on education may lose their compensation (SFS 2017:584, 2017). The changes described above reflect the claims of some researchers that Swedish integration policy has been abandoned in favour of a general labour market policy. This manifested itself in 2014 when the then new Social Democratic minority government took office and amongst other things placed integration issues under the Department of Labour and did not appoint an integration minister (Holmqvist et al., 2020). Research indicates that the labour market is only one aspect of integration policy, especially at the local level, where municipalities often work with active integration policies for immigrants that include several aspects of integration (Brännström et al., 2018; Lidén et al., 2019). In summary, the direction and organisation of integration policies in Sweden have undergone many changes over the last 10 years, particularly after Establishment Reform. While introduction guides have been discontinued, it is still unclear how policy will evolve. However, in the short term it appears that the changes will mean an increased focus on labour market integration and a tightening of conditions.

3.4 Governance Through Vertical, Horizontal, and Multi-Level Structures As mentioned in Chapter 2 we draw from theories of governance that understand governance processes from three different perspectives. In this chapter we build on contemporary understandings of the interaction between political levels as a critical element in the governance of migration policy. In the following sections we present empirical findings on relations between the national level (i.e., the central government and its public authorities) and the local level of government. We highlight governance issues, the consequences of reforms in recent years, and how the reforms affect the relationship between actors at different levels in the governance system, with a particular focus on relations between the state and the local level. First, we describe the relations between the national and the local level before the cut-off point of the migrant crisis. The section thereafter deals with relations between actors and levels after the migrant crisis.

84

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

3.4.1

Before the Migrant Crisis: From Large Local Discretion to Increased Government Control

Over the years there have been quite large fluctuations in the numbers of migrants received in Sweden, which has created different challenges for municipalities as well as actors at the central level. These challenges and discussions on how to solve them can be traced back to the 1980s when the uneven reception of immigrants between municipalities was perceived as a problem. Different measures were taken to handle this such as the “Whole of Sweden Strategy” (Borevi, 2012). Under this strategy the most important factor in placing immigrants was the availability of housing. However, the strategy was unsuccessful as a result of immigrants tending to relocate to metropolitan areas when they received their residence permits. It also brought about a more vertical mode of governing and increased the elements of hierarchical, top–down governing in the policy area (Hill & Hupe, 2014). There have been years when there was a lack of capacity in Swedish municipalities and disparities in geographical distribution of reception between them (Robinson et al., 2003). According to a Swedish government analyst interviewed, Swedish society has undergone major demographic changes during the past 10 to 15 years and one cause of that change has been the reception of immigrants (Analyst, the Swedish Government ). This resulted in large differences between municipalities in terms of immigrant reception. As presented above uneven distribution has been a focus of the government for many years. Challenges brought about by inequalities and fluctuation in numbers over the years have been evident. However, it is not only uneven distribution that has triggered policy changes and implementation of the Settlement Act. According to an interview with a public official at the SMA, another reason policies were changed was the fact that immigrants with residence permits remained in the SMA’s accommodation centres, and the agreements signed by the municipalities and the national government were not adequate in terms of numbers of immigrants to be received. This resulted in those living in SMA facilities not being transferred into housing of their own in the municipalities because the number of immigrants in the accommodation centres was greater than that the municipalities had agreed to receive. As a consequence immigrants stayed in the accommodation centres for far too long (Public Official 2, the Swedish Migration Agency; Senior Officer, Swedish Government ). Even though the new

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

85

regulations restricted the autonomy of local governments, the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) was positive to this introduction, which is somewhat unusual given that the new act was foreseen to address the uneven distribution of immigrants between the municipalities (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Analyst 2, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ). SALAR is a member and employer organisation for all Sweden’s municipalities and regions. The organisation works in the interests of municipalities and regions and helps them fulfil their obligations. It also advocates the importance of local government and discretion. The overall aim of the new regulation, the Settlement Act, was to create a more even distribution of immigrants over time between municipalities, a goal that was generally well received. However, some municipalities also witnessed a decrease in the reception of immigrants as a result of both the Settlement Act and the general decreased inflow of immigrants, which also affected the municipalities’ way of working with these issues. According to a SALAR representative, both the increased and decreased reception of immigrants pose challenges for municipalities. These include the ability to build the infrastructure and organisation for receiving immigrants. The official interviewed described it as follows: Small municipalities with a limited reception of immigrants find it difficult to take advantage of economies of scale that a large assigned reception can provide. (Analyst 2, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions )

The Swedish immigration policy has been described as fragmented and decoupled (Qvist, 2012). Changes in the immigration and integration policy in recent years have amongst other things been focused on linking different activities closer together. One of the aims of recent improvements is to better relate political efforts with the needs in municipalities. The connection between reception and integration is often based on the three different phases articulated in the Swedish reception policy: reception, establishment, and integration. The reception phase reflects the initial period after arrival in the country once the immigrant has obtained his or her residence permit and is assigned a residence or has arranged some accommodation. At this stage the municipality’s responsibility has been to arrange assistance in connection with relocation to the accommodation and to ensure that other relevant measures that may be necessary are in place. Currently, the establishment period of two years is

86

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

the responsibility of the PES, but this period of time is perceived as insufficient. Integration can take much longer since it involves a reciprocal process including interaction between the individual and the receiving society. When it comes to the regulations of 2010 and how the central government changed the focus of integration policy, an interview with an official from the Ministry of Labour reveals that: Integration is a more long-term process that can take many, many years. However, the policy changes in 2010 meant an increased focus on labour market integration and much less on other types of integration, which has started to change with the adaptations in regulations in recent years. (Analyst, the Swedish Government )

Prior to 2010 the focus on labour market integration was less pronounced. Even though labour market integration has been a priority in Swedish integration policy over the years, there have also been periods when these elements have been less emphasised. A PES public official who we interviewed stated that: Prior to 2010 the municipalities focused on other forms of integration, such as social integration, rather than labour market integration. This can also be seen as one of the backgrounds to [the changes to Establishment Reform, and] the central government taking over part of the integration efforts from the municipalities. (Analyst 1, the Public Employment Service)

As previously mentioned, the content of integration policy has changed over time and the main focus in the policy has shifted over the years, from a stronger focus on social efforts and since 2010 towards labour market integration. The consequence of the increased labour market focus was that social issues were lost, as expressed in interviews with the PES. In recent years though social issues have re-entered into focus (Analyst 1, the Public Employment Service). This is confirmed by the Ministry of Labour, who describe the focus of integration policy in the same way (Analyst, the Swedish Government ). As a result such tendencies have also affected municipalities and how they work with integration policy, using different strategies to increase immigrants’ participation in the labour market as well as trying to focus on social issues. In this respect it can be said that one reason for the development of local integration policy was implementation of the Settlement Act (Analyst 2, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ).

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

87

There are also clear examples of the two spheres of migration policy intersecting at the local level. Changes in reception also affect integration policy and work on integration, especially in municipalities. When the reception of immigrants diminishes such municipalities find it particularly difficult to maintain organisation focused on integration. Different municipalities choose to organise their integration efforts in various ways. Some have settled for a separate solution in which integration work takes place in a different organisation and other municipalities have chosen to integrate the work across departments. A larger reception of immigrants means municipalities can better adapt their integration work, adopting more targeted initiatives that are specially adapted to the new immigrants and their integration (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ). 3.4.2

After the Migrant Crisis: Stronger State Control and Focus on Cooperation Between Levels and Actors

The reforms of recent years entailed a major change for municipalities, in particular in relation to local self-government (Hernes, 2017). Since receiving immigrants was unfamiliar to some municipalities, some local governments initially opposed the reception of immigrants. The main argument often given was that they had no vacant accommodation to offer. At the same time the SMA emphasised that many municipalities did not have the appropriate facilities to handle reception issues as a result of a lack of previous experience of receiving immigrants. From this perspective the Settlement Act forced municipalities to develop the necessary structures and an appropriate organisation (Analyst 1, the Public Employment Service). The SMA’s strategy towards municipalities was pragmatic. When problems with immigration admission arose, dialogues between the SMA and the municipalities took place, including discussions on when the issue could be resolved (Public Official 2, Swedish Migration Agency 21 May 2019). While the Settlement Act was being introduced, there were as many as 90,000 to 100,000 immigrants waiting in SMA facilities to obtain municipal placement (Public Official 2, Swedish Migration Agency). Obviously, this put pressure on many municipalities. One of the problems was that several municipalities assigned to receive immigrants had difficulties in offering accommodation within two months of the immigrants obtaining their residence permit, something the law required. In response, the SMA investigated those municipalities who had trouble

88

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

meeting the two-month limit with a view to resolve the situation. One of the representatives of the SMA interviewed explained the situation as follows: The reason why some municipalities had difficulties in meeting the twomonth limit was that they had little or no previous experience of refugee reception and a housing market that did not offer any vacancies. (Public Official 2, Swedish Migration Agency)

This demonstrates that previous experience of receiving immigrants is an important factor in the preparedness of municipalities to meet the requirements of the Settlement Act, corroborating previous claims on the strength of path dependency within Swedish policy (Bengtsson & Borevi, 2016). One situation that has arisen as a result of implementing the Settlement Act is that it has been applied somewhat differently in the various municipalities. While a few municipalities terminate the housing immigrants are granted once the two-year establishment period ends, others provide an ongoing housing contract (County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). Diverging opinions exist between the central government and SALAR on how to handle such a restrictive stance. Although there are different interpretations of the legal basis for such a standpoint, the government’s opinion is that there is no legal support for such a restrictive approach. Different interpretations have led to divergences in practice between some municipalities and from the government’s point of view it is seen as an undesirable situation. In the worst case scenario, this type of behaviour from municipalities can lead to homelessness for the individual and difficulties for them in becoming established and integrated (Analyst, Swedish Government ). This aligns with what Guiraudon and Lahav (2000) suggest when they stress that although the government has other aims with its policies, significant local variations in interpretations of the policy will occur. It also corroborates the remarks of other researchers who state the relations between different governing levels have become more complex with local adaptations of central government policy (Dekker et al., 2015). This shows that even when more vertical governing modes are developed, local adaptation can occur as a counteracting response to increased governmental control. According to an interview with a public official at the PES, the Settlement Act has meant that some of the structures that existed before 2010

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

89

have re-emerged in the municipalities. Municipalities have once again developed their own models for coping with the reception of immigrants in which the focus is more on practical aspects such as the social situation and informing immigrants about what living in Sweden entails. In particular, municipalities that have had many self-settled individuals, such as those in metropolitan areas, have already been forced to set up such structures. For instance, finding housing is more difficult in these areas as a result of lower supply and higher rents. These combine to decrease an individual’s ability to find work and establish social networks (Analyst 2, Public Employment Service). As previously mentioned, many municipalities find themselves compelled to build a municipal structure for labour market policy, despite it being formally a central government issue. There are two reasons for this: first, there may be some dissatisfaction with the PES and, second, municipalities may try to supplement the policy and measures decided by the central government. According to a report (Vikman & Westerberg, 2017), municipalities spend billions every year on municipal labour market initiatives (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Analyst, Swedish Government ). However, coordination challenges between different political levels are common. For example, the routines for disbursements of benefits can vary between authorities and this creates problems for the individual. As described above, it is not uncommon for municipalities to have formed labour force units that specifically handle those who have completed their establishment period but have still not found employment. According to one informant, municipalities must work together with the PES to find solutions to improving assistance. If this is not achieved, then those who do not receive employment after the introduction period will be placed under the remit of municipal social services for financial support. As a consequence, even if labour market policy is primarily under the purview of the national government via the PES, municipalities tend to develop their own policy solutions, often based on cooperation in networks with different actors in the municipalities. This is deemed a way to reduce their costs in the long run (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ). One way to make integration activities function more efficiently locally is through central government authorities adjusting their actions and measures according to local circumstances. The PES claims that, as far as possible, local adaptations are made to integration efforts according to local circumstances. Obligatory activities are formulated at the central

90

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

level, but how these are implemented is at the discretion of the local level of government. Although there are local variations in how the PES works, the agency describes its mission as providing supportive structures to local PES offices to fulfil state assignments. It is up to the local PES office to design activities based on local conditions (Analyst 1, Public Employment Service). This illustrates that the PES has some ability to adapt measures to local needs and do so in a multi-level governance fashion. However, according to informants at SALAR, there is a complication that sometimes prevents cooperation in this area: the fact that government authorities are not present in every municipality makes such adaptations infeasible (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Analyst 2, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ). When it comes to the regulatory framework, one PES representative argues that municipalities experience difficulties in managing the funding for labour market initiatives, while the ability for the PES to fund such initiatives in the municipalities is limited. However, municipalities can take part in government initiatives and programmes that can support them in their work. The labour market focus of the integration policy has also resulted in municipalities starting their own integration units when cooperation between the PES and the municipalities has been difficult, mainly regarding the follow-up of inclusion plans. Cooperation in this area is complicated by the fact that the PES does not have an office in many municipalities (Analyst 2, Public Employment Service). 3.4.3

After the Migrant Crisis: Increased Coordination and Cooperation Between Levels and Actors in Network Structures

One recurring theme during the reforms of recent years has been increased government control over the reception and integration policy, and increased connection between political levels to make the policy areas more coherent. One way to achieve more coherent policy efforts has been to improve cooperation in networks between actors at different levels of government as well as with actors outside government. This includes civil society organisations, NGOs, and actors from the business sector who cooperate in network-based ways and in a multi-level governance fashion (Hooghe & Marks, 2003; OECD, 2018; Rhodes, 1997). After the cut-off point of the migrant crisis, a central aspect in the reception system involved immigrants being assigned to a municipality

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

91

without the local government having any influence over this process. This excludes immigrants who find housing for themselves, which is a substantial portion of those arriving in Sweden. Municipalities receive information about how many immigrants they are to receive based on figures calculated by the SMA, the so-called county figures. While the numbers are produced by the SMA in consultation with the PES and the particular County Administrative Board, the ability for municipalities to influence the numbers of immigrants is limited. It can be handled at the regional level. This can vary between regions, however, depending on cooperation between the municipality and the particular County Administrative Board. As mentioned in the previous section, the SMA began to map those municipalities who had difficulties in meeting the required two-month limit for settlement in the municipality as per the Settlement Act. Thereafter, a dialogue was initiated to solve the issue in the municipalities concerned. The SMA was assisted by county administrative boards since the latter have closer contacts with municipalities. According to an informant representing the SMA, dialogue and cooperation were seen as the best way to solve the situation, as the new law meant a major change for municipalities and greatly curtailed municipal self-government (Public Official 2, Swedish Migration Agency). Even though vertical governance has increased through reforms in recent years, governmental agencies continue to try and solve policy problems through cooperative strategies with other authorities as well as the municipalities (Rhodes, 1997; Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). According to several of the interviewees, when the PES was given clearer responsibility for integration in 2010, this strengthened the work in several areas, including extensive cooperation between different organisations. On the other hand, the reform has been criticised by some municipalities (Lidén et al., 2015; Qvist, 2016). The Settlement Act has led to reinforcement of the cooperative structures between the PES and municipalities that were built after 2010. For example, the PES and municipalities work much closer together as a result of a PES effort called “Extra jobs”. This initiative was a consequence of the migrant crisis and involved the PES subsidising employment for newly arrived immigrants. As a result of “Extra jobs” fewer people had to apply to the municipalities for financial support (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Analyst 2, Public Employment Service). “Extra jobs” has since been replaced by a number of other employment initiatives.

92

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

When it comes to organisation of the policy sector, centralisation, increased power, and vertical governing of the central level are perceived to have improved as a result of policy changes. It has been pointed out that cooperation between the state and the municipalities has improved as a result of stronger government control expressed primarily through the Settlement Act (SFS 2016:38, 2016) (Analyst 1, Public Employment Service). However, as mentioned above, the tendency to centralise much of the responsibility for integration policy and immigration policy in recent years has also been criticised, particularly by individuals at the local level of government (Lidén et al., 2015). Overall, cooperation between public authorities at the central level has worked well, according to several of the representatives interviewed. Through the so-called Cooperation Council, on which the SMA, the PES, SALAR, the Social Security Agency, and the County Administrative Board are represented, it has been possible to discuss and air important issues. This council has also been instrumental in disseminating information and is used when new county and municipal figures are to be established. Although the SMA is formally responsible for the work, it must be done collaboratively and the Cooperation Council has been a successful forum for that. Although this council existed before the Settlement Act, it now also resolves issues that became relevant due to reform. Cooperation between regions and municipalities also works reasonably well. Furthermore, the SMA has a regional organisation with regional managers who are experienced in creating well-functioning relations with municipal managers and county boards (Analyst 1, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Analyst 2, Public Employment Service; Public Official 2, Swedish Migration Agency). There has always been cooperation between the government’s public authorities and municipalities regarding labour market policy initiatives for immigrants who are a long way from entering the labour market. One critical success factor is having a local PES presence in municipalities enabling easier cooperation between the municipality and the local PES office (Analyst 2, Public Employment Service). Barriers to effective cooperation between actors in the policy area were also mentioned by the interviewees. One thing that was highlighted in an interview with SALAR is the fact that not all public authorities are present in all municipalities (Analyst 2, Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions ). This was also mentioned by an analyst at the PES who states in the

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

93

interview that in their internal evaluations they saw a link between positive results in municipalities where the PES had local offices. In these municipalities, cooperation often worked well and produced good results. However, concern was expressed both internally within the PES and also by municipalities regarding the effects organisational changes within the PES were having on labour market integration (Analyst 1, Public Employment Service; Analyst 2, Public Employment Service).

3.5

Concluding Remarks

As shown in this chapter, Swedish immigration and integration policies have wrestled with the same problems for a long time. We identify two recurring themes: levelling out the reception of immigrants between municipalities and improving the integration of immigrants into Swedish society. We address these from theoretical ideas of different governance structures. Over the years integration policy has shifted focus from job creation to more social issues, and during recent decades back to a labour market focus once more and an increased focus on social efforts. Considering the effects of reforms in recent years, it can be seen that the government has taken a strong stance in increasing vertical governance over particularly immigration policy. When it comes to immigration policy, municipal discretion has been heavily reduced, with the policy now having greater elements of vertical governance (Filomeno, 2017; ZapataBarrero & Barker, 2014). However, local initiatives are not completely absent. In fact, there are aspirations for a more coherent policy. This includes interventions at the state level aiming to better connect and respond to efforts and needs at the local level. It also includes ambitions to better integrate reception and integration policies. In this respect it can be said that governance has tended more towards being designated to multi-level governance (Schiller, 2018; Scholten & Penninx, 2016; Zapata-Barrero et al., 2017), with interdependencies of the different levels increasing and the measures and working methods developed at different political levels better responding to wishes and needs at other levels. At the same time it is also evident that local governments attempt to maintain some level of discretion even if institutional prerequisites to do so are limited (Agranoff, 2018). In terms of local immigration policy, this is evident in how some municipalities have a stricter interpretation of their housing commitments. Municipalities have also become more

94

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

active in terms of pursuing their own labour market policy. There are also clear justifications for this given that unsuccessful integration processes by government to allot immigrants to municipalities can result in a financial burden for the municipality. Increased state governance has also improved cooperation between actors at different levels of government. This means that even here it can be argued that the element of multi-level governance has strengthened (Dekker et al., 2015; Scholten & Penninx, 2016; Zapata-Barrero et al., 2017). Through political ties and efforts made in the labour market actors have been forced to cooperate in new ways. The interviewees generally perceive that this worked better following the reforms of recent years after which there were signs of increased horizontal governance in the form of networks, particularly at the local political level (Rhodes, 1997). However, there are still examples of significant difficulties in terms of cooperation and interconnection between levels, indicating that forced forms of cooperation do not always lead to goals being achieved (Lidén et al., 2015).

Notes 1. A number of municipalities or areas of municipalities have been exempted as a location for asylum seekers’ self-settling to counter problems with segregation. Nonetheless, asylum seekers are not denied the possibility to move to such areas. However, if they do, then they lose their monthly government subsidy (SFS 2019:1204, 2019). 2. Based on the population size of each municipality, the distribution model is weighted according to conditions in the local labour market and previous reception of asylum seekers. Positive conditions in the labour market increase the numbers assigned, and vice versa. A greater number of asylum seekers previously received decreases the number this time, and vice versa. 3. A fictitious example illustrates this. Region A is constituted of two municipalities: Municipality B and Municipality C. Region A is obliged to receive 100 immigrants, 60 in Municipality B and 40 in Municipality C. However, renegotiations on the distribution can take place between the two municipalities if, combined, they grant the admission of 100 immigrants.

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

95

4. Activation policy refers to policies that consist of various techniques for creating active and responsible democratic citizens. For example, activation policy within labour market policy refers to initiatives intended to increase job-seeking activities and job-seekers are activated via various “job activities” (Dahlstedt, 2009).

References Agranoff, R. (2018). Local governments in multilevel governance: The administrative dimension. Lexington Books. Bengtsson, B., & Borevi, K. (2016). Mångfaldens vägskäl—Om integrationspolitikens stigberoende. In B. Bengtsson, G. Myrberg, & R. Andersson (Eds.), Mångfaldens dilemman—Medborgarskap och integrationspolitik. Gleerups. Borevi, K. (2012). Sweden: The flagship of multiculturalism. In G. Brochmann & A. Hagelund (Eds.), Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state 1945–2010 (pp. 25–96). Palgrave Macmillan. Brännström, L., Giritli-Nygren, K., Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2018). Lived experiences of changing integration policies. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 8(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1515/njmr-2018-0009. County Administrative Board in Stockholm. (2020). Bostad sist? Om bosättningslagen och nyanländas boendesituation i Stockholms län. Dahlstedt, M. (2009). Aktiveringens politik: Demokrati och medborgarskap för ett nytt millennium. Liber. Dekker, R., Emilsson, H., Krieger, B., & Scholten, P. (2015). A local dimension of integration policies? International Migration Review, 49(3), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12133. Edin, P.-A., Fredriksson, P., & Åslund, O. (2004). Settlement policies and the economic success of immigrants. Journal of Population Economics, 17 (133– 155). European Commission. (2010). Europe 2020—A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Filomeno, F. A. (2017). Theories of local immigration policy. Palgrave Macmillan. Geddes, A., & Scholten, P. (2016). The politics of migration & immigration in Europe. Sage. Guiraudon, V., & Lahav, G. (2000). A reappraisal of the state sovereignty debate the case of migration control. Comparative Political Studies, 33(2), 163–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414000033002001. Hansen, P. (2008). EU:s migrationspolitik under 50 år: Ett integrerat perspektiv på en motsägelsefull utveckling.

96

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Hansen, T. (2014). Kommunal autonomi—hvor stort er spillerommet? In L. E. Rose, & H. Baldersheim (Eds.), Det Kommunale laboratorium: Teoretiske perspektiver på lokal politikk og organisering (3. utg., pp. 239–260). Fagbokforl. Hernes, V. (2017). Central coercion or local autonomy? A comparative analysis of policy instrument choice in refugee settlement policies. Local Government Studies, 43(5), 798–819. Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2014). Implementing public policy (3rd ed.). Sage. Holmqvist, E., Omanovi´c, V., & Urban, S. (2020). Organisation av arbetsmarknads- och bostadsintegration. SNS Förlag. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97 (2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649. Hudson, C., Lidén, G., Sandberg, L., & Giritli-Nygren, K. (2021). Between central control and local autonomy—The changing role of Swedish municipalities in the implementation of integration policies. In J. Franzke, & J. Ruano de la Fuente (Eds.), Local integration policy of migrants—European experiences and challenges. Palgrave Macmillan. Ladner, A., Keuffer, N., Baldersheim, H., Hlepas, N., Swianiewicz, P., Steyvers, K., & Navarro, C. (2019). Patterns of local autonomy in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. Larsson, J. K. (2015). Integrationen och arbetets marknad: Hur jämställdhet, arbete och annat “svenskt” görs av arbetsförmedlare och privata aktörer. Atlas Akademi. Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Explaining local Swedish refugee policy. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 15(3), 547–565. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12134-013-0294-4. Lidén, G., Nyhlén, J., & Nyhlén, S. (2015). Forced cooperation from above: The case of Sweden’s establishment reform. Policy Studies, 36(5), 468–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2015.1089983. Lidén, G., Nyhlén, J., & Nyhlén, S. (2019). Neoliberal steering in Swedish integration policy: The rise and fall of introduction guides. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 23(1), 23–40. Lidström, A. (2011). Sweden: Party-dominated subnational democracy under challenge? In J. Loughlin, F. Hendriks, & A. Lidström (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of local and regional democracy in Europe. Oxford University Press. OECD. (2018). Working together for local integration of migrants and refugees. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085350-en. Prop. 1983/84:125. (1983). Med förslag om tilläggsbudget III till statsbudgeten för budgetåret 1983/84. Prop. 1989/90:105. (1989). Om samordnat flyktingmottagande och nytt system för ersättning till kommunerna, m.m.

