Immigration policy and integration of migrants in the Kingdom of Denmark at the beginning of the XXI century
Denmark upholds high standards of human rights as long as the interests of its citizens are concerned but erects barriers for migrants of a different cultural background who might threaten the security of the national community. The Danish tradition of liberalism, humanism and the welfare state coexists with one of Europe’s most restrictive policies towards third-country immigrants. The article traces the evolution of management approaches to developing the immigration policy and integrating foreign cultural migrants in Denmark. It describes the value determinants of these changes. Using the neo-institutional methodology, the authors analyse the evolution of the value determinants of Denmark’s immigration policy and look at the national norms and practices of integrating migrants from a different cultural background. A restrictive immigration policy became possible due to a consensus between the main political forces, the left Social Democratic Party and the right Liberal Party Venstre, both willing to keep in check electoral support for the radical right-wing parties (the effect of ‘contagion from the right’ in Maurice Duverger’s terms). The object of Denmark’s restrictive integration policy is migrants from a different cultural background (mainly from Muslim countries). The government takes systematic measures to restrict their access to the country. As to migrant integration, the focus has shifted to ‘hard’ assimilation of civiс democratic values, benefits linked to employment, and deportation of migrants who have committed crimes.
1. Jørgensen, M. 2011, Understanding the research — policy nexus in Denmark and Sweden: The field of migration and integration, British Journal of Politics & International Relations, № 13 (1), p. 93—109. doi: 10.1111/j.1467856X.2010.00441.x.
2. Jensen, K. K., Fernández, C., Brochmann, G. 2017, Nationhood and Scandinavian naturalization politics: varieties of the civic turn, Citizenship Studies, № 21 (5), p. 606— 624. doi: 10.1080/13621025.2017.1330399.
3. Scholten, P., Baggerman, F., Dellouche, L. et al. 2017, Policy Innovation in Refugee Integration? A Comparative Analysis of Innovative Policy Strategies toward Refugee Integration in Europe, Rotterdam: Erasmus Migration and Diversity Institute, 95 p.
4. Olwig, K., Romme Larsen, B., Rytter, M. (eds.) 2013, Migration, Family and the Welfare State: Integrating Migrants and Refugees in Scandinavia, Routledge, 186 p.
5. Brochmann, G., Hagelund, A. 2012, Immigration policy and the Scandinavian welfare state 1945—2010, Houndmills, Palgrave Macmillan, 297 p.
6. Olwig, K. 2011, “Integration”: Migrants and Refugees between Scandinavian Welfare Societies and Family Relations, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, № 37, p. 179—196. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2010.521327.
7. Sainsbury, D. 2012, Welfare states and immigrant rights: the politics of inclusion and exclusion, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 326 p.
8. Butenko, V. A. 2020. Transformation of the integration policy of Denmark, Vestnik Povolzhskogo instituta upravleniia [Bulletin of the Volga Institute of Management], vol. 20, № 4, p. 24—30 (in Russ.).
9. Volkov, A. M. 2020. Migration flows in the Nordic countries, Vestnik Diplomaticheskoi akademii MID Rossii [Bulletin of the Diplo-matic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry], № 1 (23), p. 126—142 (in Russ.).
10. Panikar, M. M., Vaseva, O. A. 2015. Specificity of migration processes in the north of Europe (on the example of the Kingdom of Denmark), Arktika i Sever [Arctic and North], № 21, p. 42—51 (in Russ.).
11. Talalaeva, E. Yu., Pronina, T. S. 2020. Ethno-confessional immigrant ghettos as a national security problem in Denmark’s social and political discourse, Balt. Reg., vol. 12, № 3, p. 55—71. doi: 10.5922/2079-8555-2020-3-4.
12. Shadrina, O. N., Matveeva, E. A. 2020. The current state of the migration policy of Denmark in the mirror of statistics (2015—2020), Gumanitarnyi Nauchnyi Vestnik [Humanitarian Scientific Bulletin], № 7, p. 1—10. doi: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3979356 (in Russ.).
