Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Nordic Journal of Migration Research

The Journal of Nordic Migration Research

4 Issues per year

Open Access
Online
ISSN
1799-649X
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 4, Issue 3 (Sep 2014)

Issues

Canada as an Inspirational Model: Reforming Scandinavian Immigration and Integration Policies

Trygve Ugland
Published Online: 2014-09-25 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/njmr-2014-0016

Abstract

The Scandinavian countries have often been portrayed as models for the development of policies for other states. However, in the area of immigration and integration policies, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden have themselves been searching for new policy solutions abroad. Canada is internationally recognised in the areas of immigration control and immigrant integration, and this article focuses on the role the Canadian immigration and integration policy model played in the Scandinavian reform process during the 2000-2012 period. The overall conclusion is that the Canadian model significantly shaped the reform debate and process in the three Scandinavian countries. However, the Canadian model was not copied or emulated to a great extent. Instead, it served as intellectual stimulus and a model for inspiration. In particular, the Canadian model served as an inspiration for the rediscovery of labour immigration in Scandinavia during the 2000s.

Keywords: Scandinavia; immigration and integration; Canadian model; policy transfer; inspiration

References

  • Abu-Laban, Y & Gabriel, C 2002, Selling diversity : Immigration, multiculturalism, employment equity, and globalization, Broadview Press, Peterborough, Ont.Google Scholar

  • Andersen, J, Larsen, JE & Møller, IH 2009, ‘The exclusion and marginalisation of immigrants in the Danish welfare society’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 29, no. 5/6, pp. 274-286. DOI: 10.1108/01443330910965804.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Anton, TJ 1969, ‘Policy-making and political culture in Sweden’, Scandinavian Political Studies, no. 4, pp. 88-102. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1467-9477.1969.tb00521.x.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Banting K, 2010, ‘Is there a progressive’s dilemma in Canada? Immigration, multiculturalism and the welfare state’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 797-820. DOI: 10.1017/S0008423910000983.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Banting, K & Kymlicka, W 2006, Multiculturalism and the welfare state, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Bennett, CJ 1991, ‘How states utilize foreign evidence’, Journal of Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 31-54. Doi:10.1017/ S0143814X0000492X CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Benson, D & Jordan, A 2011, ‘What have we learned from policy transfer research? Dolowitz and Marsh revisited’, Political Studies Review, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 366-378. DOI: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00240.x.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Borevi, K 2012, ‘Sweden: The flagship of multiculturalism’, in Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state 1945-2010, eds G Brochmann & A Hagelund, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 25-96.Google Scholar

  • Brochmann, G 2003, ‘Citizens of multicultural states’, in The multicultural challenge, ed G Brochmann, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 1-11.Google Scholar

  • Brochmann, G & Hagelund, A 2011, ‘Migrants in the Scandinavian welfare state’, Nordic Journal of Migration Research, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13-24. DOI: 10.2478/v10202-011-0003-3.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Brochmann, G & Hagelund, A 2012, Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state 1945-2010, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.Google Scholar

  • Dolowitz, D & Marsh, D 2000, ‘Learning from abroad: the role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making’, Governance, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5-23. DOI: 10.1111/0952-1895.00121.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Einhorn, ES & Logue, J 1989, Modern welfare states: politics and policies in social democratic Scandinavia, Praeger, New York.Google Scholar

  • Elder, N, Thomas, AH & Arter, D 1988, The consensual democracies? The government and politics of the Scandinavian states, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Emilsson, H 2011, Vad kan vi lära av Kanadas migrations- og integrationspolitik? Available from: http://integrationsbloggen.blogspot.ca/2011/03/den-kanadensiska-modellen-oversatt-till.html [Last accessed 10.05.2013].Google Scholar

  • Hoberg, G 1991, ‘Sleeping with an elephant: the American influence on Canadian environmental regulation’, Journal of Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 107-131. DOI: 10.2307/4007340.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hojem, P & Ådahl, M 2011, Kanadamodellen, FORES, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • Information 2002, ‘’Et foregangsland’, 26. januar. Available from: http://www.information.dk/65291. [Last accessed 28.02.2013].Google Scholar

  • Innst. 2005, nr. 185 (2004-2005): Innstilling fra kommunalkomiteen om mangfold gjennom inkludering og deltakelse, Stortinget, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Jønsson, HV & Petersen, K 2012, ‘Denmark: a national welfare state meets the world’, in Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state 1945 - 2010, eds G Brochmann & A Hagelund, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp. 97-148.Google Scholar

  • Koning, EA 2011, ‘Ethnic and civic dealings with newcomers: naturalization policies and practices in twenty-six immigration countries’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 1974-1994. DOI: 10.1080/01419870.2011.556747.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Koning, EA & Banting, K 2011, ‘The Canadian model of immigration and welfare’, in NOU, 2011:7 - Velferd og migrasjon: den norske modellens framtid, pp. 354-371.Google Scholar

  • Kymlicka, W 2004, ‘Marketing Canadian pluralism in the international arena’, International Journal, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 829-852.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kymlicka, W 2007a, ‘The Canadian model of multiculturalism in a comparative perspective’, in Multiculturalism and the Canadian constitution, ed S Tierney, UBC Press, Vancouver, pp. 61-90.Google Scholar

  • Kymlicka, W 2007b. Multicultural odysseys, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

  • Kymlicka, W 2007c. ‘Disentangling the debate’, in Uneasy partners multiculturalism and rights in Canada, ed J Stein, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo, Ont., pp. 137-156.Google Scholar