3

GOVERNING SWEDISH IMMIGRATION AND INTEGRATION POLICY

97

Prop. 1993/94:94. (1993). Mottagande av asylsökande m.m. Prop. 1997/98:16. (1997). Sverige, framtiden och mångfalden—från invandrarpolitik till integrationspolitik. Prop. 2009/10:60. (2009). Nyanlända invandrares arbetsmarknadsetablering— egenansvar med professionellt stöd. Qvist, M. (2012). Styrning av lokala integrationsprogram. Institutioner, nätverk och professionella normer inom det svenska flyktingmottagandet. Linköpings universitet. Qvist, M. (2016). Activation reform and inter-Agency co-operation—Local consequences of mixed modes of governance in Sweden. Social Policy & Administration, 50(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12124. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press. Righard, E., Emilsson, H., & Öberg, K. (2019). Language education for asylum seekers and refugees in Sweden: Provision and governance. Malmö University. Riksrevisionen. (2014). Etableringslotsar—Fungerar länken mellan individen och arbetsmarknaden? (RiR 2014:14). Robinson, V., Andersson, R., & Musterd, S. (2003). Spreading the “burden”? : A review of policies to disperse asylum seekers and refugees. Policy. SCB. (2008). Integration—en beskrivning av läget i Sverige. SCB. Schierup, C.-U., Hansen, P., & Castles, S. (2006). Migration, citizenship, and the European welfare state: A European dilemma. Oxford University Press. Schiller, M. (2018). The local governance of immigrant integration in Europe: The state of the art and a conceptual model for future research. In T. Caponio, P. Scholten, & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the governance of migration and diversity in cities (pp. 204–215). Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9781351108478-20. Scholten, P., & Penninx, R. (2016). The multilevel governance of migration and integration. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas, & R. Penninx (Eds.), Integration processes and policies in Europe (pp. 91–108). Springer. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-319-21674-4_6. SFS 1994:137. (1994). Lag om mottagande av asylsökande m.fl. SFS 2000:1383. (2000) Lag om kommunernas bostadsförsörjningsansvar. SFS 2005:716. (2005). Utlänningslag. SFS 2010:197. (2010). Lag om etableringsinsatser för vissa nyanlända invandrare. SFS 2010:1122. (2010). Förordning om statlig ersättning för insatser för vissa utlänningar. SFS 2016:38. (2016). Lag om mottagande av vissa nyanlända invandrare för bosättning. SFS 2016:752. (2016). Lag om tillfälliga begränsningar av möjligheten att få uppehållstillstånd i Sverige.

98

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

SFS 2017:584. (2017). Lag om ansvar för etableringsinsatser för vissa nyanlända invandrare. SFS 2019:1204. (2019). Lag (2019:1204) om ändring i lagen (1994:137) om mottagande av asylsökande m.fl. Soininen, M. (1992). Det kommunala flyktingmottagandet. Genomförande och organisation. CEIFO. Ugland, T. (2014). Canada as an inspirational model: Reforming Scandinavian immigration and integration policies. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 4(3), 144–152. Vikman, U., & Westerberg, A. (2017). Arbetar kommunerna på samma sätt? IFAU. Zapata-Barrero, R., & Barker, F. (2014). Multilevel governance of immigration in multinational states: “Who governs?” reconsidered. In E. Hepburn, & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The politics of immigration in multilevel states: Governance and political parties. Palgrave Macmillan. Zapata-Barrero, R., Caponio, T., & Scholten, P. (2017). Theorizing the ‘local turn’ in a multi-level governance framework of analysis. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(2), 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/002 0852316688426.

CHAPTER 4

Presentation and Contextualisation of Case Studies

4.1

Introduction

Our aim in this chapter is to consider three issues. First, we provide an expanded presentation of the three Swedish municipalities that were selected for more detailed study. This includes a description of what they represent and what characterises them compared with the full range of Swedish municipalities. We start with a short historical background of each municipality. This includes the demography as well as a description of each of their political contexts. Second, the cases are contextualised by providing information on how they relate to each other and Swedish municipalities in general. By doing so we set the scene for the statistical presentation that is given in Chapters 5 and 7. This is achieved by describing how these cases perform on indicators that are related to both local immigration policy and local integration policy. Third, we provide a description of how we collected and analysed the material for the case studies. As described in the introduction to this book, the municipalities selected are representative of different experiences faced during admission of immigrants. The law of 2016 had a vital influence on the municipal sector through its ratification of a system in which all municipalities could be obliged to receive immigrants. To be able to address how such differing conditions affected local immigration policy as a whole we

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_4

99

100

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

searched for municipalities that would be likely to have faced the most extreme consequences and based our search on statistics. In 2015, after agreements with the central government, the municipality of Vallentuna had received 11 immigrants. By the end of 2017, purely as a consequence of the 2016 law, which removed local discretion, this number had increased to 185. An extreme case at the other end of the scale was Avesta which admitted 725 immigrants in 2015. By the end of 2017 this number had decreased to 263 individuals. In relation to the population size of municipalities, Vallentuna stands out as one of the representatives of the greatest increase in the reception of immigrants, whereas Avesta is by far the municipality with the greatest reduction in reception during this period. Hence these two cases can be regarded as extremes in terms of the consequences of the application of the policy change. The methodological literature provides strong arguments for addressing such cases. Whereas Gerring (2017) states that extreme cases enable strong potential causal leverage by maximising the scope of the phenomenon of interest studied, Seawright (2016) argues that this type of case study is somewhat overlooked in the methodological toolbox. Extreme and unusual cases should be complemented by a more typical one. This case should function as a reference point and thereby minimises the problem of the extreme cases not being representative. In 2015 the municipality of Östersund received 368 immigrants. Two years later the corresponding number was 307. Although this represents something of a decrease, Östersund is still characteristic of a municipality almost unaffected by the reform, in terms of the magnitude of immigrants received during the years directly after the implementation of the reform.

4.2

Describing Our Three Cases

In the following sections we describe our cases in more detail to provide background context essential to understand them. 4.2.1

Avesta

The municipality of Avesta is located in the county of Dalarna and is geographically placed in the centre of Sweden. The municipality is dominated by the city of Avesta into which the former community of Krylbo was later integrated. Avesta is situated in the northern part of Bergslagen, which is an area of Sweden known for its mining and metal industries

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

101

since the Middle Ages. Avesta was growing rapidly as early as the seventeenth century as a result of the success of these mining and metal industries, which after 1630 were particularly dominated by a copper foundry. Even though this period was followed by more challenging times, when the Swedish metal industry was affected by international competition, an additional phase of growth occurred during the late nineteenth century with the expansion of the iron foundry in the municipality (Jensen, 2019). This industry, which has since transformed into a steel foundry, was decisive for the growth of Avesta and is still, together with a paperboard mill, the largest employer within the municipality itself. The rest of the municipality includes a former industrial community, a railway town, and rural areas dominated by forestry and farming. Even though several of the other dominant industries have closed, there has been a growth in smaller companies within the very same sector, demonstrating that employment in the industrial sector is still substantial in the municipality (Jensen, 2019). Similar to many other small municipalities in Sweden, the population of Avesta has declined. Between 1968 and 2012 this pattern by and large predominated, but there were a few deviating years. However, since 2013 the trend reversed with 2018 being the sixth year in a row that the number of inhabitants increased, totalling slightly more than 23,000. The major reason for this growth was the increasing foreign-born population. In fact, in 2018 this proportion of the total population was above 18%. This is close to the make-up of the general Swedish population, which was 19% in 2018. Looking back a few years to 2011, the proportion of foreign-born people in Avesta was 10%. Comparing such percentages allows us to use a somewhat expanded measurement that takes into account individuals with a foreign background. This includes both people born abroad as well as individuals born in Sweden but whose parents are foreign born. This indicator grew in a similar way and reached 23% of the population in 2018. The current municipality of Avesta was formed in 1967 as a result of an amalgamation of several previously independent municipalities. That reform led to a number of countryside parishes, the market town of Krylbo, and the city of Avesta joining into a common municipality. The political orientation of the different areas of the municipality varied between urban and rural areas. While the labour movement completely dominated urban parts, the stronghold of the Centre Party was the countryside. However, the more populous urban parts of the municipality

102

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

favoured Leftist parties. Since the creation of the current municipality the political history of Avesta has been dominated by the Social Democratic Party. The only exception to this was the period from 2002 to 2004 during which a coalition of the Green Party and centre–right parties governed the municipality together with a local party (Jensen, 2019). For the period in which we are interested (i.e., since the election of 2010) the municipality was ruled by the Social Democratic Party together with the Left Party and, when present in the council, the Green Party. The election of 2014 resulted in a somewhat different political composition since a local party, Kommunlistan, gained three seats on the municipal council. Although they obtained fewer seats, the Moderate Party and the Sweden Democrats were still in second and third places. In the 2018 election the Green Party did not win any seats, whereas the Social Democratic Party won 19 of the 41 seats on the municipal council. This was nonetheless fewer seats than they had in the 2014 election in which the party had secured its own majority with 21 seats. Since 2018 all other parties from the national parliament, apart from the Green Party, have been represented on the municipal council. The Moderate Party and the Sweden Democrats are next largest to the Social Democratic Party in size. 4.2.2

Vallentuna

Vallentuna is located about 30 km north of central Stockholm. The population of the municipality is largely gathered around the urban centre of Vallentuna itself. Other areas within the municipality are historically important as there are remains of settlements from the Bronze Age dating back about 3000 years (Hellström et al., 1988). The Folkunga Dynasty, which is the family to which the kings of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark belonged from 1250 to 1387, probably had links to the Vallentuna area (Hellström et al., 1988). Historically, Vallentuna has been characterised by forestry and agriculture, but has also been a place where industry and crafts have developed. Transport links have always been important in the area and in ancient times waterways provided the main form of transportation. At the time of the Swedish Empire (1611–1718) the road network expanded, something that was particularly important for Vallentuna. Expansion of the railroad during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was another significant infrastructure investment, especially the Roslagsbanan Line that became vital to development of

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

103

the area. The establishment of the Roslagsbanan Line, a narrow-gauge commuter railway built in 1885, connected Vallentuna with the centre of Stockholm and enabled efficient commuting to the heart of the region (Hellström et al., 1988). Modern expansion of the municipality is closely linked to the growth of the Stockholm region. This has transformed Vallentuna from a predominantly agricultural area with some elements of industry to a community largely comprising commuters to other parts of the Stockholm region and an administrative centre for the municipality. Today Vallentuna is a wealthy municipality primarily as a result of having some of the highest income levels in the country combined with low levels of unemployment. The population of the municipality has seen an annual increase and has approximately tripled since 1968. This dramatic growth resulted in a 2018 population of slightly more than 33,000 inhabitants. The proportion of foreign-born individuals also increased over the years, from 11% of the population in 2010 to more than 14% in 2018. As previously mentioned, this share is lower than the national average of 19%. Population growth in Vallentuna is mainly a result of an increase in inhabitants born in Sweden. However, since 2016 the increase can mostly been accounted for by foreign-born individuals moving to the area. Likewise, the proportion of individuals who have a foreign background has also increased over the years, totalling 19% in 2018. The modern political history of Vallentuna can be characterised by the dominance of the centre-right parties. In the last election of 2018 the Moderate Party once again won the most votes gaining 15 of the 51 seats. Together with the Centre Party, the Christian Democrats, and the Liberals it constitute the governing coalition of the municipality. This coalition was in power during the entire period of interest to us (i.e., from 2010 onwards). During this time the Moderate Party was the largest party within this coalition. During the same period the local council of Vallentuna comprised the same political parties that are found in the national parliament. Of the opposition parties the Social Democratic Party is the largest winning 10 seats in 2018. The Sweden Democrats has increased its vote in the municipality holding 7 seats since 2018. 4.2.3

Östersund

The municipality of Östersund is located in the county of Jämtland, which is situated in the southwestern part of northern Sweden. Although the

104

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

municipality is dominated by the town of Östersund, it also includes a number of surrounding communities. During the late eighteenth century Östersund was granted the status of a town and by 1810 this had changed to Östersund becoming the headquarters of the County Administrative Board when the county of Jämtland was founded. It was only after the railway network reached Östersund in 1879 that the city started to grow substantially. The establishment of the railway also transformed Östersund into an important commercial centre and the only large city in this region. In addition, the forestry industry gained in importance along with some engineering industries (Björklund et al., 1986). In the 1950s government subsidies were granted to facilitate the establishment of industrial manufacturing in the region. Consequently such businesses relocated from other parts of the country to the region (Björklund et al., 1986). As a result of its strategic position the municipality has had a considerable military presence since the seventeenth century. Although this is no longer the case, the public sector is still an important employer in Östersund made up as it is of both government authorities and a university. The private sector is characterised by smaller businesses from a range of different sectors. In contrast to many other municipalities in the hinterland of northern Sweden, Östersund has an increasing population. Over the timeframe 1968 until 2018, the population in the municipality grew by 30%. In 2018 the population totalled slightly more than 63,000 inhabitants. One significant contributing factor was an increase in foreign-born individuals, although the increase was from remarkably low levels. In 2010 about 6% of the population of the municipality was born abroad. In 2018 this had increased to slightly more than 9%. Similarly, the proportion of individuals with a foreign background also increased accounting for 11% of the population in 2018. The current municipal structure originates from 1971 when six former municipalities were merged into the municipality of Östersund. Politically, the two dominating forces of Östersund have historically been the Centre Party and the Social Democratic Party (Björklund et al., 1986). Even though a power struggle between these parties characterised politics in the municipality, other established parties such as the Left Party and the Moderate Party have played vital roles in the governing of Östersund. For the period in which we are interested (i.e., since the 2010 election) the municipality has been governed both by left and right coalitions. After the election of 2010 the Social Democratic Party continued

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

105

to rule the municipality within a coalition that also consisted of the Left Party and the Green Party. This situation was maintained until the 2018 election, which resulted in a centre–right coalition led by the Centre Party that also included the Christian Democrats, the Liberals, and the Moderate Party. The 2018 election represented a decline in the popularity of left-wing parties apart from the Left Party. Nonetheless, the Social Democrats remained the largest party accounting for 18 of the 61 seats. The Centre Party was the clear winner gaining 14 of the seats on the council, and thereby overtook the Moderate Party as the largest of the liberal and conservative parties. In line with their national growth the Sweden Democrats increased their mandate in the council and since 2018 they have held 5 seats.

4.3

Selected Cases and Contextualisation of Their Local Immigration Policy

We start by looking at the local immigration policy of the three cases selected. This will be achieved by showing data reflecting the number of immigrants the three municipalities were allocated to receive and the actual numbers received. By so doing we will highlight the consequences of the new legislation. Before imposition of this new model, municipalities reached annual agreements on immigrant numbers with the government after which the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) assigned individuals to municipalities. The new law allotted immigrants to municipalities based on a distribution model. A more thorough analysis of all the local immigration policies of Swedish municipalities is given in Chapter 5. Table 4.1 shows the number of immigrants received in each municipality for the 2010 to 2018 timeframe. This includes absolute figures and admission as a proportion to the population, as well as data on agreed and allotted reception. When it comes to the latter, it should be noted that the numbers for 2010 to 2015 are based on optional agreements reached between the municipalities and the government as handled by government authorities.1 The three cases selected present diverging stories on the development of immigrant reception. Whereas Avesta had agreed to receive quite moderate numbers of immigrants during the first phase, actual reception increased dramatically in the few years preceding the migrant crisis that culminated in 2016. Thereafter it decreased again. As we will see, this surge is mainly explained by an increasing proportion of self-settlers and immigrants coming to the municipality for family

25 33 (1.54) 25 5 21 (0.68) 80 56 (0.94)

25

38 (1.76)

40 5

41 (1.36)

90

75 (1.26)

2011 (per 1,000)

97 (1.63)

80

27 (0.86)

25 5

46 (2.14)

25

2012 (per 1,000)

341 (5.69)

280

20 (0.63)

262 (12.14) 116

35

2013 (per 1,000)

333 (5.50)

150

18 (0.56)

397 (18.03) 116

35

2014 (per 1,000)

368 (6.03)

275

11 (0.34)

725 (31.82) 49

35

2015 (per 1,000)

Note Numbers in parentheses indicate immigrants received per 1,000 inhabitants in the municipality

Avesta—agreed or allotted reception Avesta—actual reception Vallentuna—agreed or allotted reception Vallentuna—actual reception Östersund—agreed or allotted reception Östersund—actual reception

2010 (per 1,000)

283 (4.58)

115 (3.51) 107

521 (22.49) 129

0

2016 (per 1,000)

307 (4.90)

185 (5.58) 115

263 (11.31) 134

0

2017 (per 1,000)

221 (3.50)

122 (3.65) 84

193 (8.28) 135

0

2018 (per 1,000)

Table 4.1 Immigrants received, actual reception, agreed reception (2010–2015) and allotted reception (2016–2018), absolute numbers and per 1,000 inhabitants (2010–2018)

106 G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

107

purposes, which therefore goes beyond planned intentions. As a proportion of its population, Vallentuna saw low levels of immigrant reception until 2016, after which enforcement of the law and its obligatory elements is clearly visible. Östersund’s development was closer to that of Avesta, although increasing levels of reception were initiated by the municipality as early as 2013 via a more extensive agreement. Actual reception thereafter remained at quite high levels, albeit demonstrating a decreasing tendency. It is tempting to distinguish between those immigrants who were assigned to a municipality and those who organised their own accommodation in the specific municipality. The first category is heterogeneous and includes immigrants who originated from government accommodation through the asylum process, quota refugees, and refugees who wanted to reunify with family members. Table 4.2 shows the proportion of immigrants who organised their own accommodation in the three municipalities and the number who actively chose to settle there in these cases. The way in which these numbers developed differs in the three municipalities. In Avesta the proportion peaked in 2015 with 72% of selfsettling immigrants. The proportion decreased thereafter. In Vallentuna the share of self-settled immigrants decreased over the years and since the law was enforced the proportion was marginal. The corresponding figure for Östersund was low in the first decade, followed by an increased phase that culminated in 2016, only to then decrease again. Although our task in this chapter is not to explain the varying proportions of immigrants who organised their own accommodation in municipalities, there are nonetheless reasons for providing a short discussion on the matter. According to the literature and previous research, there are a few factors that can influence the level of self-settled immigrants. First, as stated by the National Board of Housing, Building and Table 4.2 Immigrants arriving in municipalities who have organised their own accommodation as a proportion of the total number of immigrants received (2010–2018)

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

0.29 0.63 0.00

0.21 0.57 0.04

0.30 0.52 0.07

0.21 0.35 0.13

0.71 0.72 0.26

0.72 0.36 0.37

0.62 0.16 0.38

0.50 0.06 0.24

0.20 0.03 0.10

108

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Planning (NBHBP, 2015), accommodation for asylum seekers in the municipality will increase the likelihood that individuals placed in such housing also choose to stay in the same municipality after a positive decision on their residence application. During the crisis in 2015, these types of accommodation were set up by the SMA in the municipalities of Avesta and Östersund. The SMA kept one of these operational in Avesta, even though there is less of a need based on the national outlook. The second reason is the housing market situation. The view is that immigrants who organise their own accommodation are more inclined to settle in municipalities in which the supply of either accessible or cheaper accommodation is more widespread. Even though prior Swedish research has not identified this particular effect, it has at least indicated that the reception of immigrants has been greater in smaller communities (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Wennström & Öner, 2015). The final reason is related to theoretical assumptions regarding migration networks. From a micro perspective the importance of such networks, which comprise interpersonal relations linking immigrants who have migrated to a specific community and those who are thinking of migrating, is significant. Increased exposure to a foreign-born population can therefore increase the chances of future immigration (Arango, 2000). Another factor that can affect the actual outcome of municipal reception relates to refugees wanting to reunite with family members. Although such reunions were limited as a result of legislation on migration policy being more restrictive around the time of the migrant crisis, it was still possible for immigrants to reunite with family members. Since this occurs after initial reception there is a time lag in the effect. Table 4.3 shows the proportion of immigrants arriving in municipalities because of reunification with family members in relation to the total number of immigrants received excluding the share of individuals who have self-settled. Even Table 4.3 Immigrants arriving in municipalities because of reunification with family members as a proportion of the total number received but excluding selfsettled immigrants (2010–2018)

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

0.30 0.73 0.00

0.15 0.89 0.09

0.00 0.54 0.13

0,.06 0.54 0.13

0.41 0.00 0.31

0.79 0.29 0.30

0.65 0.01 0.23

0.77 0.04 0.38

0.89 0.03 0.37

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

109

though there is no clear pattern based on these numbers, some remarks can be made. First, in Avesta the proportion of immigrants who reunited with family members increased over the time span in question. This result is expected since the municipality was not allotted any additional immigrants after 2016, thus the only inflow beside self-settlers ought to be constituted by this group. The fact that the number of immigrants belonging to this group (between 2016 and 2018 this was more than 100 individuals per year) was quite large is also an indication that many of the large number of immigrants who settled in the municipality just before and after the migrant crisis remained in the municipality because they wanted to reunite with family members. In the case of Vallentuna the total number of immigrants received was too low to reach any conclusions before admission increased in 2016. However, the fact that the proportion of individuals who had reunited with family members thereafter was negligible indicates that no immigrant flow of this character was evident in the municipality. This could be because of the limited time span since the municipality’s increased reception or the fact that the immigrants received were less prone to remain in the municipality. Finally, the situation in Östersund resembles that of Avesta but has lower levels of immigrants arriving in the municipality because of reunification with family members. However, there was clearly an increase in later years.

4.4

The Cases Selected and Contextualisation of Their Local Integration Policy

In this section we provide an overview of the local integration policy in the three municipalities. We follow our previously stated focus on socioeconomic aspects of integration policy (Garcés-Mascareñas & Penninx, 2016). Since such policies per se cannot easily be quantified they are addressed qualitatively in the case study analysis presented in Chapter 8. Quantitative indicators can nonetheless be applied to create an overview of how local integration policies perform. Below we distinguish between how integration into society is achieved by targeting three different spheres of society: the labour market, the education system, and the housing market. Moreover, the illustration focuses on outcome variables (i.e., variables that provide information concerning just how successful integration into these different spheres has been). In Chapter 7 this presentation is expanded to cover all Swedish municipalities and data on

110

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

80 70 60 50

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund Sweden

40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 4.1 Employment rate for immigrants (in %) (2011–2018)

efforts made by the municipalities themselves in this area (namely policy outputs) are provided. 4.4.1

Integration Through the Labour Market

The most intuitive way to measure labour market integration is to use employment rates. In Sweden the route to employment is often a prolonged and challenging endeavour for immigrants (Ruist, 2018). Obviously, success is dependent on individual characteristics. However, regional variations play a part (Andersson, 2016; Liljeberg & Åslund, 2020). Figure 4.1 reveals the average employment rates for immigrants in the three cases selected for the time span 2011 to 2018. Data cover all individuals who reside in one or other of these municipalities and have come to Sweden based on criteria that match our overall definition.2 During this time span Vallentuna accounted for the highest employment levels. Both Östersund and Avesta reported lower levels, with immigrants particularly in Avesta struggling to find employment. The trend in both Avesta and Östersund has been positive since 2015, which interestingly enough coincides with when the number of immigrants being admitted was on the increase. However, when it came to Vallentuna the reverse happened; employment peaked in 2013 and decreased thereafter. An important point of comparison was that the corresponding average figure for Sweden as a whole was quite consistent during the timeframe, hovering at around 54–55%. A more detailed view can be seen when we

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

111

70 60 50 Avesta Vallentuna Östersund Sweden

40 30 20 10 0 2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 4.2 Proportion of individuals (in %) leaving the establishment period (90 days later) with employment (2015–2018)

only include individuals residing in the three municipalities who came to Sweden during the three complete preceding years. Specific data such as these give a somewhat different view for 2018, when close to 43% of immigrants were employed in Östersund while the corresponding figure for Avesta and Vallentuna was in the range 24–25%. Since the establishment period for integration is two years, a more granular indicator of the success of the municipalities’ work with local integration policy can be attained through data reflecting the employment of individuals after that period has ended. Figure 4.2 shows the average proportion of individuals who were employed once their establishment period was finished including positions subsidised by the government. For Vallentuna and Östersund development was positive every year. In Avesta, however, immigrants ending their establishment period struggled to find employment and the trend did not change over the years studied. Compared with the national situation, Vallentuna and Östersund performed well and were in line with the average or mostly above it, while Avesta was below it (particularly in 2018). 4.4.2

Integration Through the Education System

Quantitative indicators reflecting the success of integration through the education system are centred on Swedish language training (SFI, Swedish For Immigrants) that is offered to new immigrants. Prior studies have

112

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

shown that participating in such activities is beneficial to the individual since it can facilitate labour market integration and wider aspects of social integration (Bonfanti & Nordlund, 2012; Hoehne & Michalowski, 2016). Figure 4.3 shows the proportion of course participants who passed their latest SFI course. Although this measurement does not account for the degree of difficulty of the course in question, it is evident that the actual number who passed fluctuated during the years studied. Variation between the municipalities was also substantial. In the case of Avesta the average proportion of SFI courses passed differed by as much as 30 percentage units between 2016 and 2018. Fluctuation was also significant in Vallentuna and Östersund. Although the situation in Sweden as a whole was more stable, there was a tendency for the pass rate to decline over the years in question. Figure 4.4 presents an associated variable that measures average study time in number of days for participants to complete and pass their latest course. There are no clear tendencies based on this figure when it comes to showing how study time developed over the timeframe. Comparison of the municipalities reveals participants in Vallentuna taking longer to complete courses since 2013. However, in 2017 this changed dramatically when the municipality decreased the scope of SFI. Avesta and Östersund developed similarly to each other as borne out by study time lengthening during more recent periods. Although a faster study time was seen from 2012 to 2014 at the national level, thereafter the time lengthened. 80 70 60 50

