ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

From Policy to Practice: How Temporariness Shapes Refugee Integration in Norway. Temporary Protection and the Implementation of Integration Policies in Norway

Migration
Policy Change
Policy Implementation
Refugee
Rebekka Ravn Lysvik
Guri Tyldum
Fafo Institute for Labour and Social Research

Abstract

This paper addresses how temporary protection status, temporary legislative changes, and the political rhetoric of temporality influenced the street-level implementation of integration policies for refugees from Ukraine in Norway. To manage the high influx of refugees in 2022, the Norwegian government allowed municipalities to scale back language courses and integration services to refugees with temporary protection. This enabled municipalities to depart from standard requirements for refugee receptions, to alleviate capacity strains. However, some municipalities interpreted this shift as a mandate to reduce integration efforts towards Ukrainian refugees, referring to the rhetoric of the central government which emphasized temporariness and the need to facilitate return to Ukraine after the war. As this paper demonstrates, this resulted in some municipalities offering significantly limited integration programs to this refugee population. Drawing on theories of how street-level workers develop strategies and adapt to shifts in policy and discourse, we highlight their role as de facto policymakers under capacity constraints. We argue that the combination of temporary protection and a rhetoric of reduced generosity from government actors influenced street-level workers' understanding of what their mandate was, leading to a stricter interpretation of temporary laws than what was intended from the side of authorities. This points to local interpretations as an important mechanism when exploring how temporary status can be an obstacle to integration. Our analysis is based on qualitative interviews with local street-level workers in 12 municipalities, alongside document analysis and interviews with central government officials involved in drafting integration policies.