13. Van Klingeren, M., Boomgaarden, H. G., Vliegenthart, R., de Vreese, C. H. 2015, Real world is not enough: The media as an additional source of negative attitudes toward immigration, comparing Denmark and the Netherlands, European Sociological Review, № 31 (3), p. 268—283. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcu089.
14. Madsen, J. 2004, Mediernes konstruktion af flygtninge- og indvandrerspørgsmålet, Magtudredningen, 95 p.
15. Hernes, V. 2018, Cross-national convergence in times of crisis? Integration policies before, during and after the refugee crisis, West European Politics, № 41 (6), p. 1305—1329. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2018.1429748.
16. Kanellopoulos, K., Duru, D. N., Zschache, U., Loukakis, A., Kousis, M., Trenz, H-J. 2020, Transnational Solidarity, Migration, and the Refugee Crisis. In: Formal Organizing and Political Environments in Greece, Germany, and Denmark, Sociological Research Online, July. doi: 10.1177/1360780420937030.
17. De Genova, N. 2018, The ‘migrant crisis’ as racial crisis: Do Black Lives Matter in Europe? Ethnic & Racial Studies, № 41 (10), p. 1765—1782. doi: 10.1080/01419870. 2017.1361543.
18. Koos, S., Seibel V. 2019, Solidarity with refugees across Europe. A comparative analysis of public support for helping forced migrants, European Societies, № 21 (5), p. 704—728. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2019.1616794.
19. Jørgensen, M. B. 2014, Decentralizing immigrant integration: Denmark’s mainstreaming initiatives in employment, education, and social affairs, Brussels, Migration Policy Institute Europe, 32 p.
20. Borevi, K., Bengtsson B. 2015. The tension between choice and need in the housing of newcomers: A theoretical framework and an application on Scandinavian settlement policies. Urban Studies, № 52 (14), p. 2599—2615. doi: 10.1177/0042098014548137.
21. Lægaard, S. 2013, Danish Anti-Multiculturalism? The Significance of the Political Framing of Diversity. In: Kivisto, P., Wahlbeck, Ö. (eds.), Debating Multiculturalism in the Nordic Welfare States, p. 170—196, Palgrave Macmillan, Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series, 345 p.
22. Kvist, J. 2018, First results of the U-turn in Danish migration and integration policies, ESPN Flash Report, URL: https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=19985&langId=en (accessed 12.01.21).
23. Hagelund, A. 2020, After the refugee crisis: public discourse and policy change in Den-mark, Norway and Sweden, Comparative Migration Studies, № 8 (13). doi: 10.1186/s40878-019-0169-8.
24. Hovden, J., Mjelde, H., Gripsrud, J. 2018, The Syrian refugee crisis in Scandinavian newspapers, Communications, № 43 (3), p. 325—356. doi: 10.1515/commun-2018-0013.
25. Shaparov, A. E., Sinkova, E. V. 2020. Demarginalization of right-wing radicalism in the European political process, Sovremennaya Evropa, № 5, p. 182—192. doi: 10.15211/soveurope5202018219.
26. DiMaggio, P. J., Powell, W. W. 2010, A new look at the “iron cage”: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields, Economic sociology, vol. 11, № 1, p. 34— 56.
27. Rydgren, J. 2005, Is extreme right-wing populism contagious? Explaining the emergence of a new party family, European Journal of Political Research, № 44, p. 413—437. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2005.00233.x.
28. Kampmark, B. 2019, The Danish Elections: Social Democracy with an Inhumane Face, CounterPunch, 12 June, URL: https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/06/12/the-danish-elections-social-democracy-with-an-inhumane-face/ (accessed 21.01.2021).
29. Plevako, N. S. 2019, Parliamentary elections in Denmark, Nauchno-analiticheskii vestnik Instituta Evropy RAN [Scientific-analytical bulletin of the Institute of Europe RAS], № 3 (9), p. 42—48 (in Russ.).
30. Myrberg, G. 2017, Local challenges and national concerns: municipal level responses to national refugee settlement policies in Denmark and Sweden, International Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 83, № 2, p. 322—339. doi: 10.1177/0020852315586309.