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund Sweden

40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 4.3 Proportion of participants (in %) who passed an SFI course (2011– 2018)

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

113

1200 1000 800

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund Sweden

600 400 200 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 4.4 Average study time (in days) for participants to pass an SFI course (2011–2018)

4.4.3

Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants

The final aspect we discuss regarding integration is the potential effect the housing situation has on the process. During the establishment period it is the responsibility of the municipality to provide housing for the immigrants received. Obviously, for those immigrants who organise their own accommodation the responsibility of the municipality is secondary. Municipal housing can include anything from privately owned homes to rented alternatives. The supply of different types of housing differs between municipalities. There are two alternative formats for owning one’s own home in Sweden, either a tenant-owned apartment or one’s own house. Another consideration is that prices for these types of properties vary dramatically between municipalities. Figure 4.5 shows the average proportion of immigrants residing in privately owned homes in the three studied municipalities. An important caveat is that the data do not show who owned the property, merely that it was owned by an individual. In general, both international (Cortes et al., 2007; Vono-de-Vilhena & Bayona-Carrasco, 2012) and Swedish studies (Turner & Hedman, 2014) state that the propensity for immigrant home-ownership is greater in mid-sized, suburban, and non-metropolitan areas. The figure displays two types of information: the first includes all immigrants per our definition, the second includes those who were received in Sweden during the three preceding years.3 Starting with the first indicator, there are dramatic differences between the three cases. In

114

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

100 90 80 70

Avesta

60

Vallentuna

50

Östersund

40

Avesta (0-3)

30

Vallentuna (0-3)

20

Östersund (0-3)

10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 4.5 Proportion of immigrants (in %) who lived in privately owned homes and proportion of them (in %) who had been received during the three preceding years (2011–2018)

Vallentuna some 80% of immigrants lived in a privately owned home, compared with the situation in both Avesta and Östersund where the same indicator was just above or below 20%. In fact, since 2011 Vallentuna reported the highest level of all municipalities in Sweden. The figure reveals some fluctuations over time, generally indicating a declining proportion in line with the increasing admission of immigrants. In the case of Avesta and Östersund the corresponding figure was much lower. The shaded lines on the graph show the alternative indicator, which only includes individuals whose stay in Sweden was shorter. As expected, although the proportion was generally lower, it still followed the same pattern between the three cases. Living in a privately owned home was much more common for newly arrived immigrants in Vallentuna than in Östersund and Avesta (Fig. 4.6). One possible consequence of immigrant reception is residential segregation, in which immigrants are typically concentrated in less attractive and poorer residential areas. Previous research shows that spatial separation between the majority population and the immigrant population can be associated with difficulties encountered by the immigrant group. These include lower employment and income levels and health problems (Andersson, 2016; Bevelander et al., 1997; Börjesson, 2018; Kölegård Stjärne et al., 2007). Statistics Sweden provides an index that compares the settlement of individuals born in Sweden with individuals born abroad at disaggregated geographical units within municipalities. Data are only

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

115

40 35 30 25

Avesta Vallentuna Östersund

20 15 10 5 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Fig. 4.6 Index of residential segregation (2011–2016)

provided up to 2016. Due to differences in the way geographical data have been calculated in municipalities, this index is not recommended for cross-case comparison. However, it can instead be used to compare the development of cases over time. The index ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores reflecting higher levels of residential segregation. Although no comparisons should be made across cases, the development of the index does illustrate important tendencies for each municipality. In Avesta residential segregation evidently increased over the years. By contrast, the curve for Vallentuna indicates slightly declining segregation, whereas fluctuation was both somewhat positive and negative in Östersund. A report from 2018, which examined levels of segregation and diversity in Swedish municipalities based on data from neighbourhoods, corroborated the information above (Börjesson, 2018). Graphic illustration of how the ethnic composition differs between the case studies verifies the above results. As previously mentioned, the population of those with a foreign background ranged from a high level in Avesta to an intermediate level in Vallentuna and a lower level in Östersund. The distribution of this portion of the population can be displayed by applying sub-municipal data.4 Municipal maps showing different areas and their proportion of individuals with foreign backgrounds are presented in Fig. 4.7. It should be kept in mind that individuals who either were born in a foreign county or were born in Sweden but both their parents were born in Sweden are classified as having a foreign background.

Fig. 4.7 Proportion of population with a foreign background in the municipalities of Avesta (left), Vallentuna (centre), and Östersund (right) at the sub-municipal level (2018)

Sources Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

116 G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

117

In general, the maps reveal an interesting scenario. In Avesta individuals with a foreign background were clearly concentrated in a few residential areas close to the city centre, among them the districts of Krylbo where they made up about half the population. Since other central areas, particularly the more sparsely populated areas surrounding the city, were instead dominated by individuals with a Swedish background, this situation indicates ethnic segregation. In Vallentuna such tendencies are less obvious. Nonetheless, in some of the centrally located areas, such as the city centre, the proportion of individuals is visibly higher. The proportion of immigrants was also higher in Brottby, a smaller community located in the eastern part of the municipality. One reason for the larger proportion of immigrants in this part of the municipality was that the local government previously had accommodation for immigrants in the district. Lastly, in Östersund the population with a foreign background was focused in a few residential areas within the city centre. One residential area in particular stands out and reached more than 35% of the population. In contrast, the rural areas surrounding the city centre were almost completely populated by individuals with a Swedish background, with only single-digit figures for the proportion of individuals with a foreign background. Even though this reflects a similar situation to the one in Avesta, it differs since the ethnic concentration was not as great and local areas more populated by individuals with a foreign background were more scattered throughout the municipality. 4.4.4

Compilation of Data Underlying the Local Integration Policy of the Cases Selected

To enable direct comparisons between these different indicators focusing on outcome measures, we compiled the data from 2018 for the three cases studied (see Fig. 4.8). Once again, it is clear that Vallentuna and Östersund achieved better results when it comes to measures regarding labour market integration. Östersund scores well for both of the indicators applied, particularly for employment rates for immigrants who had been in the country for a shorter amount of time—up to three years. When it comes to educational aspects, which proved to be more volatile over the years, Vallentuna showed the best results, while both Avesta and Östersund appear to have had some challenges. In terms of integration measures through the housing situation, Vallentuna stands out for providing immigrants with much better circumstances. The average

118

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN Employment rates for immigrants (in %) in municipaliƟes, only including immigrants received during the preceding 3 years 100 80 60

ProporƟon of immigrants (in %) that lived in privately owned homes, only including immigrants received during the 3 preceding years

ProporƟon of individuals (in %) leaving the establishment period (90 days later) with employment

40 20 0

Average study Ɵme (in days*10) for parƟcipants to pass an SFI course

Avesta

ProporƟon (in %) of parƟcipants that passed an SFI course

Vallentuna

Östersund

Fig. 4.8 Compilation of outcome variables of local integration policy (2018)

proportion of immigrants who resided in privately owned homes was dramatically higher there than in the other two municipalities.

4.5

Methods Used for Case Studies

The material underpinning the three cases studies was based on interviews and the study of documents. In total, 35 informants participated in our interviews. In two cases, informants were interviewed twice. All interviews except 11 took place at the offices of the municipality concerned and were recorded and thereafter transcribed. The remaining interviews were conducted by telephone and, in two cases, via Zoom. A semi-structured interview method was used, which meant the questions asked were predefined, but this provided an opportunity to ask supplementary questions about anything that was unclear in the answer or was of particular interest. During the interviews an interview guide was followed in which questions were based on a number of key topics in relation to the theoretical premises. Although the key topics were the same for all those interviewed, the questions varied slightly depending on the person being interviewed.

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

119

The key topics revolved around local immigration policy, local integration policy, cooperation, and the effects of policy changes. When it came to local immigration policy, the questions centred on how the municipalities were affected by the European migrant crisis and the subsequent inflow of immigrants, as well as the introduction of the Settlement Act and the form of the local immigration policy prior to the Settlement Act. The questions about reception also touched upon political considerations made before the reform with regard to reception. The questions regarding local integration focused on local integration policy, whether such existed, and the political considerations that were made regarding such issues. The questions also covered relations between different actors in the municipality. When it came to issues about integration, questions were also asked on the way in which the Settlement Act influenced integration work in the municipalities. Municipal representatives were also asked about the way in which the municipal organisation structured reception and integration as well as how cooperation between different departments in the municipality worked. One theme that was present in all interviews concerned cooperation between all the actors involved, how cooperation was organised, what areas they cooperated around, the way in which cooperation worked, and what could have been done to improve such cooperation. Finally, questions were asked of the municipalities, representatives of civil society, and representatives of the business community about how they cooperated with the municipality and how their work contributed to the reception and integration of immigrants in the municipalities examined. The actors interviewed were relevant representatives of different areas of the local community. They were chosen according to previous research (see Table 2.4 in Chapter 2)—a compilation of relevant actors built upon the findings of Guiraudon and Lahav (2007). Those interviewed were leading politicians, officials, and representatives of public authorities based in the region the municipality represents. We also interviewed representatives of civil society and the business sector. In Appendix B we compile a table of all informants interviewed and present the interview guides. In Appendix C we give more precise information on how the interviews were conducted. The interviews were complemented by document studies that were used to ensure data triangulation (Yin, 2009). Such documents were varied ranging from policy documents, reports, records from council

120

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

meetings, documents from local political parties, through to media articles. Such supplementary data create additional confidence in the analyses provided. When it came to analysing the qualitative material, we drew on content analysis (Boréus & Bergström, 2017) and thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). By so doing we endeavoured to find patterns that jointly reconstruct processes and results that corresponded to our research questions. The empirical material was categorized according to the theoretical categories presented in Chapter 2 and empirical events that were relevant to the study. Such categories—namely the aspects of governance structures and policy output in the policy sectors studied, helped us understand the empirical events and their consequences that are the focus of the study. We nonetheless complemented this deductive way of working with inductive objectives, such as by paying attention to empirical findings that, although not specifically covered by the theoretical framework, are still valuable. Hence the interaction between empirical phenomena and theoretical categorisations helped us find meaningful categorisations. These themes also informed the interviews conducted. Such analysis was used for transcriptions of the interviews that were carried out and for the documents reviewed. In this we were inspired by Schreier and Flick’s (2014) method to systematically categorize empirical material on the basis of a coding scheme. A common problem that can arise in qualitative research is that the degree of subjectivity in interpretation can be high. This is also the case in applied analyses. However, there are various ways of mitigating this. We chose to use double coding to reduce personal bias in the interpretation of empirical material (Boréus & Bergström, 2017). Some of the interviews were carried out by both authors who later discussed and reconciled interpretations of the material to reduce personal bias in coding and interpretation of the material. We also took measures to ensure that the material presented, which was based on the interviews, was correct and shared by all the actors involved. This included different events, facts, and other information that appear in the interviews. To ensure this, key informants from the municipalities read drafts of the chapter’s case studies and were given the opportunity to comment on the text. Any comments that were valid led to modifications of the text.

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

121

Notes 1. Agreements between the government and municipalities sometimes included an estimated number of self-settlers. However, the proportion of self-settled immigrants has not been included in our compilation. 2. When it came to the population of immigrants, they were measured as those who had received residence permits due to refugee status, subsidiarity protection, or other protection, as well as relatives of such groups. It should be noted that these data do not include the first municipal placement of an individual nor the year in which residence permits were permitted. Hence individuals included in the data may have resettled within Sweden and received their residence permit further back in time. Concerning the employment variable, it should be noted that the classification of an individual as employed has been set at a low level in line with international standards. 3. See Endnote 2 for a description of the population. 4. We used Statistics Sweden’s unit DeSo to ascertain demographic statistics for this. This division of Sweden into 5984 geographical units follows county and municipal borders and is the clearest way to break down municipalities further. 5. The municipality of Vallentuna has not been able to answer whether these figures include an estimation of the number of self-settled immigrants. 6. In these agreements the actual number of immigrants received was placed on a scale ranging from 7–15 individuals. The median value of this range is therefore displayed.

References Andersson, R. (2016). Flyktingmottagandets geografi: : En flernivåanalys av integrationsutfallet för tio årskohorter av invandrade från Somalia, Irak och Iran. In R. Andersson, B. Bengtsson, & G. Myrberg (Eds.), Mångfaldens dilemman: Boendesegregation och områdespolitik. Gleerups. Arango, J. (2000). Explaining migration: A critical view. International Social Science Journal, 52(165), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451. 00259. Bevelander, P., Carlson, B., & Rojas, M. (1997). I krusbärslandets storstäder—Om invandrarna i Stockholm, Götegorg och Malmö. SNS Förlag.

122

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Björklund, J., Pentén, G., Sundin, B., & Wallentin, H. (1986). Östersunds historia III . Jämtlands läns museum. Bonfanti, S., & Nordlund, M. (2012). Does ‘Swedish For Immigrants’ (SFI) matter? A longitudinal assessment of the impact of SFI on migrants’ position in the Swedish labour market (Working Papers—Economics). Università degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l’Economia e l’Impresa. Boréus, K., & Bergström, G. (2017). Analyzing text and discourse. Sage. Börjesson, L. (2018). Diversity and segregation in Sweden. Hyresgästföreningen. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Cortes, A., Herbert, C. E., Wilson, E., & Clay, E. (2007). Factors affecting Hispanic homeownership: A review of the literature. Cityscape, 9(2), 53–91. Garcés-Mascareñas, B., & Penninx, R. (Eds.). (2016). Integration processes and policies in Europe. Springer. Gerring, J. (2017). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press. Guiraudon, V., & Lahav, G. (2007). Immigration policy in Europe: The politics of control. Routledge. Hellström, A., Mörk, K. E., Schön, E., Claesson, S., Eriksson, B., & Höglund, M. (1988). Örnen, bilan och stjärnorna: En bok om Vallentuna. Vallentuna: Kulturnämnden. Hoehne, J., & Michalowski, I. (2016). Long-term effects of language course timing on language acquisition and social contacts: Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in Western Europe. International Migration Review, 50(1), 133– 162. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12130. Jensen, R. (Ed.). (2019). Folkareboken. Avesta kommun. Kölegård Stjärne, M., Fritzell, J., Brännström, L., Estrada, F., & Nilsson, A. (2007). Boendesegregationens utveckling och konsekvenser. Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 14(2–3). Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Explaining local Swedish refugee policy. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 15(3), 547–565. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12134-013-0294-4. Liljeberg, L., & Åslund, O. (2020). Etablering efter etableringsinsatser. IFAU. National Board of Housing, Building and Planning. (2015). Boendesituationen för nyanlända. Ruist, J. (2018). Tid för integration (2018:3). Expertgruppen för studier i offentlig ekonomi. Schreier, M., & Flick, U. (2014). Qualitative content analysis. In The Sage handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). Sage. Seawright, J. (2016). Multi-method social science: Combining qualitative and quantitative tools. Cambridge University Press.

4

PRESENTATION AND CONTEXTUALISATION OF CASE STUDIES

123

Turner, L. M., & Hedman, L. (2014). Linking integration and housing career: A longitudinal analysis of immigrant groups in Sweden. Housing Studies, 29(2), 270–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2014.851177. Vono-de-Vilhena, D., & Bayona-Carrasco, J. (2012). Transition towards homeownership among foreign-born immigrants in Spain from a life-course approach. Population, Space and Place, 18(1), 100–115. https://doi.org/10. 1002/psp.641. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications. Wennström, J., & Öner, Ö. (2015). Den geografiska spridningen av kommunplacerade flyktingar i Sverige. Ekonomisk Debatt, 43(4), 52–68.

CHAPTER 5

Local Immigration Policy in Swedish Municipalities

5.1

Introduction

In this chapter we present the output of local immigration policy by addressing Swedish municipalities’ reception of immigrants. This will be done by applying the theoretical framework formulated in Chapter 2, making it possible to describe policy output as either restrictive or liberal. The chapter has three sections. The first provides data that show the key variables of municipal reception and refined categories of reception over a longer time series. The subsequent two sections exploit the cut-off point of the migrant crisis and thereby distinguish between the situation before and after this period of time. These two sections include more detailed descriptions of municipal admission during the timeframes and introduce the vast variation that exists between the municipalities. Furthermore, these sections also contain statistical analyses that provide increased understanding of how the municipal reception of immigrants can be understood in relation to theoretical assumptions. Drawing from the theoretical considerations of Chapter 2, this analysis is guided by previous knowledge of the link between demographic, economic, political, and sociocultural factors and local immigration policy. Since local discretion related to local immigration policy has been curtailed, more explanatory estimations are solely given for the preceding time phase. Throughout this chapter we use data from sources whose details are provided in Appendix A. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_5

125

126

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

5.2 Overview of the Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities The most natural vantage point for the issue of immigrant reception in Swedish municipalities would be to review how actual inflow to the local level unfolded. Figure 5.1 shows the total number of immigrants who were received in municipalities from 2005 until 2018. First, it should be noted that a time lag exists between when an immigrant receives permission to stay in Sweden and is thereafter received in a municipality. The fact that this lead time exists has been previously reported by the national audit office—Riksrevisionen (2014, pp. 52–53). The Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) stipulates that municipalities have no more than two months to organise the admission of an individual they have been assigned. The figure shows an early peak in 2006 when almost 28,000 individuals were received by Swedish municipalities. This can be explained by the relatively high inflow of asylum seekers to Sweden in the preceding years, partly due to the ongoing conflict in Iraq at the time. This phase was followed by a period of diminishing numbers of immigrants. In 2011 this period reached its lowest point with fewer than 14,000 immigrants being settled in municipalities. Thereafter, the influx of immigrants to Sweden steadily grew before it culminated in the years following the migrant crisis. In 2015 Sweden received about 160,000 asylum seekers (UNHCR, 2018a). As a consequence of the high number of immigrants reaching Sweden, the subsequent two years account for 80000 70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Fig. 5.1 Immigrants received in municipalities (2005–2018)

2016

2017

2018

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

127

some 68,000 immigrants annually being settled in the municipalities. National enforcement of more restrictive policies is evident in the lower numbers in 2018. As previously mentioned, immigrants received in Swedish municipalities are classified in different ways (as specified in Fig. 5.2). Over the complete time series, it was most common for former asylum seekers to enter municipalities by organising their own accommodation.1 As selfsettlers, this group was not placed in a specific municipality and instead remained or settled in a municipality of their choice. Although municipalities have no tools to regulate the admission of this category of immigrants, they are still obliged to provide them with local welfare services.2 As a proportion of the total number this has varied quite substantially over the years but the proportion seems to diminish later on in the time series (cf. County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). There was a more consistent proportion of immigrants received in the municipalities after having been housed in accommodation organised by the SMA during the asylum process. About a quarter of the immigrants received had this background. In 2017 this proportion increased with 40% of immigrants coming from state accommodation. Immigrants who are placed in municipalities so that they can reunite with family members also represent a significant proportion and are naturally received in the municipality in which their family lives. Preceding years of immigrant admission can therefore have a multiplying effect when additional family members

Fig. 5.2 Proportion of immigrants received in municipalities based on different categories of reception (2005–2018)

128

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

are received. Although fluctuation in the proportion coming for family reunification can depend on a number of circumstances, the changes in regulations over the years is presumably one contributing factor. During the period shown, policies alternated between more liberal and more restrictive regulations. With the law implemented in 2016 the possibility to unite families has been more restrictive (for a more detailed discussion see Chapter 3). Nonetheless, in 2018 almost 40% of the total group joined families for family reunification. The number of quota refugees received is decided by the government and has increased over the years. In 2005 Sweden received about 1,200 quota refugees, a number that increased to 1,600 the following year. Thereafter the number was between 1,800 and 1,900 annually but this increased dramatically to 3,400 in 2017 and further to 5,000 in 2018 (UNHCR, 2018b). Finally, the category of “others” was quite consistent over the time series and according to the SMA primarily consisted of individuals who received a residence permit without seeking asylum. These aggregated numbers provide us with some clues as to the overall task fulfilled by the municipalities in terms of local immigration policy. Based on this overview, the most striking development is that Swedish municipalities handled an increasing volume of immigrants during the time span presented. A significant share of these immigrants belonged to the category of individuals who organised their own accommodation and therefore did not follow the regular process of placement in a specific municipality by Swedish authorities. Although these aggregated numbers give a better understanding of local migration policy, they do not provide any understanding of the great variations between municipalities. Since this is one of our primary research interests, we now dive deeper into this matter and use the natural cutoff point between the two different policy regimes. The following two sections examine variations in the reception of immigrants in Swedish municipalities before and after the important reform shifts.

5.3 Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities Before the Migrant Crisis In 2015 Swedish municipalities received 7.65 immigrants per 1,000 inhabitants on average. At that time, a regular Swedish local government with a municipal population of 25,000 took in 191 immigrants. These

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

129

figures were highly skewed though and far from normally distributed. Figure 5.3 shows the distribution of immigrants including the average number across the municipalities. Each municipality represents a bar in the figure, arranged according to their volume of reception per 1,000 inhabitants. It is evident that a large share of municipalities accounted for negligible or limited reception while the average number was boosted by a smaller number of municipalities. As an example, the median value is considerably lower at 5.89 immigrants per 1,000 inhabitants. This skewed distribution is also indicated by the value of the standard deviation, the most common way of quantifying a variation in values within variables. This measurement reveals that general deviation from the average was 6.4 points whereas the range, that is the difference between the largest and smallest value, was 40.9 immigrants per 1,000 inhabitants. Table 5.1 shows immigrants received in those municipalities that either received the highest or the lowest number in relation to their population. The proportions of received immigrants are decomposed into three sub-categories following official classifications. While the proportions of self-settled immigrants and family reunifications are shown separately, the remaining categories of quota refugees, those with their background in organised government accommodation and others, are combined into one group. The top receiving municipalities consisted mainly of smaller municipalities. Geographically these municipalities are located from the very south of Sweden to the middle of the country. What is common

Fig. 5.3 Immigrants received in municipalities (bar) and average across municipalities (line) per 1,000 inhabitants (2015)

130

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Table 5.1 Immigrants received in municipalities (2015) Municipality

Top 10 Högsby Hylte Avesta Hultsfred Lessebo Ljusnarsberg Östra Göinge Mellerud Ockelbo Åmål Bottom 10 Öckerö Vellinge Vallentuna Vaxholm Kil Härryda Staffanstorp Lomma Lerum Kungsbacka

Population

Immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

… of which self-settled immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

…of which immigrants settled due to family reunification, per 1,000 inhabitants

… of which sum of remaining categories, per 1,000 inhabitants

5,857 10,514 22,781 13,919 8,516 4,928 14,102 9,169 5,849 12,601

40.98 34.05 31.82 29.46 28.18 26.18 26.10 24.87 23.42 21.03

26.46 17.50 22.91 17.75 13.15 17.45 14.32 11.02 16.93 8.57

8.37 15.60 7.02 8.26 13.97 7.10 10.64 10.47 1.37 11.27

6.15 0.95 1.89 3.45 1.06 1.62 1.13 3.38 5.13 1.19

12,682 34,667 32,380 11,380 11,802 36,651 23,119 23,324 40,181 79,144

0.08 0.29 0.34 0.35 0.68 0.68 0.69 0.77 0.87 0.87

0.08 0.00 0.12 0.09 0.08 0.19 0.48 0.13 0.20 0.21

0.00 0.23 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.04 0.04 0.37 0.35

0.00 0.06 0.15 0.26 0.59 0.33 0.17 0.60 0.30 0.30

Note Immigrants received includes all categories of immigrants that entailed municipal funding from the government, self-settled immigrants are those immigrants who organised their accommodation for themselves, immigrants settled as a result of family reunification are those arriving in a municipality for that reason, remaining categories are immigrants who are quota refugees, immigrants from organised government accommodation, and others. Rounding errors are the result of rounding the different scores

for all these municipalities is that their significant reception was mainly fuelled by a large proportion of self-settled immigrants and those received due to family reunifications. For example, in the two municipalities of Avesta and Ockelbo the proportion of self-settled immigrants of the total number was more than 70%. In Lessebo and Åmål, on the other hand, about 50% of the reception was due to family reunifications. Having a

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

131

tradition of admitting immigrants who also remain in the municipality may create such outcomes. Turning to the municipalities that received the lowest number of immigrants, they range from quite small to averagesized municipalities and are all located in the southern or central part of Sweden. In the smallest of these municipalities the number of immigrants received comprises just single digits. In contrast to the municipalities at the top of the table these communities attracted just a few self-settled immigrants and show similarly low levels of family reunifications. It is not instinctively easy to understand the dramatic difference in circumstances that are revealed when describing cases at opposite ends of the spectrum. The fact that a municipality such as Högsby, with fewer than 6,000 inhabitants, received 240 immigrants was obviously a great commitment for a small local community. In 2015 this represented about 4% of the total population in the municipality. At the other end of the scale is Öckerö with just one self-settled immigrant received in 2015. Midsized municipalities such as Vellinge and Vallentuna admitted 10 and 11 immigrants, respectively. As a comparison, these two municipalities would have received between 240 to 260 immigrants had they followed the national average. Hence there are extreme numbers found both among the top receivers as well as among those municipalities that more or less refrained from admitting immigrants. 5.3.1

