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

Open access

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.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

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

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

  • 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].

  • 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.

  • Hojem P & Ådahl M 2011 Kanadamodellen FORES Stockholm.

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

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

  • Kymlicka W 2007b. Multicultural odysseys Oxford University Press Oxford.

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

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

  • NOU 2004:20 Ny Utlendingslov Statens forvaltningstjeneste Oslo.

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

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

  • OECD 2012a International migration outlook. Available from: . [Last accessed 10.1.2013].

  • OECD 2012b ‘Key information on migration policy and migration statistics by country’. Available from: . [Last accessed 5.4.2013].

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • 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.

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

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

  • SOU 1999:34 Svenskt medborgarskap Regeringskanseliet Stockholm.

  • SOU 2002:13 Vår anhöriginvandring Regeringskanseliet Stockholm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • 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.

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

  • Velfærdskommissionen 2005 Fremtidens velfærd - vores valg Velfærdskommissionen København.

  • 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.

Search
Journal information
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 846 247 12
PDF Downloads 375 114 12