Is It Getting Harder for Immigrants to Integrate into Swedish Society?

Figure 1: Swedish flag and geographical location

by Mariam Abushamaa

Mariam Abushamaa is a recent UIUC alum and incoming law student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She majored in linguistics and hopes to become a lawyer, using the skills she learned from studying language and assisting in research projects at the University of Illinois in her future career. She wrote this blog post for 418 “Languages and Minorities in Europe” in Spring 2023.

Sweden is known for being one of the most accepting countries of new immigrants, but recent proposals may reflect a change in this attitude. For example, new proposals, such as one limiting the rights to publicly funded interpreters, may cause a lot of new roadblocks for immigrants to Sweden who do not speak the language fluently (“Proposed Limits on the Right...”). Imagine for instance a healthcare system that is completely free to everyone, and suddenly your access to free healthcare is hindered because of your inability to speak Swedish. No one should have to pay to be understood by others, and to gain a basic right that has been enjoyed by Swedes for a long time. So, what happened between the period of welcoming immigrants and now? Has something changed in the way Sweden and its people see newcomers and their languages?

To answer these questions, it’s important to first look at Sweden’s history of migrants over time. From the 1940s-60s, immigrants to Sweden were primarily Nordic refugees, Baltic nationals, Eastern Europeans, Hungarians, and refugees from concentration camps during World War II (Hobzová 88). The 60s and 70s were a significant time period because Sweden was looking to accept migrants to fulfill a need for factory workers (Hobzová 85). This was also when SFI (Svenska för invandrare), a Swedish language program for immigrants, began, which will be discussed in further detail later on (Hobzová 89). The 70s and 80s brought Czechoslovak political emigrants, war refugees from Eritrea and Kurds, Assyrians and Syrians, Chileans followed by Latin Americans, as well as immigrants from Iraq and Iran (Hobzová 88). Refugees from the former Yugoslavia came over in the 1990s, and 2015-16 was the European refugee crisis, bringing a huge influx of immigrants from mostly Syria, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Somalia, and Iraq (Hobzová 88). The number of immigrants in this time in Sweden was almost twice the number of that in the 60s (Hobzová 88). Ultimately, Sweden had to learn how to deal with an overwhelming increase in immigrants, and they sometimes had trouble catching up.

In terms of language, SFI was put into place as a mandatory language class for immigrants who elected to participate in an introduction/integration plan (Hobzová 89). It was for people over 16 who needed to learn the basics of Swedish, and it was offered to all types of migrants (Hobzová 88-89). SFI focused on structural, interactive, and cultural integration, and courses were provided in varying quality by individual municipalities (Hobzová 89, 91). SFI courses were first offered during the evening but were then expanded to be available during work hours and eventually open to anyone rather than just employees (Hobzová 89). In 1986, SFI became part of the national education system with a new demand for teachers and a structured curriculum (Hobzová 89). About ten years later, the “Sweden, the future and diversity – from immigration policy to integration policy” law was passed for equal rights and opportunities for all, reflecting a positive view on integrating immigrants (Hobzová 90). SFI even had different levels suited to each individual’s language learning needs (Hobzová 90). However, there were drawbacks over time to SFI as the system struggled to keep up with the growing number of immigrants. There was a high level of dropouts due to a full workload for many people, the unemployment rate for immigrants in 2018 was significantly higher than that of the Sweden-born, and a long waitlist meant that it was difficult to access SFI classes for many people (Hobzová 89, 92-93). At this point in time, though, the government was trying to resolve these issues by organizing additional language and social integration activities, and there was generally no doubt that immigrants were a benefit to society, and that Sweden was right to give them the same rights as Swedish citizens (Hobzová 92, 93). Even anti-immigration parties said that Sweden is a country of immigration, and that they just need a better system of regulation (Hobzová 92-93). An additional problem was that individualizing courses put harsher demands on teachers, so SFI had the lowest number of qualified teachers (Hobzová 94). This caused many to drop out of SFI (Hobzová 95).