Patterns of Variation in Local Immigration Policy

This section considers variations by using a number of factors that could theoretically be assumed to relate to local immigration policy. We examine theoretical ideas on how demographic, economic, political, and sociocultural factors relate to local policy, as mentioned in Chapter 2. Up to this point our analysis has focused entirely on immigration reception per capita. By applying such a strategy we have implicitly argued that population size is a vital dimension to take into account when describing the reception of immigrants. One may obviously expect a strong relationship between municipal size and admission of immigrants (Riksrevisionen, 2014, p. 39). It is to be expected that larger municipalities have better capacity to organise the reception of immigrants and appear to be more attractive for those who organise their own accommodation. At the same time, challenging population developments in several welfare societies have made smaller communities more keen to receive immigrants, to the extent that they can support them (Lidén &

132

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Nyhlén, 2015). In many Western countries the proportion of individuals belonging to the labour force will struggle to finance all welfare commitments; hence immigration is seen as a solution (Massey et al., 1993). In the next section we look closer at the demographic dimension of local immigration policy. In Fig. 5.4 each municipality is plotted based on their number of received immigrants and their population size. As a result of the greatly varying number of inhabitants in Swedish municipalities, this variable is displayed on a logarithmic scale. The illustration shows total numbers of immigrants received and makes a few remarks based on the outcome. In general, there is a positive relationship between the two variables. This is visible in the scatterplot and clearly shown in statistical tests (p < 0.01). At the aggregate level it is therefore reasonable to say that the reception of immigrants goes largely hand in hand with municipal population size. In other words, municipal population size is a feasible predictor of the total number of immigrants received in each municipality. There are, nonetheless, several important deviations from this general pattern that emerge from the figure. Such deviations indicate municipalities that received either more or fewer immigrants than would be expected from this correlation. Aside from the metropolitan municipalities for which total population is underestimated via the rescaled population measurement, local governments such as Eskilstuna, Avesta, and Södertälje stand out as municipalities that had a larger reception than assumed from their 2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 1000

10000

100000

1000000

Fig. 5.4 Immigrants received in municipalities (Y-axis) and municipal population size on a logarithmic scale (X-axis) (2015)

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

133

population size. Cases showing the opposite combination (i.e., an unexpectedly low admission of immigrants in relation to population size) are found in the municipalities of Kungsbacka, Nacka, and Lund. Although scholars have not reached common ground, studies have shown that less-populated municipalities have largely been more keen to uphold a more generous admission of immigrants than others (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014, 2015; Steen & Røed, 2018; Wennström & Öner, 2015). If this assumption is correct it could provide an explanation for the lack of complete linearity in Fig. 5.4. However, various demographic circumstances can be analysed using additional indicators. The only measurement that has been consistent over the years is Eurostat’s classification of local administrative units based on their degree of urbanisation. As stated by Eurostat (2018), such a categorisation is based on a combination of geographical contiguity and population density. This categorisation covers all municipalities in Sweden and generates three different outputs; cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas. These sub-types range from having high density, to intermediate density, through to rural areas. The results in terms of immigrants received based on these classifications follow a clear pattern (shown in Table 5.2). On average, the number of immigrants received is lowest in cities, followed by towns and suburbs, and highest in the most rural areas. In fact, none of the 24 most densely populated municipalities lived up to the average levels of immigrants admitted of either the intermediate or rural categories. There is still an important variation within the categories, as indicated by the value of the standard deviation, which is particularly true for the two categories that most municipalities are divided into. There are mainly two lines of argument concerning the way in which economic circumstances can affect local immigration policy. The first relates to the relevance of the characteristics of local labour markets Table 5.2 Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per classification of municipality (2015) Classification of municipalities Cities Towns and suburbs Rural areas

Average no. of immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

3.36 6.21 9.55

1.62 5.38 7.02

N 24 120 146

134

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

(Piore, 1979). The second aspect reflects the municipal economy, in that a better economic capacity could influence the admission of immigrants (Jacobsen, 1996). Empirical studies have shown that labour market demands (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Walker & Leitner, 2011) and a better economic capacity of the local municipality (Steen & Røed, 2018) are positively associated with a more liberal local immigration policy. Although not particularly focusing on the group of immigrants that have been granted residence permits, other researchers have shown that larger reception is instead associated with weak economic circumstances (Wennström & Öner, 2015). In Table 5.3 two measures are tested in relation to the actual reception of immigrants. As a somewhat blunt but still comprehensive predictor, we make use of the local unemployment rate. However, the results do not align with theoretical assumptions since the relationship with immigrant reception is positive. As such, municipalities that have challenging labour market conditions found themselves to be greater receivers of immigrants than their opposites. Although not presented in the table, this effect also remains when the scope of reception is broken down to exclude the proportion of self-settled immigrants. Further, municipalities’ financial strength, measured as their own equity in relation to municipal total assets on the balance sheet, shows a similarly unexpected relationship. It is a negative relationship revealing that municipalities with a greater admission of immigrants appear to have a more troublesome financial situation. When combined, these correlations show that more extensive reception of immigrants took place in municipalities with poorer economic circumstances. Political factors are commonly examined in relation to the local admission of immigrants. As argued elsewhere in this book, partisan issues Table 5.3 Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities, unemployment rate (in %), and municipalities’ financial strength (2015) Unemployment rate Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants

0.651**

Municipalities’ financial strength – 0.191**

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

135

are one of the usual suspects when it comes to explaining variations in communities’ standpoints on immigrant reception. From a European context at least, parties to the right have traditionally identified the migration issue as more challenging than parties placed in the centre or to the left (Bale, 2008; De Vries, 2000). Additional studies have shown that anti-immigration parties (Bolin et al., 2014; Folke, 2014; Steen, 2009) or traditionally conservative parties (Gulasekaram & Ramakrishnan, 2015; Walker & Leitner, 2011) can also put restrictive pressure on local immigration policy. To analyse this the political orientation of the ruling coalition needs to be given attention. As displayed in Table 5.4, differences can be seen in that right-wing coalitions diverge from the other two categories through having a lower reception of immigrants. If we look closer at the variable over which municipalities had political influence (i.e., assigned immigrants in accordance with agreements with the government), there are minor variations between the municipalities.3 Although falling outside the scope of this publication, examinations of prior time periods in Sweden indicate that differences in policy can be identified particularly during circumstances in which ruling coalitions have a substantial margin over opponents on the municipal council (Jutvik, 2020). We can supplement this knowledge with data reflecting municipal support for the leading populist radical right party in Sweden, the Sweden Democrats, with its agenda of pursuing anti-immigration policies that include making reception much more restrictive (Jungar & Jupskås, Table 5.4 Average number of immigrants received in municipalities, per local government of municipality (2015) Local government

Average no. of immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

… of which assigned immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

N

Left-wing coalitions Cross-block coalitions Right-wing coalitions

8.20

5.97

4.62

3.11

99

8.18

6.17

4.19

3.18

101

6.30

6.74

3.61

3.44

89

136

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

2014). As a consequence of the municipal elections in 2014 the party was represented in 285 of the 290 municipalities. Somewhat contradictory to this, a positive relation is found between the two variables, indicating that the party is somewhat stronger in municipalities that have a larger reception of immigrants. However, looking at the extent of immigrant reception, which is the purview of the municipality (i.e., assigned immigrants), no statistical effect is evident (Table 5.5). A final factor that may influence local immigration policy is the sociocultural landscape. Prior research has shown that the existence of migration networks (i.e., linkages between immigrants already received and potential newcomers) can enable future waves of immigration (Arango, 2000; Massey et al., 1998). More specifically, although this is usually fuelled by particular ethnic communities, the effects may be seen in broader categories of immigrants. Table 5.6 shows the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities and the share of the population that was foreign born. The relationship is positive implying that municipalities with a larger proportion of foreign-born individuals also previously received a greater number of additional immigrants. Table 5.5 Analysis of the correlation between received and assigned immigrants in municipalities in 2015 and share of votes (in %) for the Sweden Democrats in the 2014 municipal elections Share of votes for the Sweden Democrats in 2014 municipal elections Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants Assigned immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

0.215** 0.019

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

Table 5.6 Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities and share of the foreign-born population (in %) (2015) Share of foreign-born population Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants

0.197**

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

137

As a final strategy that can be used to analyse patterns in the reception of immigrants, we present two regression models. With a focus on municipalities’ own policy, the dependent variable reflects the number of immigrants who were assigned according to agreements with the government. The variables previously discussed in this section are included as independent variables in the model, together with a number of predictors reflecting the local housing market situation. The justification for this is that housing can be viewed as a scarce local resource (Filomeno, 2017, p. 24). Myrberg and Westin (2016) have in fact shown that housing shortage is a widespread challenge for Swedish municipalities and that this is a barrier to the settlement of immigrants. However, there is no comprehensive data on the proportion of available apartments in municipalities in Sweden. The data that are available pertain to the proportion of available apartments provided by public housing companies. However, such apartments do not exist in every municipality. In 2015, for example, accommodation of this nature existed in 277 of the 290 municipalities, but a specific proportion of the apartments at the disposal of such companies was reserved for receiving immigrants in many municipalities. To complement this variable, we have added assessments made by the municipalities themselves, collected by the National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (NBHBP), reflecting whether municipalities perceived they had a shortage of housing or not. Regression estimations are shown in Table 5.7. In Model 1 two of our previously presented predictors yield significance. Less populated municipalities and municipalities with a higher unemployment rate seem to have taken on more immigrants via resolutions with the government. However, in Model 2 we add another potentially important predictor, namely the size of the group of self-settled immigrants. The assumption behind this variable, reflecting the situation in the preceding year of 2014, is that a larger admission of self-settled immigrants would lessen municipalities’ willingness to take on the group of assigned immigrants. In contrast though, the effect of this variable is positive meaning that the admission of self-settled immigrants instead goes hand in hand with the reception of placed immigrants (see Model 2), whereas the other three variables remain important. Furthermore, the predictor concerning the share of votes for the Sweden Democrats reports a significant negative effect. One of the dummy variables measuring the local housing market is also significant, in that its findings suggest that a greater number of assigned immigrants are received in municipalities where there is a surplus

138

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Table 5.7 Linear regression analysis of assigned immigrants in municipalities (per 1,000 inhabitants) based on a set of independent variables Model 1

Model 2

Population size (log)

– 0.409** (0.039)

Unemployment rate Financial strength Local rule dummy, right-wing coalition (reference category: left-wing coalitions) Local rule dummy, cross-block coalition (reference category: left-wing coalitions) Share of votes for Sweden Democrats Foreign-born population Available public-housing apartments Housing market dummy, surplus of housing (reference category: shortage of housing) Housing market dummy, balance of housing (reference category: shortage of housing) Number of self-settled immigrants (per 1,000 inhabitants) (2014)

0.072** (0.007) 3.682E-4 (0.001) – 0.027 (0.038)

– 0.382** (0.038) 0.049** (0.007) 0.001 (0.001) – 0.057 (0.036)

0.012 (0.035)

0.004 (0.034)

– 0.006 (0.003) – 0.054 (0.286) – 0.005 (0.013) 0.096 (0.054)

– 0.007* (0.003) – 0.10 (0.273) – 0.003 (0.013) 0.128* (0.052)

0.034 (0.035)

0.045 (0.033)

R2 N

0.598 288

0.028** (0.005)

0.638 288

Note Applied estimator is the ordinary least squares method. Entries are unstandardised coefficients followed by standard errors in parentheses. *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level. All variables reflect the situation in 2015, apart from the number of immigrants who organised their own accommodation in municipalities, which refers to the situation in 2014. The dependent variable is logarithmised to minimise problems with heteroscedasticity

of homes in the housing market than municipalities where the opposite prevails.

5.4 Reception of Immigrants in Swedish Municipalities After the Migrant Crisis In March 2016 local immigration policy was dramatically altered and a new policy regime was established. Thereafter, the voluntary feature of the previous system was replaced with a mandatory system based on a distribution model. The overarching ambition of the changed policy was to provide better possibilities for individuals to become established in society via making reception more even across Swedish municipalities

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

139

(The Swedish Government, 2019), or as has sometimes been expressed via better “burden-sharing” (Robinson et al., 2003). When comparing the situation over the years it should also be remembered that the number of immigrants received in municipalities increased from about 51,000 in 2015 to almost 69,000 in 2017. Figure 5.5 shows immigrant reception in all Swedish municipalities from lowest to highest. Average reception for all municipalities was 8.56 immigrants per 1,000 inhabitants. Although there are some extreme levels at the right end of the figure, the results still contrast with the situation in 2015. Before that time a proportion of the municipalities had more or less refrained from receiving immigrants. In this regard, the new policy appears to have had an effect. The differences between municipalities were also smaller on average compared with 2015. In 2017 the standard deviation was 4.36 and the range (i.e., the difference between the largest and smallest level) decreased to 35.31. At an aggregated level, a more equal distribution was achieved compared with the situation in 2015. This more equal distribution and its continuation have been reported elsewhere (County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). Table 5.8 provides corresponding data for 2017 for the top and bottom receivers following the same categorisations as applied in 2015. With the coming into force of the new policy dramatic changes might have been expected. However, six of the top receivers from 2015 still accounted for the highest levels of reception of immigrants in 2017. In most of these cases, although the general inflow of immigrants decreased

Fig. 5.5 Immigrants received in municipalities (bar) and average across municipalities (line) per 1,000 inhabitants (2017)

140

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Table 5.8 Immigrants received in municipalities (2017) Municipality

Top 10 Högsby Lessebo Östra Göinge Hultsfred Hällefors Perstorp Emmaboda Mellerud Hylte Markaryd Bottom 10 Sundsvall Härryda Bollebygd Hudiksvall Askersund Tyresö Mariestad Knivsta Gävle Timrå

Population

Immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

… of which self-settled immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

… of which immigrants settled as a result of family reunification, per 1,000 inhabitants

… of which sum of remaining categories, per 1,000 inhabitants

5,782 8,256 13,864 13,738 6,936 7,174 9,009 8,936 10,278 9,549

38.77 29.18 24.80 23.53 20.82 19.63 19.21 18.66 18.20 18.19

20.21 15.44 11.08 12.07 13.22 10.63 9.29 10.13 8.55 10.23

15.28 11.02 10.60 7.82 4.92 4.36 3.31 6.61 7.01 5.11

3.29 2.73 3.13 3.64 2.67 4.64 6.62 1.92 2.64 2.85

97,338 36,291 8,652 36,924 11,119 45,390 23,921 16,105 98,314 18,025

3.46 3.61 3.67 4.06 4.12 4.19 4.24 4.26 4.29 4.38

1.06 0.35 0.11 0.88 0.63 0.36 0.74 0.11 1.64 0.67

0.93 0.59 0.22 0.75 1.43 0.19 1.24 0.28 1.53 0.94

1.47 2.67 3.35 2.43 2.06 3.64 2.26 3.88 1.12 2.77

Note Immigrants received includes all categories of immigrants that entailed municipal funding from the government, self-settled immigrants are those immigrants who organised their accommodation for themselves, immigrants settled as a result of family reunification are those arriving in a municipality for that reason, remaining categories are immigrants who are quota refugees, immigrants from organised government accommodation and others. Rounding errors are the result of rounding the different scores

somewhat, it was still extensive. Once again, these municipalities were smaller, largely located in southern and central Sweden, and not directly connected to any larger urban area. Similar to the situation in 2015 the large proportion of self-settled immigrants and family reunifications

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

141

continued to be a major reason for such an outcome. The 10 municipalities that received the smallest proportion of immigrants in relation to their population in 2017 were all different compared with the situation in 2015 (apart from one municipality). This exemplifies the objective of the law to equalise distribution. Another indicator that reflects this objective is the fact that all the bottom 10 municipalities still received substantially more immigrants than the bottom 10 municipalities in 2015. These municipalities are geographically located all over Sweden with no representatives in the very south of the country. Some of them are quite large such as Gävle and Sundsvall. Härryda is the only municipality that was also in the bottom group of receiving municipalities in 2015. However, compared with the situation in 2015 the admission of immigrants in Härryda nonetheless still multiplied several times. In contrast to the top receiving municipalities, the local municipalities at the bottom of the table mainly received immigrants assigned by the government instead of groups who organised their own accommodation or who came to municipalities for family reunifications. 5.4.1

Patterns of Variation in the Admission of Immigrants

Similar to the way in which the earlier time period was described, in this section we look more closely at how variations between municipalities could be better understood in 2017. As before, we follow the prior structure and examine how demographic, economic, political, and sociocultural factors relate to local policy. This allows us to exploit the advantages of comparisons with the situation that existed before legislative changes. In contrast to the period when the policy was optional, the levels of admission were no longer under the control of the municipalities in 2017. As a result of the mandatory policy and its calculation model, some municipalities were not assigned any new immigrants at all. However, they were still able to receive individuals who either organised their own accommodation in the municipality or who arrived in the municipality with a view to reuniting with family members. Having said that, any influence over the distribution of the variable measuring reception was, to a large extent, taken out of the hands of the local governments themselves in favour of the national government. This consequently makes regression models irrelevant, so we only include correlational statistics. We start by making a demographic analysis. Figure 5.6 shows the relationship between the admission of immigrants and population size. From

142

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1000

10000

100000

1000000

Fig. 5.6 Immigrants received in municipalities (Y-axis) and municipal population size on a logarithmic scale (X-axis) (2017)

the shape of this scatterplot, it is obvious that the distribution model heavily relied on population size. Compared with 2015 (as presented in Fig. 5.4) the distribution curve is more even with minor deviations from the general pattern. However, there is more to demographic characteristics than simply population data. In Table 5.9 we use the same classification as earlier in the chapter, drawing on Eurostat’s division of municipalities into cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas based on levels of urbanisation. It should be kept in mind that the overall number of municipal admissions increased by 34% from 2015 to 2017. As seen by the situation before the cut-off point the average reception of immigrants appears to have a negative relationship with the degree of urbanisation. Cities undeniably Table 5.9 Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per classification of municipality (2017) Classification of municipalities Cities Towns and suburbs Rural areas

Average no. of immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

5.75 7.11 10.21

0.79 2.61 5.14

N 24 120 146

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

143

accounted for the sharpest increase in reception of the different categories of municipalities, and the general variation within each category decreased as seen by the standard deviation. Despite the redistribution ambitions of the reform, there is still a clear tendency towards a greater reception of immigrants in countryside communities than in larger and more populated municipalities. Examination of the way in which economic factors may relate to levels of admission is based on variables indicating the unemployment rate and the financial strength of the municipality. The situation in 2015 (as shown in Table 5.10) indicates that in the years following the reform there was still a relationship between higher immigrant reception and higher unemployment rate. What is not shown is that this relationship remained even when we confine our view to the share of immigrants who were assigned to municipalities. When it comes to municipal financial strength no effect is seen, thereby indicating a contrast with the situation in 2015. Next we look at whether the composition of the political majority demonstrated any relation with the number of immigrants received in 2017. Analysis is based on the same local government categorisation as used for the 2015 data and is presented in Table 5.11. Differences were marginal between municipalities governed by left-wing and crossblock coalitions, whereas municipalities governed by right-wing coalitions received slightly fewer immigrants once the new reform was in place.4 Analysis that excludes immigrants other than those who were assigned to the municipality discloses another pattern, in which block-crossing coalitions represent a lower share than the other two categories. This information was supplemented by data from the 2014 municipal election related to local support for the Sweden Democrats (see Table 5.12). There was a positive correlation between the proportion of Table 5.10 Correlation analysis of immigrants received in municipalities, unemployment rate (in %), and the financial strength of municipalities (2017)

Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants

Unemployment rate

Municipalities’ financial strength

0.590**

– 0.075

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

144

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Table 5.11 Average number of immigrants received in municipalities per local government of the municipality (2017) Local government

Average no. of immigrants received, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

… of which assigned immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

Std. Dev

N

Left-wing coalitions Cross-block coalitions Right-wing coalitions

8.68

4.05

5.98

2.27

99

8.67

3.84

4.81

2.73

101

8.28

5.22

5.93

2.40

89

Table 5.12 Analysis of the correlation between received and assigned immigrants in municipalities in 2017 and share of vote (in %) for the Sweden Democrats in the 2014 municipal election (in %) Sweden Democrats’ share of votes in the 2014 municipal election Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants Assigned immigrants, per 1,000 inhabitants

0.190** 0.041

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

immigrants received and the share of vote share for the party. However, there was no apparent relationship when only considering the number of immigrants who were assigned to the municipality. The final potential linkage concerns sociocultural factors that we addressed once again by examining data on the share of foreign-born individuals. The findings were similar to the situation in 2015 yielding a significant positive correlation (see Table 5.13).

5.5

Concluding Remarks

The substantial variation in municipalities’ reception of immigrants was one of the arguments given by the government for launching far-reaching legislation. This chapter demonstrates that such arguments were not unjustified. Commitments varied dramatically in the year prior to the

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

145

Table 5.13 Analysis of the correlation between immigrants received in municipalities and share of foreign-born population (in %) (2017) Share of foreign-born population Immigrants received in municipalities, per 1,000 inhabitants

0.220**

Note *Significant at the 0.05 level. **Significant at the 0.01 level, Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient

new legislation, ranging from highly restrictive policies to liberal policy output. Whereas some local governments received almost no immigrants, others accounted for extraordinary levels of reception. Although general tendencies show that these high levels of reception usually coincided with a number of relevant circumstances, deviations from prior theoretical assumptions were also found. Greater reception has previously been noted in both towns and suburbs and rural areas (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014; Walker & Leitner, 2011). Moreover, it has already been shown that a similar positive effect can be assumed from a more multi-ethnic population (Steen & Røed, 2018). Although perhaps somewhat unexpected, the admission of immigrants was greater in municipalities where there were already challenging labour market circumstances. This finding is also consistent in regression models that focused explicitly on the proportion of assigned immigrants. This illustrates the challenge some municipalities have to grapple with when, despite unfavourable conditions for labour market integration, their aim is nonetheless to receive a higher proportion of immigrants (e.g., Wennström & Öner, 2015). When it came to the potential effect the political composition of municipalities had on the situation there were divergences between the different combinations of local rule when averages were compared. However, regression models illustrate that greater divergences arise in circumstances regarding the Sweden Democrats. Correlation analyses yield a positive but unexpected relation between municipal reception and the share of votes for the party. A closer look at this reveals that this pattern vanishes when the proportion of immigrants who organised their own accommodation in the municipality is excluded. Furthermore, regression models find that a larger admission of agreed immigrants is negatively related to support for the party, which is more in line with prior research (Bolin et al., 2014; Lidén & Nyhlén, 2014).

146

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

The circumstances that arose subsequent to the legislative change also provide some valuable insights. While the distribution model for calculating municipal quotas indicates a particularly strong relationship between municipal size and immigrant reception, other aspects were clearly not central for the government. This gives a more nuanced view compared with some of the previous assessments of the equalising effect of the reform (County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). Above all, this is illustrated by the positive relationship between municipalities’ employment rates and their reception of immigrants. Although a higher unemployment rate may still correlate with labour market demands in some sectors, this is hardly the expected outcome of the reform. Long lag times in immigrant reception, such as for family reunification, may inflate reception volumes in municipalities that have previously received more immigrants. A final remark can also be made that the equalizing effect of the reform was not fully successful. As shown in this chapter, several of the top receivers in 2015 also admitted large numbers of immigrants in 2017.

Notes 1. Immigrants who organise their accommodation for themselves during the asylum process automatically belong to this category. 2. Since July 2020 the legislation enabling asylum seekers to organise their own accommodation has been modified. A number of municipalities or areas of municipalities have been exempted from the possibility for asylum seekers to self-settle to counter problems of segregation. However, an asylum seeker is not denied the possibility to move into such an area but, if they choose to do so, they will lose their monthly government subsidy (SFS 2019:1204, 2019). 3. The term ‘assigned immigrants’ consistently refers to totals received in municipalities as quota refugees, from government organised accommodation, others or because of family reunification. 4. One municipality is excluded from the analysis since it was governed by a local party that cannot easily be classified according to the traditional left–right scale.