  • Laczko, LS 1994, ‘Canada’s pluralism in comparative perspective’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 20-41. DOI:10.10 80/01419870.1994.9993811.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lenard, PT & Straehle, C 2012, Legislated inequality: temporary labour migration in Canada, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal.Google Scholar

  • Lisheng, D, Christensen, T & Painter, M 2010, ‘A case study of China’s administrative reform’, The American Review of Public Administration, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 170-188. DOI: 10.1177/0275074009334075.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Marwah, I, Triadafilopoulos, T, & White S 2013, ‘Immigration, citizenship and Canada’s new Conservative Party’, in Conservatism in Canada, ed. DM Rayside and JH Farney, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp. 95-119.Google Scholar

  • Mylenberg, T 1997, ‘Weiss: Arbejde er den bedste integration’, Berlingske, p. 5.Google Scholar

  • NOU 2000:32, Lov om erverv og tap av norsk statsborgerskap (Statsborgerloven), Statens Forvaltningstjeneste, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • NOU 2004:20, Ny Utlendingslov, Statens forvaltningstjeneste, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • NOU 2011:7, Velferd og migrasjon: den norske modellens framtid, Statens Forvaltningstjeneste, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • NOU 2011:14, Bedre integrering: mål, strategier, tiltak, Statens Forvaltningstjeneste, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • OECD 2012a, International migration outlook. Available from: <http:// www.oecd.org/migration/internationalmigrationpoliciesanddata/internationalmigrationoutlook2012.htm>. [Last accessed 10.1.2013].Google Scholar

  • OECD 2012b, ‘Key information on migration policy and migration statistics by country’. Available from: <http://www.oecd.org/migration/mig/internationalmigrationoutlook2012countrynotes. htm>. [Last accessed 5.4.2013].Google Scholar

  • Olsen, JP & Peters, BG 1996, Lessons from experience, Scandinavian University Press, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Olwig, KF & Paerregaard, K 2011, The question of integration: immigration, exclusion and the Danish welfare state, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge.Google Scholar

  • Ot.prp. 2002, nr. 28 (2002-2003): Om lov om introduksjonsordning for nyankomne innvandrere (introduksjonsloven), Kommunalog regionaldepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Ot.prp. 2005, nr. 41 (2004-2005): Om lov om norsk statsborgerskap (statsborgerloven), Kommunal- og regionaldepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Ot.prp. 2007, nr. 75 (2006-2007) Om lov om utlendingers adgang til riket og deres opphold her (utlendingsloven), Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Proposition 2008, 2007/08:147: Nya regler för arbetskraftsinvandring, Rikdsagen, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • Proposition 2010, 2009/10:77: Försörjningskrav vid anhöriginvandring, Rikdsagen, Stockholm Rose, R 1991, ‘What is lesson-drawing?’, Journal of Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 01, pp. 3-30. DOI: 10.1017/S0143814X00004918.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rose, R 1993, Lesson-drawing in public policy. Chatham House Publishers, Chatham.Google Scholar

  • Schmidtke, O 2003, ‘Das kanadische Einwanderungsmodell: wohlverstandenes Eigeninteresse und multikulturelles Ethos’, in Migration im Spannungsfeld von Globalisierung und nationalstaat, eds D Thränhardt & U Hunger,Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 205-226.Google Scholar

  • SOU 1999:34, Svenskt medborgarskap, Regeringskanseliet, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • SOU 2002:13, Vår anhöriginvandring, Regeringskanseliet, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • SOU 2005:50, Arbetskraftsinvandring till Sverige - befolkningsutveckling, arbetsmarknad i förändring, internationell utblick, Regeringskanseliet, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • SOU 2006:87, Arbetskraftsinvandring till Sverige - förslag och konsekvenser, Regeringskanseliet, Stockholm.Google Scholar

  • St.meld. 2004, Nr. 49 (2003-2004): Mangfold gjennom inkludering og deltakelse: ansvar og frihet, Kommunal- og regionaldepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • St.meld. 2008, Nr. 18 (2007-2008): Arbeidsinnvandring, Arbeids- og inkluderingsdepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • St.meld. 2012, Nr. 6 (2012-2013): En helhetlig integreringspolitikk: mangfold og fellesskap, Barne-, likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet, Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Tænketanken om Udfordringer for Integrationsindsatsen i Danmark, 2004, Udlændinge- og integrationspolitikken i Danmark og udvalgte lande. Ministeriet for Flygtninge, indvandrere og integration, København.Google Scholar

  • Triadafilopoulos, T 2006, ‘A model for Europe? an appraisal of Canadian integration policies’, in Politische Steuerung von Integrationsprozessen, eds K Schönwälder, S Baringhorst, & U. Hunger, Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp. 79-94.Google Scholar

  • UDI 2005, Anmodningsvedtak fra Stortinget om forsørgeransvar for herboende referanse ved familieinnvandring for ektefeller.Google Scholar

  • Velfærdskommissionen 2005, Fremtidens velfærd - vores valg, Velfærdskommissionen, København.Google Scholar

  • Wickström, M 2013, ‘The difference white ethnics made: the multiculturalist turn of Sweden in comparison to the cases of Canada and Denmark’, in Migrations and welfare states, eds HV Jønsson, E Onasch, S Pellander and M Wickström, NordWel, Helsinki, pp. 25-58. Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2013-07-12

Accepted: 2014-07-10

Published Online: 2014-09-25

Published in Print: 2014-09-01


Citation Information: Nordic Journal of Migration Research, ISSN (Online) 1799-649X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/njmr-2014-0016.

Export Citation

© by Trygve Ugland. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in