Figure 2: Svenska för Invandrare (SVI) participants learning Swedish

So now that we have the immigration timeline and issues with language education outlined, what were the overall attitudes toward immigrants in Sweden? One immigrant to Sweden, Catherine Edwards, recounted her personal opinions about the push to learn Swedish, saying that ideally, it’s respectful to try and learn Swedish, but many people don’t always have the time or opportunity to do so (Edwards 2). She felt that international residents sometimes exclude others to prove they belong themselves, and it’s easy to live in Sweden without knowing the language (English is typically enough to get around and communicate with others) (Edwards 2-3). Edwards argued that Sweden gives the impression that Swedish is optional, and then there is pressure to learn the language once people settle in (Edwards 4). She believes there should be no legal language requirement, but policy that allows access to high-quality language education, considers obstacles, and ensures that people can stay in the country (since many are forced to leave the country due to small errors in work permit paperwork) (Edwards 5). Ultimately, only inclusive policies can produce engaged citizens and prevent parallel societies in which people feel “othered” (Edwards 2).

Following this concept of “Other”, a recent article criticizes the implicit agenda surrounding teaching parents Swedish as a gateway to their children. This article by Enni Paul and Liz Adams Lyngbäck argues that language is primarily linked to the labor force, and immigrants are made to feel more like workers than human beings (Paul and Lyngbäck 3). The segregated, superdiverse areas of Sweden have become symbols for welfare reform, and non-whiteness and poverty have been perceived as foreignness (Paul and Lyngbäck 4). The authors mainly discuss the program, Language Learning and Babies (LLB), which focuses on mothers and states that learning Swedish is good for their children’s success in schools (Paul and Lyngbäck 8). They believe that LLB normalizes the targeting of non-white, non-Swedish parents for lacking language and work (the term “immigrant stay-at-home mother” crops up many times as a stereotype being fed into by the program) (Paul and Lyngbäck 9). Very few people in the group are new in Sweden or even wanting to learn the language (Paul and Lyngbäck 10). The expectations of participants vary widely, as many just want to come to meet other mothers, while volunteers who lead the group take on a teacher role and implicitly carry out the monolingual ideology by emphasizing speaking Swedish as if in a classroom environment (Paul and Lyngbäck 8). Enni Paul and Liz Adams Lyngbäck say that “enthusiasm towards participating in multilingual storytime by the ‘monolingual’ Swedish speaking parents reveals multilingualism as an ideal and not as lived,” and that “it is manifested as something to be consumed” (Paul and Lyngbäck 13). In other words, while monolingual Swedes in the group marvel at the idea of multilingualism, they end up alienating non-Swedish immigrants. The underlying message is clear: multilingualism is good... as long as Swedish is one those languages.

Sources 

Edwards, Catherine. “Opinion: Swedish Language Requirements Must Not Be a Hurdle for Immigrants.” The Local Sweden, 12 Oct. 2020, https://www.thelocal.se/20200916/opinion-swedish-language-requirements-for-immigrants-must-not-be-a-hurdle-for-foreigners/.   

Hobzová, Milena Öbrink. “Development and Current Challenges of Language Courses for Immigrants in Sweden.” SAGE Journals, SAGE Publications, 7 May 2020, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1477971420918271.   

Paul, Enni and Lyngbäck, Liz Adams. “‘Say It in Swedish!’: Babies, Belonging and Multilingualism in an ...” SAGE Journals, SAGE Publications, 16 July 2022, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14661381221113549. 

“Proposed Limits on the Right to Publicly Funded Interpreters Criticised by Police, Lawyers - Radio Sweden.” Radio Sweden | Sveriges Radio, Sveriges Radio, 2 Nov. 2022, https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/proposed-limits-on-the-right-to-publicly-funded-interpreters-criticised-by-police-lawyers#:~:text=The%20agreement%20says%20the%20right,themselves%20if%20one%20is%20needed. 

“Sweden Country Profile - BBC News.” BBC News, 29 March, https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/AF6B/production/_129170944_bbcm_sweden_country_profile_map_270323.png. Accessed 8 Apr. 2023. 

“Svenska För Invandrare – Enköpings Kommun.” Enköpings Kommun, https://enkoping.se/images/18.4f4401c2186975065c065130/1678718622496/SFI-vt23-cassandragronlund02-webb.jpg. Accessed 8 Apr. 2023. 

Posted in: immigration,Mariam Abushamaa,Sweden,Swedish Language