5

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

147

References Arango, J. (2000). Explaining migration: A critical view. International Social Science Journal, 52(165), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451. 00259. Bale, T. (2008). Turning round the telescope. Centre–right parties and immigration and integration policy in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(3), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701847341. Bolin, N., Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Do anti-immigration parties matter? The case of the Sweden democrats and local refugee policy. Scandinavian Political Studies, 37 (3), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/14679477.12031. County Administrative Board in Stockholm. (2020). Bostad sist? Om bosättningslagen och nyanländas boendesituation i Stockholms län. De Vries, M. (2000). Left and right among local elites: Comparative figures from Switzerland, Spain, Germany and the Netherlands. Local Government Studies, 26(3), 91–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930008434001. Eurostat. (2018). Methodological manual on territorial typologies. Filomeno, F. A. (2017). Theories of local immigration policy. Palgrave Macmillan. Folke, O. (2014). Shades of brown and green: Party effects in proportional election systems. Journal of the European Economic Association, 12(5), 1361–1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12103. Gulasekaram, P., & Ramakrishnan, S. K. (2015). The new immigration federalism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978131 6282410. Jacobsen, K. (1996). Factors influencing the policy responses of host governments to mass refugee influxes. International Migration Review, 30(3), 655–678. Jungar, A.-C., & Jupskås, A. R. (2014). Populist radical right parties in the Nordic Region: A new and distinct party family? Scandinavian Political Studies, 37 (3). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/https://doi. org/10.1111/1467-9477.12024. Jutvik, K. (2020). Unity or distinction over political borders? The impact of mainstream parties in local seat majorities on refugee reception. Scandinavian Political Studies, 43(4), 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/14679477.12175. Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2014). Explaining local Swedish refugee policy. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 15(3), 547–565. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12134-013-0294-4. Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2015). Reception of refugees in Swedish municipalities: Evidences from comparative case studies. Migration and Development, 4(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/21632324.2014.894178.

148

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1993). Theories of international migration: A review and appraisal. Population and Development Review, 19(3), 431–466. https://doi.org/10. 2307/2938462. Massey, D. S., Arango, J., Hugo, G., Kouaouci, A., Pellegrino, A., & Taylor, J. E. (1998). Worlds in motion: Understanding international migration at the end of the millennium. Oxford University Press. Myrberg, G., & Westin, S. (2016). Bostadsbrist som problem vid bosättning av flyktingar—Hur ser kommunerna på frågan? In B. Bengtsson, G. Myrberg, & R. Andersson (Eds.), Mångfaldens dilemman—Medborgarskap och integrationspolitik (pp. 81–100). Gleerups. Piore, M. J. (1979). Birds of passage: Migrant labor and industrial societies. Cambridge University Press. Riksrevisionen. (2014). Nyanländ i Sverige—Effektiva insatser för ett snabbt mottagande (RiR 2014:15). Robinson, V., Andersson, R., & Musterd, S. (2003). Spreading the ‘burden’? : A review of policies to disperse asylum seekers and refugees. Policy. SFS 2019:1204. (2019). Lag (2019:1204) om ändring i lagen (1994:137) om mottagande av asylsökande m.fl. Steen, A. (2009). Hvorfor tar kommunene imot ‘de fremmede’? Eliter og lokal skepsis. In J. Saglie (Ed.), Det nære demokratiet—Lokalvalg og lokal deltakelse. Abstrakt forlag. Steen, A., & Røed, M. (2018). State governance or local Agency? determining refugee settlement in Norwegian municipalities. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 22(1), 27–52. The Swedish Government. (2019). Frågor och svar om lagen om mottagande av vissa nyanlända för bosättning (bosättningslagen). https://www.regeringen. se/artiklar/2016/02/fragor-och-svar-om-lagen-om-mottagande-av-vissa-nya nlanda-for-bosattning/. UNHCR. (2018a). Global trends—Forced displacement in 2017 . UNHCR. UNHCR. (2018b). UNHCR resettlement handbook—Country chapters—Sweden. Walker, K. E., & Leitner, H. (2011). The variegated landscape of local immigration policies in the United States. Urban Geography, 32(2), 156–178. https:// doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.32.2.156. Wennström, J., & Öner, Ö. (2015). Den geografiska spridningen av kommunplacerade flyktingar i Sverige. Ekonomisk Debatt, 43(4), 52–68.

CHAPTER 6

Local Immigration Policy in the Case Studies Selected

6.1

Introduction

This chapter focuses on municipalities’ policies for receiving immigrants during the period before, during, and after the migrant crisis. To a large extent, policy changes revolved around enforcement of the Settlement Act (SFS, 2016:38, 2016), at which point the discretion of municipalities was radically reduced since it then became mandatory for them to receive immigrants. The fact that municipalities were obliged to start receiving immigrants created changes both in terms of policies and activities in the municipalities, resulting in they having to initiate policy making in a situation that was unfamiliar to some of them. In this chapter we discuss differences in key actors’ views on policy change that the reforms entailed. Furthermore, the relationship between municipal officials and politicians will be addressed as well as relations between the government and the municipalities examined. The material consists of interviews with local politicians and officials and studies of municipal documents in the form of investigations, official decision protocols, minutes written by officials, and other relevant written material. The material on which this chapter is based also consists of interviews with government authorities who represent the regions in which these municipalities are located. For a description of the interviews conducted see Appendix B. We analyse the empirical material from two theoretical perspectives of migration policy: governing structures and the policy output of immigra© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_6

149

150

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

tion policy in the municipalities. As mentioned in Chapter 2, governance structures are related to three different modes of governance: the vertical, horizontal, and multi-level. These modes vary in terms of the policy agenda, the actual governing process, defining characteristics, and the result of policy. When it comes to policy output there is one main distinction: policy stances that are liberal versus those that are restrictive. Although there is no exact way to define the limits of such a policy choice, a contextual analysis that involves comparison of the polities being studied does enable this. Our distinction between liberal and restrictive policy stances on local immigration policy follows theoretical work on immigration policy (Hammar, 1985; Meyers, 2004) including work at the local government level (Money, 1999).

6.2 Avesta---A Municipality with a High Reception of Immigrants and Self-Settled Immigrants Avesta is a municipality with a long tradition of receiving people from other countries. As early as the 1950s and 1960s people from other countries were welcomed to the municipality. At that time this group mainly consisted of people who came from Finland to work in the steel industry (Local Government Official 1, Avesta Municipality). This resulted in a situation in which citizens with a foreign background were not particularly uncommon in the municipality. The tradition and motivations for receiving immigrants were previously strongly connected to the needs of the labour market. This is still the case. Statements in interviews emphasised that the general motivation for Avesta’s approach to immigration reception was to mitigate the municipality’s risk of having to contend with a shortage of labour in the future. Immigration was perceived as one of the solutions to the labour shortage. Some of the local actors interviewed also indicated that reasons related to solidarity lay behind the choice of policy and that immigration was seen to enrich the municipality (Leading Politician 1, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 1, Avesta Municipality). The arguments in favour of immigration reception can be linked to previous research which identifies arguments as instrumental and symbolic and attitudes to reception as

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

151

positive. In the case of Avesta the arguments can be classified as instrumental as a result of the welfare gain aspect (workforce) and as symbolic as a result of the solidarity aspect (enriching for the local community) (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2015; Steen, 2010). Avesta’s long tradition of receiving immigrants has also affected the way in which admission was organised and the way in which the municipality developed its internal organisation for admission over a long period of time. 6.2.1

Organisation of Immigrant Admission

As stated above, Avesta has had a long tradition of receiving immigrants. This means that the municipality is experienced in organising reception and over time has been able to develop what the municipality considers to be the most appropriate way of doing so. As early as 2007 some reorganisation in the way immigrants were received took place. This was further reorganised in 2010 when implementing the Establishment Reform. During these years the municipality’s reorganisation of the way it received immigration involved placing the integration unit under the Education Department. Still today, this department has the main responsibility for receiving immigrants into the municipality. As a consequence of municipal reorganisation, the officials in the integration unit were also able to provide financial assistance to immigrants who needed it in accordance with the Social Services Act. This had primarily been performed by Social Services previously. The purpose of reorganisation was to generate a coherent integration policy in the municipality, one that would be perceived as including the organisation of reception (Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality). Immigrants who are to be received in Avesta often require supplementary financial compensation, which is intended to supplement state compensation. The next stage in this process involves an administrator assessing the individual and the level of compensation to which they are entitled. After this, the immigrant is given practical information about their civil obligations such as registering with the Public Employment Service (PES). Our interviewees pointed out that the knowledge immigrants have about life in Sweden differs. While some only possess the most rudimentary knowledge, others are well acquainted with the circumstances of living in Sweden, especially those who have had family or friends living in Avesta or in Sweden for a long time. However, the municipality has a checklist of information that officials go through with each

152

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

and every immigrant who arrives. The municipality has also put in place an initiative called “Men and women in focus ” in which officials meet groups of men and women separately to discuss questions and themes regarding what it is like to live in Sweden. In the municipality of Avesta community orientation education is given within the framework of the course Swedish For Immigrants (SFI, Swedish language training) that the municipality offers (Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality). During the years preceding the migrant crisis the number of immigrants moving to the municipality rapidly exceeded those reached in agreements with the government. This all started in 2013 when 262 immigrants were received in Avesta, while the number agreed was just 35 people. A local government official described this as a complete and unforeseen shock that was driven by newly established asylum accommodation combined with unoccupied apartments in the municipality. As presented in Chapter 4 this inflow of immigrants was predominantly made up of self-settled immigrants and those coming for family reunification. The magnitude escalated in the following years and created challenges for the local administration. As pressure clearly built up to a critical level the local administration was forced to operate in a state of crisis management for a number of years (Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality). Naturally, the high inflow of immigrants also had spillover effects on the municipal welfare sector including the school system as evidenced by a local shortage of teaching premises, classrooms, and teachers. However, the shortage of rooms was managed with the help of temporary modular buildings and temporary teachers. The inflow also affected group dynamics between students according to one informant (Local Government Official 3, Avesta Municipality). Nonetheless, during the most acute period some of the school routines and procedures were in fact improved, such as schools in the municipality became better at assessing students and providing the support they might need. Furthermore, since Avesta had previously received immigrants, it benefited from having multi-lingual staff who did great work during 2015 and 2016. In the period leading up to the crisis it had been decided to mix groups of self-settled immigrants with assigned immigrants. The reasons for doing so were that there was sufficient refugee accommodation in the municipality and many of the immigrants chose to stay in Avesta after they had been granted their residence permit. Since the proportion of self-settled immigrants was large in Avesta, the Settlement Act had a moderate impact on the policy of the municipality.

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

153

The large number of previous self-settled residents also meant that many immigrants chose to stay in Avesta because they already had relatives and friends in the area. The many self-settled immigrants created a business opportunity for private housing companies. One such company in Avesta focused on offering immigrants housing. However, the downside of this was that immigrants were often placed in areas outside the municipality leading to segregation. The many self-settled immigrants coupled with implementation of the Settlement Act weakened the municipality’s ability to affect the number of immigrants in the municipality. Although this was already the case prior to 2016 as a result of the waves of self-settlers, the situation became exacerbated thereafter. One of the politicians interviewed pointed out that since the reform the municipality no longer had as much choice as once it did regarding immigrant reception because it was now essentially a government issue. The informant laconically emphasised that the reception of immigrants was the government’s responsibility, which it delegated to the Swedish Migration Agency (SMA). Hence the perception that immigrant reception was a matter for the central government and the SMA (Leading Politician 1, Avesta Municipality). The number of immigrants the SMA accommodated in its refugee housing around Avesta greatly affected the number of self-settled immigrants in the municipality. Somewhat despondently, the informant argued that it was hard for the municipality to influence the number of immigrants received despite making many attempts to do so. Such attempts are detailed later in this book. The municipality found itself in a position where it had to accept the number of immigrants and work with the consequences. The increased vertical governing that the new regulation gave rise to therefore had a limited effect in terms of equalising reception as a result of the number of self-settled immigrants (Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). At the same time, many of the interviewees had a positive view of the number of immigrants received as well as the numbers of selfsettled immigrants. There was consensus among the local government that it wanted people to stay in Avesta (Leading Politician 1, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 1, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 3, Avesta Municipality). One of the politicians interviewed put it as follows: Many people enjoy living here [in Avesta]. Politically, we have been clear that we want people to stay. (Leading Politician 1, Avesta Municipality)

154

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Thus, in Avesta there was clearly the political will of the governing majority that immigrants should stay and efforts were made to create as good conditions as possible to that end. However, the legislation essentially had two effects on Avesta. On the one hand, no immigrants were allotted in later years in accordance with the implicit distribution of the Settlement Act. On the other hand, the legislation had an indirect effect as other municipalities in the region were forced to receive more immigrants. As a consequence the total pressure on Avesta decreased somewhat under the new policy regime (Local Government Official 1, Avesta Municipality). Since the municipality had received large numbers of immigrants in the past, it had institutionalised a structure that it could use to manage reception. Avesta had developed routines and skills to deal with migration that were highly beneficial when the legislation on reception changed (Local Government Official 3, Avesta Municipality). As mentioned above, even though the situation in Avesta was hard for the municipality to influence—as is often the case with vertical governance structures, there were nonetheless traits of multi-level governance processes such as the network-like cooperation between county administrative boards and municipalities through which the latter had the possibility to redistribute quotas of immigrants between themselves. This way of working shows the way in which the local government level can affect policy at other political levels and how conditions and arguments at the local level become important aspects for other political levels in the process of shaping policy and avoiding decoupling (Hooghe & Marks, 2003; Scholten, 2013). 6.2.2

Reception of Immigrants and Political Conflicts

One topic that was addressed in the interviews with local politicians and public officials concerned the attitudes of politicians towards immigration policy. The general picture that came out was that there existed a broad consensus between parties represented on the municipal council regarding the direction of immigration policy. The interviewees gave the impression that such consensus was true for all but one party. One of the politicians interviewed, who represented the governing majority, said the following about political attitudes to immigrant reception:

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

155

There is no great opposition to reception in the municipality. Perhaps our tradition of immigrant reception means that citizens are accustomed to it. (Leading Politician 1, Avesta Municipality)

When it comes to the political opposition that existed towards the reception of immigrants, this predominantly came from the Sweden Democrats. Representatives of the Sweden Democrats argued that the municipality received too many immigrants, thus creating a problematic situation for the municipality and its residents. They argued that the reception policy was too short-lived and took the form of a social experiment, which the party described as irresponsible. The Sweden Democrats tried to influence the political process by forwarding propositions to the municipal council in which they not only argued for a reduction in reception but also a shutdown of migration, which would entail the municipality investigating the economic consequences of immigrant reception and family reunification (Sweden Democrats, 18 December 2014; 25 November 2019). Although there has been objections to the immigration policy in Avesta, the major picture presented through the interviews is that there was political consensus concerning the political direction. 6.2.3

Who Governs—Local Government Officials or Politicians, the Local Level or the Central Government?

The relationship between politicians and local government officials in the municipality was described as unproblematic. Informants state that there were no major discussions on migration policy issues and little if any disagreement was evident between the two categories of actors. Although there was consensus between politicians and the local administration on immigrant reception issues, much of the practical organisation, problem solving, and initiatives around this issue were initiated by local government officials. One of the informants stated that immigrant reception and the number of immigrants the municipality agreed to receive during the time prior to the cut-off point, was decided from the outset by the local administration – not a number determined by the politicians. The actual suggestion came from Social Security Department and was thereafter negotiated with the SMA. At the same time, local government officials stated that politicians showed great commitment to and interest in immigrant reception, demonstrated political responsibility for the issues, and tried to support the local administration (Leading Politician 1, Avesta

156

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 3, Avesta Municipality). Previous research has shown that local government officials often have significant discretion in local migration policy (Filomeno, 2017; Paquet, 2015). This was also the case in Avesta where local government officials were clearly the driving force behind the development of local strategies. The way in which local immigration policy is governed involves relations between actors of both a vertical and horizontal nature. At the same time local and national authorities must find different ways to cooperate and shape policy implementation together. This means that the local government level needs to interact with the regional and national levels (Zapata-Barrero & Barker, 2014). This process can differ between regions, just as the number of immigrants can vary between regions and municipalities. Avesta is a part of the county of Dalarna within which there has been significant variation in immigration reception between the municipalities. Some municipalities have not received any immigrants, others just a limited number, while yet others have received large numbers of immigrants (Public Official, County Administrative Board Dalarna). In the county of Dalarna the process by which immigrants are distributed is done through dialogue and cooperation. Since the new legislation in 2016 distribution in Dalarna has been based on the SMA’s figures that are used to determine so-called municipal quota. Municipalities are then invited at the county level to propose any changes based on the suggested distribution. The distribution for 2018 was handled through a network of municipal managers wherein the municipalities were allowed to provide comments on the distribution. In 2019 a similar process was followed in Dalarna (Public Official, County Administrative Board Dalarna). Cooperation between actors at different political levels is another way to portray modes of governance. One such example was provided by a public official from the SMA, which reflects cooperation between public authorities at the regional and governmental level. Among other things, the municipality tried to influence the SMA to limit the number of asylum-seekers placed at the refugee facility located in Horndal, a smaller community within the municipality (Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality). There had previously been around 400 asylum seekers in the Horndal facility. The municipality tried to influence the SMA not to increase the number, but were unable to do so. One reason is likely to be that the municipality was considered by the SMA to have done a good job. Consequently, there was no motivation for the SMA to place some

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

157

of the asylum seekers in another area. This was borne out in the years of major levels of immigrant reception in 2015 and 2016 when the SMA argued for more people to be placed in the accommodation in Horndal on the basis that Avesta was considered to be highly capable of immigrant reception and integration. However, when asked in 2016 the municipality declined to receive additional immigrants (Leading Politician 2, Avesta Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Avesta Municipality). Although the central government expressed great understanding of the situation in Avesta in meetings, it did not result in the provision of any additional support. Therefore, there was by and large consensus between the government and the municipality regarding solutions to policy problems that arose in connection with the introduction of the Settlement Act. Disagreements still existed regarding the placement of asylum seekers. However, there is little evidence of Avesta wanting to decouple from this arrangement, which may be the case in municipalities where there are conflicts with the government regarding the interpretation of policy problems (Scholten, 2013).

6.3 Vallentuna---Large Changes in Policy and Ways of Working The municipality of Vallentuna has undergone a radical shift in local immigration policy during the last 10 years. Prior to the period in which legislative change occurred (i.e., 2016) the municipality had a very limited level of immigrant reception, which meant that the new law implied major changes for the municipality (see Chapter 4). The municipality’s previous experiences of reception were mainly limited to the admission of unaccompanied children. Even before the migrant crisis the government had the ability to oblige Swedish municipalities to receive this group of vulnerable immigrants (Lidén & Nyhlén, 2016). Nonetheless, the municipality received only a moderate number of immigrants preceding this cut-off point. This changed dramatically as a consequence of the new law and its mandatory nature. One of the officials interviewed described that it would not have been likely for Vallentuna to receive any immigrants had the municipality not been forced to do so by the legislative change in 2016 (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality). The autonomy municipalities had over local immigration policy was curtailed with the shift in policy. Prior to 2016 Vallentuna argued the reason the number of immigrants received was limited was the result of a

158

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

lack of housing. During the years before the Settlement Act the municipality received very few immigrants, other than unaccompanied children. This number was rarely exceeded two families per year. Most immigrants came from accommodation arranged by the government via a procedure in which the municipality, if it had accommodation to offer to immigrants, notified the SMA and began preparations for settlement. Another of the local government officials interviewed expressed that one of the positive consequences of the Settlement Act was that it made it easier for the municipality to plan immigrant reception, which had increased as a consequence of the new regulation. The reason was the municipal quota in which the municipality was allotted about the same number of immigrants each time. Armed with this information the municipality was later able to reserve accommodation places for immigrants who were to be allocated to Vallentuna (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality). Two of the local government officials interviewed also stressed the lack of experience the municipality had relating to the reception of immigrants (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 4, Vallentuna Municipality). The Settlement Act thus affected the policy and procedures the municipality of Vallentuna adopted when it came to local immigration policy. This was borne out by the municipality being forced to adapt its policy and reorganise the way in which it worked relating to reception in the municipality. An important question that arose in Vallentuna concerned finding sufficient accommodation for the immigrants. This was especially problematic since the municipality has a very small public-housing company, which was unable to meet the need that existed after the migrant crisis. Instead, the municipality had to build pavilion housing, buy flats, and rent accommodation from private persons and private landlords to handle the housing situation (Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). Vallentuna also chose to interpret the Settlement Act by strictly applying the two-year establishment rule to deal with the lack of available housing. According to a report into the municipality’s reception of immigrants carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), there was a need for more housing. The report pointed out that by 2035 the municipality would need to build 300 homes a year to achieve the necessary level (PwC, 2017).

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

159

According to this rule once an immigrant has been placed in the municipality the two-year establishment period begins, wherein the municipality is responsible for education and language training. In short, the housing contracts that immigrants receive through municipal placement are terminated after two years. The reason for this, at least in the opinion of local government officials, is that politicians believe that after the end of the establishment period immigrants should be perceived as being equal to any other municipal citizen. By extension, this means that these immigrants are obliged to apply for new housing. Moreover, if they do not have a job, then they are referred to the municipality’s welfare support services. The municipality informs all new arrivals of the situation and explains that they lose their housing agreement after this period of time. The local government officials interviewed described this as an advantage for Vallentuna because the municipality is thereby able to focus its efforts in other areas rather than looking for housing for new immigrants, which previously used a lot of resources (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). The point of view of the political opposition is that the two-year rule is problematic because many settled immigrants feel obliged to leave Vallentuna for other municipalities in other parts of the country. According to one of the politicians representing the opposition: “This interpretation of the Settlement Act has also been a major issue of conflict in the municipality” (Leading Opposition Politician 2, Vallentuna Municipality). The main argument put forward by opposition parties is that this way of interpreting the Settlement Act leads to immigrants having to run the risk of losing their job as a result of having to relocate, thus creating insecurity for families and individuals, and having to spend time searching for housing instead of studying or working. Some local government officials also criticised the strict application of the two-year rule concerning housing contracts. One of the officials interviewed stated that housing contracts of such a short duration made it difficult for immigrants to integrate, find a job, or get an education (Local Government Official 4, Vallentuna Municipality).

160

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

6.3.1

Changes in Policy and Organisation to Cope with Increases in the Number of Immigrants Received

In recent years the way in which immigrant reception has been organised has changed in the municipality. Before 2016 the Social Services department was responsible for immigrant reception (Local Government Official 4, Vallentuna Municipality). When an immigrant is to be placed in the municipality today the Property Management department of the municipality has the initial responsibility for reception. It starts by looking at the family constellation to be settled, then tries to find a home that meets the needs of the family, and finally matches them to the available accommodation. Although most often there is no problem in finding housing, there have been times when accommodation is insufficient in relation to the immigrants received and the housing available in Vallentuna (Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). Reception policy in Vallentuna changed as a result of the Settlement Act (as shown above). Before 2016 there was no reception policy that had been actively agreed by politicians. Instead, working methods existed that had been developed by Social Services. After 2016 the policy evolved in several ways. One change was in the way the municipality treated different categories of immigrants such as previous quota refugees or former asylum seekers when it came to accommodation arranged by the SMA. For example, more resources were spent here on quota refugees than on other groups received (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality). The reason for this is that those who came to Sweden as asylum seekers and have lived in housing arranged by the SMA already have some knowledge of how Swedish society works. At the other end of the spectrum quota refugees do not have the benefit of that knowledge, which means that they need more support (Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). Moreover, other policy changes were proposed. The municipality started discussing ways in which to change housing construction policy such that more housing could be built in the municipality. Although this had not been done before and was not strictly necessary to cope with the increasing reception of immigrants, immigrant needs contributed to the discussions starting (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). A 2017 report from the auditing firm PwC examined the way in which the municipality had organised its departments to deal with the

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

161

reception and integration of immigrants. When it came to immigrant reception the report concluded was that the routines used for immigrant reception and introduction were satisfactory. Although two of the five goals reviewed in the report were deemed as adequately achieved, Vallentuna received criticism regarding the three others. The municipality met the goal of having put in place an appropriately structured routine for the reception of immigrants and the goal of having put the necessary organisation and procedures in place to facilitate applying for state compensation. Criticism was expressed over the reception of unaccompanied children and the Social Security department’s work in matching needs and support for unaccompanied children. The report also reviewed the process of appointing a trustee and was critical of the lack of control over residential care homes for children and adolescents. Finally, PwC also highlighted that there was duplication of work across many of the municipality’s departments as a result of the lack of coordination between them (PwC, 2017). This is in line with some indications from research within the public administration field that pinpoint the importance of inter-coordination between departments within governments to increase efficiency (Pollitt, 2003). The municipality responded that there had been problems in recruiting staff with adequate competence in the Social Security department, making it difficult to follow up plans put in place for unaccompanied refugee children. Furthermore, the municipality stated that organisational measures had been taken to rectify the duplication of work occurring (Vallentuna municipality, 2018-01-12). The report highlighted the need for Vallentuna to quickly build an organisation capable of handling a larger number of immigrants than the municipality had previously been used to. This meant the municipality needed to reconsider its policy and procedures regarding the reception of newly arrived immigrants. In addition to the report there were further signs that such challenges existed. Since the municipality of Vallentuna had received limited numbers of assigned immigrants as a result of having a stricter applied immigration policy before 2016, it largely lacked experience in receiving immigrants in the time prior to the Settlement Act. Furthermore, in addition to the responses given in the interviews conducted, the municipality’s own documents show that these capacity problems already existed within the municipality. As an example, a memorandum from the Social Security department to the local council as a follow-up to the 2018 action plan for integration, pointed out that work with immigrants was affected by high staff turnover and organisational

162

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

changes in the department. The same was true for the Property Management department, which had a great deal of responsibility for immigrant reception. The start-up of a new organisation and unit affected its work (Leading Opposition Politician 2, Vallentuna Municipality). 6.3.2

Reception of Immigrants and Political Conflict Lines

The municipality of Vallentuna has a long tradition of centre–right majority rule. Since the 2018 elections the ruling majority has consisted of a coalition of the Moderate Party, the Christian Democrats, the Liberals, and the Centre Party. The opposition consists of the Social Democrats, the Green Party, and the Left Party. Although there is no opposition alliance between these parties, they do cooperate with each other. The Sweden Democrats is also represented on the municipal council and belongs to the opposition parties, even though the other parties in opposition do not cooperate with them. The issue of immigrant reception has long been on the political agenda and associated conflicts have varied over the years. As previously indicated, there have been political discussions about how the Settlement Act should be handled in the municipality. It was mentioned earlier in the chapter that the Settlement Act had major consequences for the municipality of Vallentuna when it came to its policy and working methods. The municipality had received unaccompanied refugee children and self-settled immigrant residents, but these were relatively few in total. The municipality addressed the reforms by developing a strategy to deal with the consequences of the new law. A politician representing the opposition emphasised in one of the interviews that the Settlement Act had forced the municipality to develop policy. The politician concerned put it as follows: There was no structure or procedure. Before February 2016 nothing was done in Vallentuna. There had been no political will, so it has not always been due to the lack of resources. (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality)

Although there were differences between the political parties regarding the direction of local politics, there was consensus on the way in which policy should be developed (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

163

Municipality). However, one of the local government officials interviewed believed that the politicisation of immigrant reception and integration increased after the 2018 elections. This was partly due to the political divide that developed within the governing alliance in 2017 and 2018. The official interviewed pointed out that the divide did little to clarify the path the municipality should take. Although politicians between 2016 and 2018 were by and large result oriented when it came to immigrant reception and integration, after 2018 the focus became more oriented towards the problems caused by immigrant reception (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality). Another local government official pointed out that immigration and integration issues after the 2018 election were not as high up on the political agenda (Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). Nonetheless, local government officials worked with the situation they faced using structures that were tried and tested such that there could be a long-term focus on the issues (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 4, Vallentuna Municipality). Interviews indicate that officials tried to apply more of a long-term and sustainable perspective to the current reception despite political governing at the time being perceived as unclear. The opposition also confirmed the view that there were divisions within the governing alliance including representatives within the alliance parties who wanted a different focus on politics (Leading Opposition Politician 2, Vallentuna Municipality). The availability of housing and limited two-year contracts were major issues causing political conflict in the municipality. The opposition wanted the municipality to allow for extensions in contracts. They argued that terminating a contract for families was not a good idea because it often led to their becoming dependent on Social Services. For example, a family could end up in an apartment hotel far from Vallentuna costing SEK 50,000 a month, much more than the price of a local apartment contract. Such extensions would lead to those assessed by Social Services as needing housing later being able to stay in their appointed apartment for another six months. The Left Party, the Social Democrats, and the Green Party were supportive of such a modification. The Social Democrats launched a proposition to enact the change, which was initially rejected. However, after discussions with the ruling majority it was accepted and implemented (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality).

164

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

6.3.3

The Governing of Local Immigration Policy—Internal and External Relations

As mentioned earlier there have been differences of opinion between politicians and local government officials in the municipality of Vallentuna regarding the best way to deal with the admission of immigrants. The interviews show that officials were by and large the driving force behind many of the efforts that have been made since 2016. When asked about the relationship between politicians and officials regarding migration in Vallentuna, one of the public officials interviewed answered as follows: The relationship between politicians and officials has shifted. In 2016 politicians had a clear agenda that officials adjusted somewhat. Since then it has changed. Many of the policy proposals have been denied by the officials. (Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality)

This demonstrates that there were increasing difficulties in the relationship between politicians and local government officials. Tension between officials and the governing majority in the municipality clearly increased over the years. One of the conflicts that existed concerned the application of the two-year housing rule (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Leading Opposition Politician 2, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). There was criticism from the local administration about how issues were handled at the political level. One of the criticisms was that no plan existed for how the municipality should handle the reception of immigrants. This lack of political guidance had severe consequences and resulted in local government officials leaving. Politicians for their part were critical of officials. They argued that while officials had demonstrated their ability to resolve acute problems, they lacked any long-term idea about how to solve the housing issue (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality). Although the relationship between politicians and local government officials was largely characterised by the fact that officials being very engaged in these issues over the years, matters relating to migration were no longer high on the political agenda. In interviews both politicians and officials described issues becoming increasingly divisive. For example, local government officials working with immigration tasks stated that they were not asked to attend meetings as much as before (Leading Opposition Politician 1, Vallentuna Municipality; Leading Politician 1, Vallentuna

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

165

Municipality; Local Government Official 1, Vallentuna Municipality). It also emerged that solutions to problems became more sensitive political issues over time. This was also confirmed by a public official from the County Administrative Board (Public Official 3, County Administrative Board Stockholm). The conclusion that can be drawn is that the situation was complex. While the issue in Vallentuna became ever more politically charged, it was perceived that the issue no longer occupied such a high position on the political agenda. Although interview material shows there was a divide between politicians and officials in the municipality, it also shows that officials were key actors in developing structures and activities in the municipality (Caponio, 2010; Paquet, 2015). Several of the municipal actors interviewed emphasised that municipal cooperation with public authorities worked well (Leading Opposition Politician 2, Vallentuna Municipality; Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). There is nonetheless evidence that decoupling processes took place with municipalities in which the central level drifted away from each other in terms of coordinating activities, shared objectives, and time horizons (Scholten, 2013). What was highlighted from the municipality perspective was that the SMA needed to become more responsive to capacity issues in municipalities such as when the municipality has just a few vacant single rooms and yet even more families are assigned. Problems were also highlighted regarding delays in the payment of compensation from the SMA. This is especially problematic when an authority cannot pay a debt to a municipality for compensation because of such a delay (Local Government Official 2, Vallentuna Municipality). The PES representative covering this area emphasised that it was a constant challenge to work with the municipalities. It was difficult to reach any consensus on who was doing what or to find consensus within the time available. One public official interviewed from the PES formulated this as follows: From the perspective of the PES, municipalities tend to be rather provincial in their view and perceive the municipality as an island and not part of a regional and national system. The central government has a view on both the regional and the national responsibility of the municipalities. Efforts made by municipalities also tend to be short term. (Public Official, Public Employment Service Northeast Stockholm)

166

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

This was also confirmed in a document from the municipality in which the administration was instructed to investigate the availability of housing in other municipalities as a result of the lack of housing (Vallentuna municipality, 2018-05-03). This could be seen as a strategy of reducing the responsibility of municipalities as well as confirming the opinion that municipalities can see themselves as islands, not as part of a whole system. This is in line with research that identifies a localist approach in immigration policy which originates from the local level and can be distinguished from the national level (Varsanyi, 2010). According to the PES, cooperation with local government officials in the municipality was successful whereas that at the political level was more difficult. The governing majority in the municipality took the view that the municipality did all the work while the central government failed to do its part. At the same time, the local government officials interviewed believed that the political attitude of the municipality of Vallentuna was such that it should do what it could to support individuals in their efforts to get established in Swedish society. Nonetheless, this is the responsibility of the individual and the municipality should not treat newly arrived immigrants any differently from other municipal citizens. However, the political leadership of the municipality expressed concern that the government support provided through its public authorities would deteriorate as a consequence of the PES changing its organisation (Public Official, Public Employment Service Northeast Stockholm). Representatives of the County Administrative Board stated that although cooperation with the municipalities took place on a voluntary basis, a great deal of negotiation coupled with financial incentives were required to encourage the municipalities to take certain measures. It should be kept in mind that the County Administrative Board did not have the power to oblige municipalities to take actions. The attitude of public officials was critical here since in their efforts to facilitate immigration reception and integration matters through politicians (Public Official 3, County Administrative Board Stockholm). This indicates that governing took place in the form of networks, through cooperation, and done using soft governing tools such as talking, listening, and trying to influence decision makers in the municipalities (Pierre & Sundström, 2009; Qvist, 2017). Nevertheless, a certain degree of decoupling clearly occurred as a result of actors at different political levels perceiving policy problems and solutions differently.

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

167

¨ 6.4 Ostersund---A History Marked by the Moderate Reception of Immigrants The nature of the local immigration policy of Östersund changed over the studied years. Whereas the early years of the 2010s saw relatively low levels of immigrant admission, the levels increased substantially in 2013, culminated in 2015, and thereafter tended to decline. We start by analysing the situation before the migrant crisis at the time the municipality itself reached annual agreements with the government. Informants revealed that local government officials and politicians were quizzed regarding the reasons for agreeing to the number of immigrants admitted. The interviewees said the reasons were based on an analysis of the local conditions, were by and large consistent, and intertwined with each other. Population growth and ensuring a supply of skills were the justifications that dominated this narrative. As a hinterland community with long distances to the more urban areas of the country, Östersund is faced with specific challenges as a result of the tendency towards urbanization that has been particularly prominent in Sweden. Immigration was thus predominantly driven by a need to secure a workforce to respond to the current and future demands of the local labour market. The aspiration to grow the community appears to have permeated the municipal organisation. One of the leading politicians of the governing majority between 2014 and 2018 referred to a liberal and welcoming attitude and a positive response to individuals who actually wanted to settle in this part of the country (Leading Politician 2, Östersund Municipality). Although only rarely explicitly mentioned in interviews, humanitarian reasons for receiving immigrants were also present. These were described as forming the basis of the standpoints taken. One of the local government officials described these reasons as more instrumental and originating from the government and later enforced through vertical venues via the SMA and the County Administrative Board. Even though immigrant volumes originated from suggestions made by representatives of the government, this was part of a negotiation in which the initial proposal from government agencies was perceived as a determinant of the final agreement (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). The actual autonomy exercised by the municipality was limited within such an institutional structure. This finding diverges from prior Swedish case study research to some extent in that the latter refers to how the government approached local governments “in a diplomatic and non-coercive manner” (Qvist, 2012, p. 219).

168

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

6.4.1

The Way in Which Immigrant Admission Has Evolved

Organising immigrant admission requires the involvement of several departments within the municipal administration and internal horizontal relations are activated as a consequence. However, the main responsibility for this in Östersund belongs to the Integration Services unit of the Social and Labour Market department, previously called the Social department. Another unit within this department handles unaccompanied minors. The unit is tasked with organising the admission of immigrants who are assigned to Östersund, giving advice and support to immigrants, and ensuring internal and external cooperation (Alirani et al., 2019). Prior to 2017 the municipality distinguished between issues related to immigrant reception and those related to integration. Hence, this meant local government officials often found themselves working in either of these areas. The structure was changed in 2017. The practicalities of this involved an assistant from the municipality meeting an assigned immigrant arriving in Östersund at the airport or train station and taking the individual to his or her allocated apartment (Local Government Official 1, Östersund Municipality). One of the local government officials described the advantages of being resettled in Östersund as follows: “When you come to Östersund as an immigrant, you get a first-hand contract for an apartment … I think it is really crucial to how well you integrate” (Local Government Official 5, Östersund Municipality). Such practicalities were followed by public officials assisting with other activities related to language training, civic orientation, schooling for children, contacts with agencies, and social support. Although such activities covered all immigrants assigned to the municipality, the experience of receiving quota refugees was particularly singled out in interviews. The Integration Service is tasked with providing support for the specific needs of this group. The Integration Service was described by an interviewee as “A special unit that can manage that ” (Local Government Official 1, Östersund Municipality). Related activities are wholly financed by the standard funding from the government that accompanies each immigrant. Hence no additional funding from the municipality is allocated to the Integration Service (Local Government Official 5, Östersund Municipality). Although adjustments have been made as a result of the diminishing levels of immigrants received since then, such as having officials work on issues related

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

169

to both the reception and integration of immigrants, the unit as a whole has been retained. The noticeably increasing levels of immigrants the municipality handled in 2013 and the years thereafter affected both the way in which immigrant reception was organised and the policies governing it. Whereas organisation was strengthened to increase capacity, the policies became formalised. The expanded organisation that was in place by 2015 was intended to handle some 250 to 300 incoming individuals a year (Leading Politician 3, Östersund Municipality). In 2014 a new role with a more strategic mandate was created and placed at the top management level of the municipality (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). One of the tasks of this position was to develop a strategy that encompassed both immigration and integration policy. The strategy was implemented in 2016. Even though practical strategic work was an administrative issue, the content was politically formulated. During these hectic years the political organisation of the municipality was restructured to meet the new demands of increased immigration. In late 2014 a more informal group of leading politicians from the municipal executive board formed a working group to address relevant and often acute integration issues related to the increasing levels of reception. These included objectives that required quick decisions such as ensuring sufficient housing facilities as well as more long-term issues such as strategy work. The working group was formalised in a committee to which representatives from the executive board were appointed. Although the committee only held meetings between April 2017 and October 2018, such an organisational transformation enabled politicians to make real-time decisions (Leading Politician 3, Östersund Municipality). The strategy was influenced by politicians from the aforementioned group and committee and provided further arguments in favour of a somewhat liberal admission of immigrants. It stated that immigration from outside Europe would be the most important resource to address the demographic challenges facing the municipality involving future requirements for citizens and labour (Östersund municipality, 2016). Since an objective of the strategy was to develop relations with civil society, organisation at the central level in 2017 was strengthened further with the addition of a role tasked with coordinating community relations (Local Government Official 4, Östersund Municipality). Organisation of the central level required enhanced relations as a result of the increasing numbers of actors and internal administrative tiers involved.

170

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

The consequences of enforcement of the Settlement Act in 2016 were mainly perceived as negative by municipal actors. Objections to the reform were both principled and practical in nature. The principle of local autonomy is particularly important to local governments in Sweden. Such legislation was perceived by both politicians and local government officials as a circumvention of local autonomy by the government exploiting its authority. Nevertheless, objections were primarily focused on practical obstacles. One of the officials related the strong organisational capacity that had been built up to the level of immigrant admission and stated that: “We have built up our organisation … it is frustrating not to continue at a level we can decide ourselves ” (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). In Östersund the lack of local autonomy and the way in which it affected organisational circumstances and administrative processes was perceived as a problem in that the subsequently limited levels of immigrant admission would be a risk to the quality of immigrant reception. Theoretically this can be linked to national and local policies being decoupled and not coordinated with each other (Scholten & Penninx, 2016) and such challenges have been identified at the national level (see Chapter 3). One of the politicians who was part of the ruling majority at the time the new law was enforced formulated this obstacle as: “To have a reasonable activity … requires a certain number of [incoming] persons ” (Leading Politician 2, Östersund Municipality). The declining number of immigrants as a consequence of the new law has created challenges for the municipality since 2018 and affected its organisation. Legislative changes similarly affected networks for cooperation that were often project-financed. Their existence was impacted by diminished local autonomy concerning immigrant admission. While the central organisation had been established and had managed to grow partly on its own merits by attracting external financing, cutbacks were instead made to units in the various departments and led to internal disagreements (Local Government Official 4, Östersund Municipality; Local Government Official 5, Östersund Municipality). The consequences of such a swinging pendulum were periods in which activities expanded followed by periods in which they diminished. There was a serious impact on the local administration, not least the managers in charge, counteracting the municipality’s ambitions for continuity (Leading Politician 1, Östersund Municipality).

6

6.4.2

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

171

Political Conflicts and How they Transformed Local Immigration Policy

Political views on the admission of immigrants to Östersund have historically been characterised by a considerable level of consensus rather than a politicised issue to any noticeable extent. However, once the question of immigrant admission was brought to the fore nationally differences of opinions also arose in Östersund. Such clashes reached their peak in 2016 in the wake of the migrant crisis when an annual reception of about 250– 300 immigrants was proposed by the municipality as a desired target. Since this was higher than forecast by the SMA it was widely assumed that a significant proportion of immigrants would organise their own accommodation in the municipality. However, there was little consensus in reaching the decision about such a high number of immigrants. Local media reported that the Moderate Party and the Sweden Democrats argued against the proposal for a higher level of immigrant reception and did not support it. All other parties voted in favour of the suggestion (Östersundsposten, 2016-10-26). Such a situation (i.e., one in which there was little consensus) can be interpreted as something of a watershed moment since it articulated political differences that expanded further into the political landscape (Leading Politician 3, Östersund Municipality). Local government officials also recounted the effect such political differences had on the discourse surrounding these issues when other topics emerged: “It was more about problems with segregation and costs … that kind of tone became more and more prevalent ” (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). The emergence of local immigration policy as a more politically contested issue also affected the municipal administration that managed this policy area. The situation led to the administration becoming more cautious. One of the officials expressed it in this way: “Since the same consensus is not really present [anymore], the administration hesitates a little. You do not really advance until you get clarity in where we [the municipality] stand” (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). Despite this being an example of diverging opinions between the governing majority that took office in 2018, it was obviously not deemed important enough to obstruct the political alliance. While there was still a consistent majority for a liberal policy, we articulate in this section the way in which increasing politicisation and the different tone adopted by politicians in the discourse surrounding immigration appear to have affected the actions of local government officials.

172

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

This demonstrates that governing is not only expressed through direct and explicit measures. This aligns with findings from previous research that argue that indirect forms of governance are present within this policy area (Qvist, 2017). 6.4.3

Internal and External Governing of Local Immigration Policy

An important factor to consider when analysing local immigration policy is the relationship between politicians and public officials. The general impression from interviews conducted is that such a relationship worked smoothly since it was based on a common understanding of how best to handle this policy area. Although taking a liberal and welcoming policy stance was an explicitly political idea, there is material evidence that the local administration had a great deal of discretion at its disposal to achieve such aims (Leading Politician 1, Östersund Municipality; Leading Politician 2, Östersund Municipality; Local Government Official 5, Östersund Municipality). This corroborates recent arguments on the often crucial role played by local government officials (Paquet, 2020). The situation becomes even more nuanced when taking into consideration the internal disagreements that existed within the local administration. This was a consequence of the way in which different units were not only funded but also had to argue to ensure their own funding (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality). Ultimately, such disagreements related to the way in which the administration should be organised and the tasks it should manage. Immigrant admission to a municipality involves a number of actors. The general impression from representatives of the municipality and other actors is that successful models of cooperation were reached in Östersund. The relationship with the SMA in terms of immigrant allocation to the municipality was described as positive and flexible. The public authority was perceived as pragmatic and able to match people to the specific supply of accommodation available in the municipality. Other actors along with civil society were also involved in immigration reception. This had a great deal in common with ideas of governance characterised by a multitude of actors (Klijn, 2008). Coordination between the municipality and the PES has been regulated through local agreements since 2012. Such agreements make it clear which actor is responsible for each of the different

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

173

practical obligations including the initial phase of immigration (Public Employment Service, Östersund, 2017-06-14). At the regional level the County Administrative Board functioned as an important catalyst and maintained the related networks (Local Government Official 4, Östersund Municipality). Not all aspects of state–local relations were experienced as positive though. One of the politicians representing the opposition parties between 2014 and 2018 referred to how the government forced responsibilities on local governments without giving full economic compensation. This was particularly the case with compensation for unaccompanied minors and general funding for received immigrants (Leading Politician 1, Östersund Municipality). The view that the legislative consequences of the migrant crisis were problematic for Östersund was not restricted to the municipality. Since implementation of the law the only remaining room for manoeuvre lay in adjustments to the levels of reception that can be made between municipalities within the same county. A public official from the County Administrative Board explained that the limited number of immigrants assigned to the county of Jämtland in recent years created discontent and frustration in municipalities, and made immigrants into something of a commodity to compete over (Public Official, County Administrative Board Jämtland). The municipality of Östersund, as the dominant centre of the region, accounts for about half the population of the county and in government quotas it was allotted the largest numbers of immigrants amongst its peers. Östersund nonetheless distributed some of its share of immigrants to its smaller neighbouring municipalities. Such redistributions were agreed through collective actions by the political leaderships of the municipalities involved. One of the politicians tasked with this issue between 2014 and 2018 explained why Östersund abstained from receiving its full allocation of immigrants. First, since total numbers of assigned immigrants had been limited since 2018, a smaller number of immigrants was not significant. Second, the dominance of Östersund in the region required some diplomacy when it came to dealing with the smaller municipalities (Leading Politician 3, Östersund Municipality). In general, this influenced local immigration policy and clearly affected the very discretion of the municipalities themselves. When asked a direct question on whether the municipality possessed any autonomy regarding immigrant reception after the reform, a public official at the municipality replied that:

174

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

That is significantly more difficult. We are somewhat of an exception in this context if you compare with municipalities in the south that perceive [the new legislation] to have been restrictive since they have been forced to receive additional [immigrants]. For our part it has been the opposite. (Local Government Official 3, Östersund Municipality)

The view that the room for manoeuvre considerably diminished is a recurrent theme in the interviews conducted including both local government officials and politicians. The only example given on how Östersund still possesses discretion over the level of reception is through redistribution taking place at the regional level. However, the outcome of such negotiations with the other municipalities involved did not coincide with the ambitions of Östersund. On the contrary, as explained above it resulted in immigrant admission being even more limited. Another factor of the relationship between municipalities and the government that had an effect on the immigration activity of municipalities was the establishment in the region of a local office of the SMA, which was tasked with finding accommodation for asylum seekers. The first such regional office was established in 2012. As mentioned, it was tasked with finding immigrant accommodation in the region including publicly financed accommodation maintained by private companies and accommodation entirely run by the SMA (Public Official, County Administrative Board Jämtland). As a consequence of the regional presence of the SMA individuals wanting to spend their asylum process in the nearby area appeared to prefer to organise their own accommodation in Östersund after receiving a residence permit. After the wave of immigrants reached its peak, the number of asylum facilities gradually diminished and in 2019 the SMA completely left the region including its own regional office. In a newspaper article jointly signed by politicians, members of civil society, and representatives of the business sector, general dissatisfaction with this withdrawal from the region was articulated (Arnesson et al., 2019-0321), partly because it was an example of the government disregarding migration policy as an instrument for regional policy and partly because it ignored local circumstances. However, it should be kept in mind that the regional presence of the SMA did enhance cooperation. This was especially true of the phase in which the greatest numbers of immigrants were received. One of the leading politicians from the former majority stated that: “It was absolutely necessary that the SMA was present in Östersund … It became so much easier when they were in place” (Leading Politician

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

175

2, Östersund Municipality). Hence, the retraction of the agency and its activities from the region had a two-fold effect on the municipality. First, it put at risk the good cooperation that had been built up between all the actors involved. Second, reducing the amount of accommodation available for asylum seekers considerably lowered the number of self-settled immigrants—the very immigrants the municipality wanted to attract since they were not included in the allotted quota. On the other hand, although interviews showed that specific municipal support for individuals who were self-settled in the municipality was limited, both public and private actors involved in immigrant admission had requested such efforts (Public Official, Public Employment Service Östersund; Representative of the Business Sector, Östersund). However, one study that conducted interviews with self-settled immigrants about their experience of coming to Östersund concluded that the support they received from the municipality was too general and insufficient (Alirani et al., 2019). The decision not to help self-settled immigrants once the SMA had left the region was taken as a result of the stance taken by the municipality. However, this stance has since shifted and the local agreement that was in place at the time of the SMA was adopted according to which some information and support was to be given (Public Employment Service, Östersund, 2017-06-14). This was because of an awareness of that this group needed similar services as other immigrants. Nonetheless, the municipality still had no outreach activity for immigrants who settled within the municipality on their own accord. The only support provided was given within the boundaries of the total capacity of the administration (Local Government Official 5, Östersund Municipality).

6.5

Concluding Remarks

We now turn to specific assessment of the two aspects of local immigration policy that our research questions are focused on. In this section we discuss and analyse the governance structure and the ensuing policy output of local immigration policy. In accordance with our general research design, this analysis distinguishes between the period before and after the migrant crisis and its legislative changes. It draws on empirical information from the three cases presented.

176

6.5.1

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Avesta—From a Liberal Policy to One that is More Restrictive Under Both Vertical and Multi-Level Governance

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the municipality of Avesta has long received immigrants. They have come to the municipality through agreements with the state, as self-settled immigrants fuelled by asylum accommodation run by the SMA office located in the municipality, or through family reunifications. However, as described, the level of reception into the municipality increased dramatically from 2013. It reached a peak in 2015 when the municipality received 725 immigrants. A level of reception of this magnitude would not have been possible had the necessary structures not already been put in place and tested. Not only had the municipality established an organisation specially built for immigrant reception, it also had at its disposal institutions and organisations capable of handling the situation. Policy development in Avesta is based on the historical roots of migration that stretch back beyond recent decades. Migration has a strong tradition and history in the municipality. Avesta can be described as an industrial community with a long tradition in steel production, which has historically needed labour. The purpose of immigrant reception was to provide the community and the industries with labour. Empirical material shows that the main purpose behind the liberal policy in Avesta was to satisfy the demand for labour. Furthermore, the policies created and the measures taken in the municipality had long-term goals one of which was to get people to stay in Avesta and establish themselves in the municipality in line with the instrumental lines of reasoning proposed by Steen (2010). Although the policy agenda found in the municipality was based on policy at the governmental level, it was transformed and adapted to local conditions and objectives. The governing process that emerged as a consequence of the governance that took place was multi-level in character. Although the different levels proved to be of great importance for policy formulation, the defining characteristic of the governing process was that actors were interdependent. Relations in the governance structure can thus be characterised by the high degree of interdependence between actors at the various levels of management. The governance of the local immigration policy still had traits that could be traced back to the government and public authorities such as the County Administrative Board, but it was nevertheless adapted to local conditions and political goals.

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

177

After the cut-off point in 2016, empirical material shows that the municipality of Avesta became critical of government control and tried to influence it. This mainly concerned the SMA’s asylum accommodation in the municipality, which affected the number of self-settled immigrants finding their way to Avesta. Although the municipality tried to get the SMA to abolish asylum housing, this request was not acted upon. Even though the request indicated a desire on behalf of the municipality to take a more restrictive stance, this should be understood against the backdrop of the municipality to end up being assigned no immigrants. Nevertheless, Avesta did not try to influence the government to allocate more immigrants to the municipality. The more restrictive policy output that Avesta adopted after the Settlement Act was a consequence of the large number of self-settled immigrants and family-reunification immigrants who continued to come to the municipality. As evident in the empirical material we collected, the municipality experienced a major limitation in how it was able to affect its local immigration policy: policy output went from being liberal to more restrictive over the years. We note the governing process still retained elements of multi-level governance, but it was more dominated by elements of vertical governance and authority than before the cut-off point. Despite the policy agenda in Avesta previously aspiring to address local concerns, it became subject to stricter government enforcement to achieve national ambitions. This meant that the defining characteristics of the governing process indicated authoritarian elements through the enforcement of vertical policy as well as features of interdependence channelled through multi-level processes. 6.5.2 Vallentuna—A Continuously Restrictive Policy that Transformed Horizontal Modes of Governance to Vertical and Multi-Level Ones An examination of the time preceding the migrant crisis showed immigrant reception in Vallentuna was very limited. Although the municipality admitted almost no immigrants, it did admit a limited number of unaccompanied minors, something that municipalities could be obliged to do from 2014. Therefore, immigrants who arrived in the municipality during this period were mainly self-settled. Since this meant that the municipality had limited experience of working with assigned immigrants, there was almost no policy let alone organisation to handle immigration reception issues on a larger scale in a structured way. This led to immigrant

178

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

reception being restrictive in that it was based on instrumental reasons mainly connected to the housing situation (Steen, 2010). The municipality took full advantage of having a local immigration policy that was restrictive by maintaining the view that other municipalities should receive immigrants—especially those that had expressed the wish to do so and possessed available housing. The policy agenda in Vallentuna was largely founded on the belief that immigrant reception was not necessarily a municipal responsibility. From this perspective Vallentuna saw itself as an island in a system rather than part of this system. The focus was on costs as was clearly evident after 2016. The governing process can be characterised as horizontal and in some senses isolated from the national level in terms of making active choices locally to develop a local immigration policy that included coordination through intra-governmental networks at the local level. With such a policy in mind the municipality chose an approach that made good use of the local scope for action to stop the development of a local immigration policy. In that respect a localist perspective was strong in Vallentuna (Dekker et al., 2015). Before 2016 the defining characteristics of the governing process were trust in their own organisation and its ability to handle a restricted number of immigrants because of the constraints the housing situation in the municipality. After the migrant crisis and its associated reforms the municipality was forced to set up a local organisation and develop procedures to manage the number of immigrants placed in the municipality. The policy agenda in the municipality of Vallentuna revolved around national politics and central government steering, Vallentuna reacted to national policy by making maximum use of its local discretion despite it being limited. Policy formulation in the municipality of Vallentuna thus involved implementing government assignments that were subjected to a certain extent to restricted local adaptation. The impact the national level of immigrant reception had on the politics and procedures developed in the municipality of Vallentuna was substantial after the cut-off point. The defining characteristics of the governing process that emerged were marked by the authority of the government and the reactionary approach of the municipality to central government policy. This was especially evident because of the limited nature of local adaptations in Vallentuna. Empirical material from the municipality of Vallentuna provided evidence of an approach in which immigrants were to be regarded in much the same way as any other municipal citizen after the two-year establishment period. Although this affected efforts made in the municipality and central government and

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

179

its authorities expected more long-term commitments, the municipality had a more short-term perspective that extended only as far as the end of the establishment period. This describes a governing process in Vallentuna that can be characterised by vertical governance carried out through regulation. There were also hopes at the local level to adopt a policy in which some elements could be decoupled from national ambitions and in so doing maintain a localist approach (Dekker et al., 2015; Scholten, 2013). Finally, the output of policy in Vallentuna can still be seen as restrictive since the municipality endeavoured to hinder the long-term settlement of immigrants in the municipality. The way this was expressed in the empirical material was that the municipality applied the two-year rule for housing while investigating options for immigrants to obtain housing in another municipality. This is strong evidence of the restrictive policy the municipality of Vallentuna applied after the introduction of the Settlement Act. 6.5.3

Östersund—A Continuously Liberal Policy Marked by Both Vertical and Multi-Level Governance

The immigrant reception policy adopted by Östersund clearly shows that agreed admission in the early years of the decade was quite moderate. Thereafter the policy shifted to become much more liberal between 2013 and 2015. Policy changes were particularly dramatic between 2012 and 2013 when the municipality increased its agreed reception by 200 individuals. The motivations behind adopting a liberal standpoint on local immigration policy were mainly economic and demographic in character and in line with Steen’s (2010) classification of instrumental reasons. More specifically, the empirical material collected described the municipality as driven by population growth and ensuring there would be enough people of working age to meet current and future demands of the labour market. Empirical material made scant mention of the other underpinning motivations relating to solidarity and humanitarian aspects. Although it initially appears that the approach was solely down to the municipality, a more complex governance structure emerges when the role played by the government is assessed. The government’s initial proposal for the number of immigrants to be received was perceived by the municipality as a determinant of the final agreement, which makes it reasonable to question whether this process contained any opportunity for negotiations. Therefore, the governing process relied more on the authority of the

180

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

government being channelled through the SMA and the County Administrative Board, both of which were perceived by the municipality as strong executers of policy. However, another interpretation of the empirical material cannot ignore that the motives and timing of the local government at least partly coincided with pressure from the national government and its authorities to find additional capacity for the increasing level of immigrants, indicating that recursive and interactive elements were not completely absent (Schiller, 2018). Another finding that strengthens this interpretation is the fact that the municipality expanded and developed its political and administrative organisation and at the same time established a number of key positions in the local administration to meet increasing demands from a substantially higher number of received immigrants. Hence it seems reasonable to refer to this as a policy agenda whose outcomes were linked to both nationally identified challenges as well as those in the local contexts mentioned above. This brings us to assessing the defining characteristics of the governing process . The mutual interests of the government and Östersund point to an interdependent process in which the actors involved expressed their mutual dependence on one another. While both the direct and long-term consequences of the migrant crisis had a great impact on many Swedish municipalities, Östersund had the benefit of having already established a new organisation in 2014 with the capacity to administer and support a larger influx of immigrants. From many viewpoints the decisions that drove this outcome appear to have been a fortunate choice. Not only did it strengthen the municipality’s capabilities during the crisis years when the municipal sector in general was highly strained, but it also formed a political direction that was relevant to the long-standing aim of the municipality: one that promoted the increased liberal reception of immigrants. Despite the actual level of reception being almost entirely in the hands of the government since 2016, Östersund nonetheless tried to pursue its own ambitions. With a new and expanded organisation and the belief that demographic challenges demanded an inflow of immigrants from outside Europe, the declining numbers of immigrants allotted the municipality in the years following the migrant crisis was perceived not only as a concern but also a long-term threat to the goals of Östersund. Moreover, having immigrant reception at a level that was too limited was seen not only as jeopardising the quality of the process of admission but also put financial pressure on the local organisation. Hence it should come as no surprise

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

181

that the empirical material refers to the way in which the new legislation and its imposed quotas curtailed the municipality’s more liberal policy. Had local autonomy not been that limited, this would reasonably have led to the decoupling of ambitions of Östersund and the national government (Scholten & Penninx, 2016). Ratification of the Settlement Act also affected the governance structure. In the county of Jämtland the County Administrative Board gathered its municipalities to discuss potential departures from quotas given by the government. These examples indicate a policy agenda that was at least partly open to both national and local considerations. However, the local influence should not be exaggerated since testimonies given in the empirical material mainly indicate that the municipalities perceived themselves as confined by the new law. Such a distinct form of government steering also affected the governing process . The municipal perspective was that the government used its authority through rules, regulations, and even financial instruments without considering local circumstances. The SMA’s decision to completely close its asylum accommodation in the region in 2019 corroborates this view. Taken together these vertical elements suggest that the defining characteristics of the governing process shifted to become more authoritarian. Highly pertinent here is the narrative surrounding how the limited levels of immigrants assigned to the region created frustration and turned individuals into something of a commodity. Although collective actions built on trust or interdependence may still have existed, as borne out by Östersund abstaining to receive a smaller number of immigrants to help the smaller municipalities, such narratives do not appear to portray the predominant situation.

References Alirani, G., Giritli Nygren, K., & Nyhlén, S. (2019). ‘Det är inte så lätt och samtidigt, det är inte så svårt’: Slutrapport från projektet: Ökade kunskaper om Östersunds kommuns integrationsservice. Forum för Genusvetenskap, Mittuniversitet. Arnesson, E., Nilsson, S., Persson, K., Bergström, J., Vomacka, P., Selberg, G., Wäppling, J., Svensson, B., Bergman, M., Westin, M., Hansson, S., Danielsson, D., Persson, J., Kärngard, T., Häggkvist, A., Olofsson, L.-E., Eklund, K., Brande, H., Nygren Sundvidsson, C., … Ryder Widén, E. (201903-21). The asylum policy strikes against the establishment in the north. Svenska Dagbladet.

182

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Avesta municipality, Sweden Democrats. (2014-12-18). Motion on limiting the refugee reception to Avesta. Avesta municipality, Sweden Democrats. (2019-11-25). Motion on preparation of a migration financial statement. Caponio, T. (2010). Conclusion: Making sense of local migration policy arenas. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The Local Dimension of Migration Policymaking. Amsterdam University Press. Dekker, R., Emilsson, H., Krieger, B., & Scholten, P. (2015). A local dimension of integration policies? International Migration Review, 49(3), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1111/imre.12133 Filomeno, F. A. (2017). Theories of local immigration policy. Palgrave Macmillan. Hammar, T. (Ed.). (1985). European immigration policy: A comparative study. Cambridge University Press. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97 (2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649 Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Complexity theory and public administration: What’s new? Public Management Review, 10(3), 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/147 19030802002675 Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2015). Reception of refugees in Swedish municipalities: Evidences from comparative case studies. Migration and Development, 4(1), 55–71. Lidén, G., & Nyhlén, J. (2016). Structure and agency in Swedish municipalities’ reception of unaccompanied minors. Journal of Refugee Studies, 29(1), 39–59. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fev015 Meyers, E. (2004). International immigration policy: A theoretical and comparative analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. Money, J. (1999). Fences and neighbors: The political geography of immigration control. Cornell University Press. Paquet, M. (2015). Bureaucrats as immigration policy-makers: The case of subnational immigration activism in Canada, 1990–2010. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 41(11), 1815–1835. https://doi.org/10.1080/136 9183X.2015.1023185 Paquet, M. (2020). Immigration, bureaucracies and policy formulation: The case of Quebec. International Migration, 58(1), 166–181. https://doi.org/10. 1111/imig.12555 Pierre, J., & Sundström, G. (2009). Samhällsstyrning i förändring. Liber. Pollitt, C. (2003). Joined-up government: A survey. Political Studies Review, 1(1), 34–49. Public Employment Service, Östersund. (2017-06-14). Local activity plan. PwC. (2017). Audit of refugee activities.

6

LOCAL IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE CASE STUDIES SELECTED

183

Qvist, M. (2012). Styrning av lokala integrationsprogram. Institutioner, nätverk och professionella normer inom det svenska flyktingmottagandet. Linköpings universitet. Qvist, M. (2017). Meta-governance and network formation in collaborative spaces of uncertainty: The case of Swedish refugee integration policy. Public Administration, 95(2), 498–511. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12310 Representative of the business sector, Östersund. (n.d.). Schiller, M. (2018). The local governance of immigrant integration in Europe: The state of the art and a conceptual model for future research. In T. Caponio, P. Scholten & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of the governance of migration and diversity in cities (pp. 204–215). Routledge. https:// doi.org/10.4324/9781351108478-20 Scholten, P., & Penninx, R. (2016). The multilevel governance of migration and integration. In B. Garcés-Mascareñas & R. Penninx (Eds.), Integration Processes and Policies in Europe (pp. 91–108). Springer, Cham. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-21674-4_6 Scholten, P. W. A. (2013). Agenda dynamics and the multi-level governance of intractable policy controversies. Policy Sciences, 46(3), 217–236. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11077-012-9170-x SFS 2016:38. (2016). Lag om mottagande av vissa nyanlända invandrare för bosättning. Steen, A. (2010). Crossing the local community border: Immigrant settlement in Norway. In B. Bengtsson, P. Strömblad, & A.-H. Bay (Eds.), Diversity, inclusion and citizenship in Scandinavia (pp. 187–214). Cambridge Scholars. Vallentuna Municipality. (2018-05-03). Report on housing contracts for newly arrived. Vallentuna Municipality. (2018-01-12). Response to the audit review of the municipality’s refugee reception. Varsanyi, M. W. (2010). Local and state politics of immigration. In R. Denemark (Ed.), The international studies encyclopedia. Blackwell. Zapata-Barrero, R., & Barker, F. (2014). Multilevel governance of immigration in multinational states: ‘Who governs?’ reconsidered. In E. Hepburn & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), The politics of immigration in multilevel states: Governance and political parties. Palgrave Macmillan. Östersund municipality. (2016). Integration strategy—2020. Östersundsposten. (2016-10-26). Municipal council in Östersund.

CHAPTER 7

Local Integration Policy in Swedish Municipalities

7.1

Introduction

In this chapter we present local integration policy as conducted by Swedish municipalities. In accordance with the theoretical framework described in Chapter 2, results from this assessment can be used to address what subnational political systems deliver in terms of integration policy. As stated throughout this book our examination focuses on the socioeconomic dimension of the integration concept (Penninx & GarcésMascareñas, 2016). Our principal reason is that this is the main dimension of responsibility for local municipalities and it is where they have the greatest potential to enhance the situation for immigrants. In contrast to quantitative descriptions of immigrant reception in Swedish municipalities, there are no established variables to illustrate integration efforts. We deploy a multi-stage strategy to address this challenge. First, the socioeconomic dimension of integration needs to be refined in terms of its different underlying spheres. We distinguish between integration through the labour market , through the education system, and through individuals’ housing situation. This is in line with Penninx and Garcés-Mascareñas (2016, p. 15) division of different dimensions of integration in which the socioeconomic dimension particularly concerns institutional facilities for immigrants to find work, housing, and education (see also Ager & Strang, 2008).1 Second, for each of these different spheres of social integration we use a number of appropriate indicators © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 G. Lidén and J. Nyhlén, Local Migration Policy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-83293-3_7

185

186

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

and divide them into output and outcome variables. We define output variables as those that display what the municipal system produces in terms of local integration policy. Such activities are closely related to whether non-policy or an active policy prevails, as described in Chapter 2. Outcome variables, on the other hand, provide us with information concerning the long-term result of integration in these different spheres. However, we do not aim to look into any particular causal linkage between output and outcome variables. For example, municipal investments in labour market programmes for unemployed immigrants will not inevitably lead to this group improving their chances in the labour market, although this would be the very goal of such policies. Causal claims need to address at least three aspects of influencing factors to be valid. First, there are factors concerning the quality and magnitude of the programme. Second, the attributes and conditions of participants will naturally influence the outcome and that will differ between municipalities. Third, influencing factors can also be contextual, such as the circumstances of local employers and their specific needs for labour, as well as the economic situation both locally and elsewhere. As a result of the complex interplay between these parameters scholars struggle to explain variations found at the municipal level. However, it has been argued that unexplained variations exist in local integration outcomes that may be due to local institutional efforts and successful governance of the actors involved (Liljeberg & Åslund, 2020; SKL, 2015; see also Andersson, 2016; Ruist, 2018). Since our ambition is not to quantitatively explain such linkages the above-mentioned caveat is less of a problem. It should be kept in mind that our presentation of statistics in this chapter is descriptive and is a way to illustrate differences in both output and outcome variables across Swedish municipalities.2 Considering the temporal focus of this chapter it starts immediately after the introduction of the Establishment Reform in 2010, but different time series have been applied as a consequence of the data available. However, it should be kept in mind that the immigrant population varied over the years either because new immigrants in our classification entered or moved from municipalities or because they died or fell outside the age group. Throughout this chapter we use data from government authorities and data from the KOLADA database. Details are provided in Appendix A.

7

7.2

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

187

Integration Through the Labour Market

Establishment through the labour market is probably the most intuitive route to socioeconomic integration for immigrants. In Sweden this is still a challenge for many immigrants and is often highlighted as taking a significant amount of time (Andersson Joona, 2020; Eklund & Larsson, 2020; Ruist, 2018). However, variation in getting established is vast according to different sub-sets of the heterogeneous group of immigrants received in municipalities. The importance of immigrants entering the labour market has also become a key issue from a policy perspective. In particular, the Establishment Reform of 2010 (The Swedish Government, 2009) tried to get things moving more quickly with the unemployed immigrant being expected to actively look for employment and being supported by the government to do so (Lidén et al., 2015; Qvist, 2016). For more details see Chapter 3. Table 7.1 shows employment rates for immigrants received in municipalities between 2011 and 2018. The population of immigrants received is divided into cohorts of immigrants received in municipalities in the same year. It should be noted that in line with international standards the classification of an individual as employed is set at a minimal level and no information is specified on the extent or type of employment. Taking these caveats into consideration the table reveals that employment opportunities were scarce at the beginning of the settlement period, the time during which immigrants normally participate in the establishment programme. Employment rates ranged from 3.2 to 6.3% for the different cohorts in the same year that they were received in the municipalities. Table 7.1 Employment rates (in %) for immigrants received in municipalities (2011–2018)

Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants Immigrants

received received received received received received received received

in in in in in in in in

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

3.2

9.4 4.4

18.8 14.6 5.6

25.6 23.9 16.0 4.6

35.7 31.9 26.9 15.6 3.7

48.5 43.8 37.7 31.6 15.8 4.6

56.0 52.3 45.6 43.0 32.5 19.1 6.3

60.1 57.6 51.7 50.7 47.4 37.8 20.7 5.4

188

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Overall, there is also a pattern revealing that results improved over time. For instance, almost 50% of the cohort received in municipalities in 2015 found employment during their fourth year, whereas the corresponding cohort from 2011 only reached this level in their sixth year. Swedish studies that have set higher criteria for employment, specified as a certain level of earnings, are more ambivalent as to whether improvements can be seen (Åslund et al., 2017; Ruist, 2018). The group of immigrants received in municipalities was highly heterogeneous. More detail can be seen by dividing this group into further, although broad, categories. In Fig. 7.1 the 2011 cohort is broken down into men and women and reported separately. The gap between these two categories is clear and shows consistently higher employment rates for male immigrants than females. Over the time series there was a tendency for this gap to increase in absolute size. Although the existence of such differences are well known from previous research, studies that take longer time spans into account and have different definitions of employment argue that this gender gap tends to decrease, in contrast to this particular example (Andersson Joona, 2020; Ruist, 2018). Figure 7.2 also shows the 2011 cohort, but this time based on individuals’ different levels of education. Three categories are applied: individuals who have had compulsory education, upper-secondary education, and finally individuals who have had post-secondary education and above. In general, individuals who have had compulsory education faced the 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 7.1 Employment rates (in %) in 2011–2018 for male (solid line) and female (dotted line) immigrants received in municipalities in 2011

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

189

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 7.2 Employment rates (in %) in 2011–2018 for immigrants with compulsory education (solid line), upper-secondary education (dashed line), and post-secondary education (dotted line) received in municipalities in 2011

greatest challenges in getting established in the labour market. Individuals who have had higher levels of education generally found it much easier to become employed. Human capital theories state that a higher level of education will lead to easier inclusion in the labour market (Chiswick, 1978), which has also been found to be valid in the reception of refugees in Sweden (Bevelander, 2011) including the effect brought about by establishment programmes (Andersson Joona et al., 2017). Although the differences between the two higher levels of education were small overall, based on these data it seems that upper-secondary education appeared to be more favourable in the long run than post-secondary education in relation to the labour market. Geographical variations in labour market integration are to be expected in the Swedish context. Previous research has shown that immigrants’ chances of becoming employed differ depending on the region of placement (Andersson, 2016). Another example was provided by Vogiazides and Mondani (2020) who observe that different regional conditions appear to facilitate labour market integration. In their study of Sweden they find that both the Stockholm region and, at the opposite end of the spectrum, small city/rural areas all over Sweden show the highest proportion of immigrants finding employment.

190

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

7.2.1

Output Variables of Labour Market Ambitions

We now compare what municipalities delivered in terms of the efforts they made to bring about labour market integration. It is difficult to quantify municipal commitments since such undertakings are not required by the government and there is no specific role in municipal documentation relating to labour market integration of the immigrant population. Even though municipalities are not obliged to, an overwhelming majority of municipalities in Sweden pursue their own labour market policy. In 2016 only 3.5% of municipalities did not conduct their own activities (Forslund et al., 2019). Since this is not a mandatory policy area the variations in scope and working methods are vast (Ulmestig, 2020). This is evident in what municipalities spend on their own labour market policy. When looking closer at such data, it becomes clear that the average cost Swedish municipalities incurred for labour market policy increased over the time period with it totalling about SEK 480 per capita in 2018. For our purposes though, the distribution across municipalities is of greater interest and the standard deviation increased slightly over the years studied. A few empirical examples provide more insight. In 2018 the municipalities of Smedjebacken, Laxå, and Härjedalen all allocated more than SEK 1,500 per capita to this policy area, while there were other municipalities that spent nothing. The data include costs for all types of labour market policy – not only for efforts aimed solely at immigrants. Although other studies indicate immigrants are clearly over-represented among the participants in these programmes, other groups in society are also covered by such local ambitions. The Swedish system is constructed in such a way that immigrants are much more prone to participate in efforts driven by the Public Employment Service (PES). However, it is not uncommon for them to get also involved in efforts organised by the municipality (Forslund et al., 2019). Prior studies also indicate that municipalities with a higher proportion of foreign-born residents have found their costs for labour market efforts have increased (Vikman & Westerberg, 2017). In simple bivariate analyses of municipalities’ labour market efforts and the average unemployment rate of immigrants covering the years 2011–2018 the correlation coefficient ranged from 0.19 to 0.31.3 Based on previous research and these analyses it seems reasonable to assume that municipalities with a larger proportion of foreign-born residents, especially when

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

191

such immigrants are largely unemployed, generally also spend more in funding for labour market programmes. 7.2.2

Outcome variables of Labour Market Ambitions

The most obvious way to address outcome variables of labour market ambitions is to look closer at employment rates for immigrants at the municipal level and examine how they vary. This variable is presented in Fig. 7.3, once again with the classification of employment set at a low level.4 Average levels for the entire immigrant population show that average employment rates in municipalities started at slightly over 50%, fell in 2015, and thereafter increased to about 53% in 2018. The corresponding indicator only including immigrants who had been received during the three preceding years yielded lower values, as expected, but increased to about 29% in 2018.5 A closer look at the situation for 2018 enables us to fully grasp the differences. The employment rate ranged from well above 70% in several of the suburban municipalities of Stockholm down to slightly above 30% in a number of smaller municipalities in rural communities located in the centre and south of Sweden. Although the variation in immigrant employment rates between municipalities is clearly substantial, it still decreased 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 7.3 Average employment rates for immigrants (in %) in municipalities (solid line). Average employment rates for immigrants (in %) in municipalities only including immigrants received during the three preceding years (dotted line) (2011–2018)

192

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

somewhat over the entire time series. The more specific indicator that only took into account immigrants received during the preceding three years reveals similarly distinct differences between municipalities. While there is a handful of smaller or mid-sized municipalities predominantly in the north of Sweden where more than 50% of immigrants were employed, there are also municipalities of a similar size scattered around Sweden where the corresponding figure was well below 20%. In general, there is no obvious trend, which to some extent mirrors previous research indicating that employment opportunities for immigrants can be greater in both more urban as well as rural municipalities (cf. Vogiazides & Mondani, 2020). This broader measurement can be complemented with an outcome indicator that is directly related to results from the integration process: namely, the proportion of immigrants who find employment after the two-year establishment period. When it comes to employment it should be noted that this measurement includes positions subsidised by the government. The trend aligns with the measurement that reflects increasing employment rates among immigrants. Figure 7.4 is a scatter diagram reflecting the situation in both 2015 and 2018. To ensure robust results, municipalities with fewer than 10 individuals completing 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Fig. 7.4 Proportion of individuals (in %) leaving the establishment period (90 days later) with employment (municipalities, Y-axis 2018, X-axis 2015; excluding municipalities with fewer than 10 individuals leaving the establishment period in 2015 and 2018)

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

193

the establishment period in 2015 and 2018 have been excluded. As the figure shows, municipalities were highly divided when it came to labour market integration. The general trend for this variable over the years for which data are accessible was that the proportion ending the establishment period with job opportunities increased. One could argue that the levels of reception influenced the outcome of this measurement implying that both local labour markets and efforts assisting them are limited in their capacity. Although no analyses of a more detailed nature have been carried out into this matter, correlational statistics between municipal reception and this very indicator are indeed negative and significant. Obviously, conditions in the local labour market will influence outcomes, as will the characteristics of specific cohorts admitted into municipalities. Prior studies have argued that these aspects can explain about 70% of the variation in successful establishment between municipalities (SKL, 2015). The remaining proportion can partly be attributed to local conditions that are hard to measure, such as differences in local models and policies (Liljeberg & Åslund, 2020).

7.3

Integration Through the Education System

Another socioeconomic aspect concerns integration through the education system. As is the case in several other European countries (Caponio et al., 2016), the area of the Swedish education system that includes specific activities for immigrants is the responsibility of local governments. It is primarily made up of Swedish language training (Swedish For Immigrants, SFI) and civic orientation (CO). Whereas the content of SFI is easily understood, the CO aims to develop participant knowledge of human rights and essential democratic values, the rights and obligations of the individual, how Swedish society is organised, and practical everyday life (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2018). The SFI education is regulated in the national curriculum, while the CO has been less regulated and is not systematically evaluated. These two activities are open to but not mandatory for immigrants with a residence permit. However, since January 2018 the PES has had the right to oblige immigrants with limited education to take on additional further education including such activities as SFI and CO. CO education is meant to be offered to immigrants who are included within establishment programmes or immigrants who have arrived in a municipality for family reunifications. Although taking part in such education

194

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

is not mandatory, other than for those immigrants the PES can oblige to participate since the new regulation, municipalities are instructed to encourage newly arrived immigrants to participate (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2018). It is not uncommon for these activities to be provided by private companies through municipal procurement or jointly by cooperating municipalities. As already mentioned, having a higher level of education has proven to be beneficial for individual immigrants regarding labour market integration (Andersson Joona et al., 2017; Bevelander, 2011; Chiswick, 1978; Hernes et al., forthcoming). When the broad concept of education is broken down further, international literature has shown that having proficient language skills improves the income levels of immigrants (Chiswick, 2008). In the Swedish context, scholars have noted that passing SFI has a positive effect on both the chances of unemployed immigrants finding a job and of their attaining a certain minimum income level (Bonfanti & Nordlund, 2012; Kennerberg & Åslund, 2010). Moreover, particularly advanced proficiency in Swedish increases the chances of employment and higher wages (Rooth & Åslund, 2006). Drawing from surveys of businesses and employment organisations, Rooth and Åslund (2006) find that Swedish language skills in general are an important attribute for candidates. However, language skills appear to be important for success in other areas in addition to the economic aspects of integration. Research shows that participating in language courses relatively early in the integration process also enhances different aspects of social integration (Hoehne & Michalowski, 2016). 7.3.1

Output Variables Reflecting the Education System

We proceed by identifying indicators that monitor municipal efforts in SFI and CO education. Of those municipalities that had a local policy commitment, measurements related to the size of the student group and teacher qualifications are particularly relevant when assessing the quality of SFI. Prior research has highlighted shortcomings in teacher competence and teaching methods within language training (Zachrison, 2014). Particular emphasis has been put on the challenge unqualified teachers pose in this form of education (Lindberg & Sandwall, 2007). The student– teacher ratio indicates the number of participating pupils per teacher. The number of full-time equivalent SFI teachers can therefore be calculated. The formal education of teachers can have an important effect on the

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

195

quality of language training. The Swedish National Agency for Education monitors the proportion of teachers working within SFI who have a university degree in teaching.6 Figure 7.5 presents the values for these two variables. The student– teacher ratio in language training was generally about 20 students per teacher or slightly above. On average, no dramatic changes can be detected over the years, despite the fact that the total number of students increased. Variations do, however, exist between municipalities. The 10th percentile has small and decreasing classes over the time period, ending in 2018 with only 10 students per teacher. The corresponding numbers for the 90th percentile also dropped over the time period and ended at 31 students per teacher in 2018. Turning to the second indicator of output variables, the proportion of teachers with university degrees involved in language training, the numbers were in the 71–78% range, with a somewhat decreasing trend over the years studied. The 90th percentile line shows that at least 10% of the municipalities only used teachers with a teaching degree. This was consistent over the time period. At the other end of the spectrum there were municipalities that struggled to find qualified teachers. The value for the 10th percentile also had a decreasing trend over the years studied, but in 2012 it was as high as 52%.

40

100

35 80

30 25

60

20 40

15 10

20 5 0

0 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Fig. 7.5 Left: average number of students per SFI teacher in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2012–2018). Right: average proportion of teachers with a university degree in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018)

196

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Figure 7.6 uses bar graphs to visualise variation between the municipalities. Each bar represents a municipality and is arranged from low to high values. Comparison is facilitated by the bars representing average values of municipalities. When it comes to the average number of students per SFI teacher, although the general distribution is quite homogenous, some clear exceptions exist. For example, a number of municipalities ran small classes in language training with fewer than 10 students per teacher. At the other extreme, there were municipalities where classes had more than 50 students per teacher. In 2017 the situation took a turn for the worse with two municipalities having more than 100 students per teacher. The diagram on the right, revealing the proportion of teachers with a teaching degree, is somewhat less skewed. In about 16% of municipalities only a minority of teachers had a suitable qualification. Although variations clearly occur, it is not completely uncommon for all the teaching staff to possess a teaching degree. Data regarding CO education efforts are available at the municipal level. The latest data are from the annual survey conducted in 2019 by the County Administrative Board. Close to 92% of municipalities responded to this survey. Even though the government requires a plan for the content and extent of CO education (SFS 2010:1138, 2010), its institutionalisation differs across municipalities, with 18% responding

Fig. 7.6 Left: average number of students per SFI teacher (bars) and average across municipalities (line) (2018). Right: average proportion of teachers with a university degree (bars) and average across municipalities (line) (2018)

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

197

that they do not have such a plan. Turning to just how extensive such education was, 68% stated that the CO education they offered was longer than the 60 hours the government required at the time. However, there was a lot of variation regarding just how extensive such education was. Whereas most municipalities stated that the total amount of CO education offered ranged between 80 and 100 hours, a few pointed out they provided even more than this. In one case it was as much as 164 hours (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2020). Another factor that can potentially vary between local providers is the time participants have to wait before they can join a CO class. In about 78% of municipalities participants have to wait for at least five weeks, but in many cases it is considerably longer before education starts (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2020). 7.3.2

Outcome Variables Reflecting the Education System

We now turn from output variables that are directly prioritised by municipalities to the results of SFI and CO education. SFI consists of three different levels of education and participants enrol in one of these based on their prior education. Within each level there are two courses, the second one indicating increased progress. After completing the two courses, participants at the lowest or intermediate level can enrol onto higher level courses, whereas those who have passed the highest level are deemed to have completed their SFI language training. The most obvious outcome measurement of SFI draws on data concerning the study results of participating individuals. Figure 7.7 provides these data using three different but related measurements.7 The first consists of an average calculated from information from all municipalities concerning the proportion of participants who passed their last SFI course. However, this variable is sensitive to low levels of participants in small municipalities. The second variable measures the average proportion of beginners who passed at least two courses in the preceding two years. Although this measurement sets higher requirements (i.e., the completion of two courses), it evaluates such requirements over a fixed time span. The final variable measures average study time, in number of days, it took for participants to pass the last course they were enrolled on. Overall, these variables paint a gloomy picture of the way in which SFI results have developed over the years. Looking at data for students who passed their last course, the general trend was a decline over the years.

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

60

50

50

40

40

30

30

300

20

20

200

10

10

100

0

0

0

600 500

2017

2018

2016

2014

2015

2013

400

2012

2018

60

2016

70

2017

700

70

2014

80

2015

800

80

2013

900

90

2011

100

90

2012

100

2011

198

Fig. 7.7 Left graph: average proportion (in %) of participants who passed an SFI course (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018). Centre graph: average proportion (in %) of beginners who passed at least two SFI courses in the two preceding years (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2013–2018). Right graph: average study time (in days) it took for participants to pass an SFI course (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018)

In 2018 about 43% of participants passed their last course, compared with 55% in 2011. This trend is also in line with the distribution across municipalities and true for the 90th and 10th percentile of municipalities. In 2018 the 10th percentile showed only 26% of participants with pass grades, while the 90th percentile showed 60% with pass grades. The second measurement, the average proportion of beginners who passed at least two SFI courses in the preceding two years, echoed such development. In 2018 about 45% of participants studying for two years had finished two courses. In 2018 the corresponding value for the 10th percentile was 28, whereas the 90th percentile was 63%. Although this variable appears to be more stable over the years, there was a marked decrease in 2017. As this measurement covers a longer time span, cancellation of studies due to employment or other studies is likely to have a potential positive effect on the individual. Turning to the average study time it took participants to pass SFI, the trend was less linear. At the beginning of the time series there was an increase in study time, which was followed by several years during which it took less time to pass SFI. After 2014 the trend went upwards again, resulting in a longer study

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

199

time in 2018 than in 2011. However, variation between the municipalities decreased during the time period. In other words, municipal results converged. Nonetheless, differences did exist. In 2018 the 10th percentile represented a general study time of only 605 days, while the 90th percentile represented 853 days. If the three variables are looked at jointly for 2018, then correlation statistics show ambiguous outcomes. As to be expected, there is a clear linkage between two of the variables: participants who passed an SFI course and participants who passed two SFI courses in the preceding two years. However, none of these show any confident correlation with the variable that measures length of study time. Hence the indicators appear to measure somewhat different aspects of language training results. At the municipal level, there is no obvious pattern linking short study time for participants to pass an SFI course and the proportion of participants who passed language training or vice versa. Corresponding data on CO courses are mainly focused on variables reflecting the proportion of participants who either pass or drop out of classes. When it comes to individuals affected by the Establishment Reform about 45% of municipalities state that 81% to 100% of participants pass the CO course within a year. However, variations are once again clear, since in more than 15% of the municipalities the corresponding range is 0–40%. Similarly, it is not unknown for immigrants to drop out of the CO course before it has finished. The most common response was that up to 20% of participants leave the class without completing it. However, 10% of municipalities stated that somewhere between 61 and 80% of participants dropped out. The reasons for this can vary because of individuals’ different circumstances. Reports put together by municipalities show that parental leave, getting a job or an internship, or moving to another municipality are the main causes (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2020).

7.4 Integration Through the Housing Situation of Immigrants The final aspect of socioeconomic integration is the housing situation. Ensuring decent and suitable housing conditions for immigrants has been a challenge for Sweden over the years (National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, 2015). Earlier assessments of the total population of foreign-born citizens at the sub-national level show that overcrowded

200

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

housing is some 10% more common than corresponding figures for the native-born population (OECD, 2018). With the increasing number of immigrants who came to Sweden during the migrant crisis an acute problem developed in terms of finding asylum seekers places to stay. The challenges took ever longer to resolve when a large proportion of individuals received during these years were granted residence permits and were therefore entitled to housing in a municipality. An individual’s housing situation can be used as an indicator of socioeconomic integration. Home ownership is commonly applied as a final indicator of the successful integration of an immigrant (Ager & Strang, 2008). Even if many of the previous studies within this area are based on the North American context, expected variables including income and educational levels appear to affect the chances of home ownership. However, crucial geographical differences here need to be taken into account. For example, in the United States immigrant home ownership rates are higher in non-metropolitan areas than in metropolitan areas because of the varied costs of homes (Cortes et al., 2007). Such community characteristics are also found in European studies that indicate the likelihood of home ownership is higher in mid-sized or suburban communities (Turner & Hedman, 2014; Vono-de-Vilhena & BayonaCarrasco, 2012). Obviously, the personal characteristics of an individual will have a great impact on his or her propensity to acquire their own home. However, studies from Nordic countries point out that several of these variations remain even after controlling for both socioeconomic and demographic variables. Moreover, some researchers have assumed that differences also exist between immigrant groups (Kauppinen et al., 2015; Turner & Hedman, 2014). Another more complex issue relates to residential segregation. Whether residential segregation affects some social aspects of integration is a contested issue (Musterd, 2003). In the Swedish context scholars have shown that ethnic residential segregation typically features a concentration of immigrants in less attractive and poorer residential areas in which a multi-ethnic composition of individuals has evolved (Andersson, 2007). Residential segregation is often framed as a challenge most commonly met in metropolitan areas. However, Malmberg et al. (2018) show that the growing immigrant population has affected the majority of Swedish neighbourhoods. It has been demonstrated that residential areas subject to segregation but dominated by a population of people who have a foreign background or who are foreign born face challenges such as lower

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

201

employment levels, lower income levels, and health problems (Andersson, 2016; Bevelander et al., 1997; Börjesson, 2018; Stjärne et al., 2007). In the following section we present statistics that reflect the municipal housing situation for immigrants in general including variables that indicate problems of residential segregation. While the output side measures municipal possibilities and obligations to ensure housing for immigrants, the outcome side not only investigates how housing integration measures have varied in Sweden but also problems of segregation. 7.4.1

Output Variables of the Housing Situation

Every year the National Board of Housing, Building and Planning (NBHBP) sends out a survey to all Swedish municipalities to map the current state of the housing market. Although survey results are based on estimates made by each municipality, the County Administrative Board in each county controls the quality of answers given by the municipalities. Questions are asked about specific groups in society including immigrants (in particular, their housing situation). Table 7.2 shows the results of assessing the municipal housing conditions that applied to immigrants received in municipalities. The table consists of the aggregated results of all participating municipalities between 2014 and 2018. Most municipalities perceived there was a shortage of housing for immigrants received in the municipality. This trend increased over the time period and it appears to have culminated in 2016 and 2017. This supports the belief that the overwhelming majority of Swedish municipalities faced challenges in acquiring housing for incoming immigrants. Nonetheless, municipalities do have some power to influence such conditions. A closer look at the 211 municipalities that stated they faced a Table 7.2 Assessment of housing market for immigrants received in municipalities (2014–2018)

Shortage of housing (%) Balance (%) Surplus of housing (%) N

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

68.1 28.8 3.1 288

85 14.3 0.7 287

95.1 4.2 0.7 286

89.5 10.5 – 285

81.5 18.1 0.4 276

202

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

housing shortage in 2018 yet still received assigned immigrants provides added insight into how they tried to tackle this issue. In the survey questions were asked about the strategies municipalities pursued to ensure that housing was available for the immigrants received. Results indicate that some 85% of municipalities regularly cooperated with their public housing company to deal with this situation. Reaching out to private property owners did occur, but it was still not an action taken in most municipalities. Other strategies pursued included using long-term leasing agreements (done in some 30% of municipalities), or in some cases the municipality itself purchased either small houses or tenant-owned apartments that were thereafter placed at the disposal of the immigrants. It is evident that municipalities took different stances on the housing situation for allotted immigrants. Subsequent to legal proceedings it became permissible for municipalities to provide individuals with housing only during the period of the establishment programme and thereafter terminate their housing contract. Since 2019 the NBHBP has been collecting such data in their annual survey. The data provide a valuable indicator of how local governments design their local integration policy within the housing area. For 2019 the data reveal that about 70% of municipalities offered standard housing contracts to assigned immigrants or, with some restrictions, even permanent ones. These long-term solutions were not granted in the remaining 30% of municipalities. It may be the latter group of municipalities were influenced by several factors such as the local housing market. Furthermore, a national report indicated that immigrants were often treated differently, with such treatment depending on the reasons underlying their receipt in Sweden (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2019). Regional assessments also reveal that municipalities within the metropolitan area of Stockholm are in general much more restrictive than the country more broadly (County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). 7.4.2

Outcome Variables of the Housing Situation

Two different measurements can be applied to examine the outcome dimension. First, we present the different forms of housing used by the immigrant population. Three alternatives dominate housing in Sweden. People either live in rented housing, own a tenant-owned apartment, or live in their own house. The supply of these different alternatives varies widely between municipalities. Although most municipalities have a

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

203

public housing company that offers rental apartments, their scope varies. In some particularly dense urban areas the proportion of privately owned homes is low, whereas there is a complete lack of tenant-owned apartments in some rural municipalities. Even if the supply may vary, this does not alter the fact that all municipalities in Sweden contain either rented or owned housing. The market and its associated prices vary dramatically between metropolitan areas and sparsely populated municipalities (National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, 2017). Figure 7.8 shows the proportion of immigrants living in privately owned homes. Such data should be interpreted with caution since the home per se is not necessarily owned by the individual living in it since the data include all kinds of homes that are privately owned.8 The average across municipalities decreased from 39% in 2011 to 32% in 2018. The increasing population of immigrants during the latter years can be assumed to have lowered this proportion. During the same period of time the differences between municipalities decreased. The 10th percentile of municipalities represented about 16% in 2017, whereas the 90th percentile was at 50%. Similar variations are revealed using a more specific indicator that only includes immigrants who were received in the preceding three years based on data for 2018. In a few municipalities within the Stockholm metropolitan area the proportion of this cohort living in privately owned 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

Fig. 7.8 Average proportion of immigrants (in %) in municipalities who live in privately owned homes (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011–2018)

204

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

homes was about 50%. At the other end of the spectrum there was a handful of fairly sizable municipalities scattered around the country where the corresponding proportion was well below 10%. However, for the purposes of confidentiality this variable contains less than half the municipalities. The principle of assuring anonymity is the same as previously described (see Endnote 5). As discussed above, residential segregation tends to be linked with other issues that affect socioeconomic integration such as getting established in the labour market and health issues. Hence residential segregation based on ethnicity can be regarded as a concern for local integration. Statistics Sweden provides an index that compares the settlement of individuals born in Sweden with individuals born abroad in disaggregated geographical units within municipalities. However, as a result of differences in the way geographical data are calculated in municipalities this index is not suitable for cross-case comparison. However, it can instead be used for comparisons over time. Figure 7.9 shows how the index of residential segregation (which ranges from 0 to 100) developed between 2011 and 2016. Higher values reflect higher levels of residential segregation in terms of average values for municipalities. The graph illustrates that the average value across municipalities increased somewhat over the years studied: from about 23 to almost 28. Differences existed between municipalities as indicated by 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Fig. 7.9 Average value of the index of residential segregation in municipalities (solid line), 90th percentile (dotted line), 10th percentile (dashed line) (2011– 2016)

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

205

the 10th and 90th percentiles. In 2016 these reported values of below 12 and almost 35, respectively. A similar increase was noted in previous analyses of residential segregation during earlier periods of time (Stjärne et al., 2007).

7.5

Concluding Remarks

In this chapter we have looked at socioeconomic integration through three different lenses: integration through the labour market , through the education system, and through individuals’ housing situation. By distinguishing between output variables (i.e., those that show the extent of municipal efforts in terms of local integration policy) and outcome variables (i.e., the result of integration through these different spheres), we have not only described the way in which such variables changed over the years but also examined the current situation in particular. We end this chapter with some concluding remarks. When it comes to labour market integration, what is obvious is that it takes time for immigrants to enter the labour market. However, such a process appears to have been accelerated during later years. Empirical material verifies a recurrent finding in previous research: that the male population has a stronger position in the labour market than the female population and that higher levels of education are advantageous (Andersson Joona, 2020; Bevelander, 2011; Ruist, 2018). Although it is difficult to quantify local municipal efforts related to local integration policy, it is nonetheless clear that the overwhelming majority of municipalities in Sweden pursue their own labour market policy (a smaller proportion refrain from having any policy of their own). Immigrants are just one of several target groups for these policies. Variations in municipal funding for labour market activities are substantial and they appear to be positively related to the proportion of foreign-born citizens (Vikman & Westerberg, 2017). This is indicative of municipalities having greater ambitions for labour market programmes. Looking at outcome variables, our indicators are in line with prior assertions in showing a dramatic variation between all Swedish municipalities and regions (Andersson, 2016; Ruist, 2018). This is similar to international findings (OECD, 2018). Employment rates in the most successful 10% of municipalities make up about 65% of the immigrant population. The corresponding figure for the lowest performing 10% of municipalities is consistently at about 40%. Such divergences remain even when examining the group of immigrants who have

206

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

resided in Sweden for no more than three years. The second measurement focused on the proportion of immigrants who found employment after the two-year establishment period. Although the trend here fluctuated in a similar way, the development of the variable was positive over the years and was at 47% in 2018. Beyond the usual individual and contextual predictors, local models and policies may have an effect on labour market integration outcomes (Liljeberg & Åslund, 2020; SKL, 2015). An important caveat to emphasise is that these measures are not adequate indicators of other aspects of labour market integration such as the type of employment and the way the labour market values education, experience, and other competences (Holmqvist et al., 2020). When it comes to integration through the education system our focus was on the provision of SFI and CO education. Since municipalities are responsible for these activities, they are also influenced by local government prioritisations. We present statistics showing the student– teacher ratio and the proportion of SFI teachers who have a university degree. The student–teacher ratio indicates that SFI classes included about 20 students on average over the years examined, but the variation between municipalities has increased greatly. It is likely that this pattern is connected to the extent of immigrant admission. When it comes to the number of SFI teachers with a teaching degree the average value in municipalities ranged between 71 and 78%. However, there were discrepancies. Unfortunately, the quality of teaching participants receive in language courses has been shown to vary as a consequence of the lack of teacher qualifications (Lindberg & Sandwall, 2007). This is a serious disadvantage given that language skills are crucial to economic and social integration (Hoehne & Michalowski, 2016; Rooth & Åslund, 2006). The conditions under which participants are taught within CO education also vary depending on where they live. This include waiting times before starting a course and variation in the amount of course time offered. Hence, there is a variation depending on whether non-policy or active policy exists in the municipality in question. Three indicators are used to reflect SFI outcome variables: the proportion of participants who passed their last SFI course, the average proportion of beginners who passed at least two courses in the preceding two years, and finally the average study time in number of days taken for participants to pass their last course. On average, the first two measurements reported a declining trend over the time span studied. There are also contrasts between municipalities. In successful municipalities about 60% of participants passed their

7

LOCAL INTEGRATION POLICY IN SWEDISH MUNICIPALITIES

207

last SFI course compared with less successful municipalities where the corresponding number was about 25%. Such clear differences are also seen when looking at the average study time indicator. In 2018 students in the most successful municipalities passed an SFI course almost two years faster than in the least successful municipalities. Similar variations are seen in CO education, with particular differences in the proportion of participants who pass exams. The chapter went on to explore integration as a factor of the housing situation of immigrants. Although it was the municipalities themselves that estimated housing for immigrants, it became increasingly challenging for them (National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, 2015). The proportion of municipalities that identified a housing shortage for immigrants increased from 68% in 2014 to above 80% in 2018. An obvious reason for this was the impact the migrant crisis had. The 18% of municipalities that did not indicate any housing shortage answered that they had a well-balanced housing situation. Ensuring assigned immigrants were granted a permanent housing contract was a highly relevant variable indicating municipal commitment, something the majority of municipalities espoused. There were nonetheless observable variations in the way local governments coped with this issue, which implies assigned immigrants were not regarded as forming part of the future citizenry in some municipalities (County Administrative Board in Jönköping, 2019; County Administrative Board in Stockholm, 2020). It suggests a municipal nonpolicy with a temporary perception of immigrants. Two different variables were used to measure outcome. Although not a detailed measurement, the proportion of immigrants who live in a privately owned home disclosed that variations between Swedish municipalities were vast, but they can most likely largely be explained by differences in the housing markets in the municipalities. Even if it is particularly costly to purchase one’s own home in some municipalities, a positive correlation between disposable income levels and the proportion of immigrants who own their own homes ought to be expected (Kauppinen et al., 2015). Residential segregation was used as the second outcome measurement since it tends to be related to other obstacles to socioeconomic integration. While this measurement is not suitable for cross-case comparison, increasing average values for municipalities do indicate higher levels of residential segregation.

208

G. LIDÉN AND J. NYHLÉN

Notes 1. There are clear examples of when these three spheres intertwine such as when successful integration in language training from the education system facilitates advancement in the labour market. The spheres do, however, reflect different aspects of social life, which means that no deterministic regularity between them should be expected. 2. The reasons behind variation in the variables presented is not within the scope of this publication. Although Chapter 5 has presented information on the numbers of received immigrants, an aspect that may crucially influence the distribution of the variables we discuss in this chapter, this chapter does not make any immediate claims about them. Our explanatory ambitions of local integration policy are instead limited to the three case studies (see Chapter 8) for which this chapter will function as an illustrative foundation. 3. The population of immigrants measured refers to those who have received residence permits as a result of having refugee status, subsidiarity protection, or other protection, as well as the relatives of such groups. It should be noted that such data do not take into account the first municipal placement of an individual or the year residence permits were granted. Hence individuals included in these data may have resettled in Sweden and been granted their residence permit further back in time. 4. This indicator is based on the same population of immigrants as described in Endnote 3. 5. This indicator draws from data from about a third of municipalities at the beginning of the time series. In later years data are included from more than 90% of municipalities. The reason for this is confidentiality. When too few individuals exist within this group (