Migration Experiences of Quota refugees in Sweden
Dennis Munetsi
International Migration and Ethnic Relations Bachelor Thesis 15 Credits
Spring 2019: IM245L Supervisor: Anders Hellström Word Count: 12032
Abstract
This study explores how quota refugees who were resettled from Botswana to Sweden in 2014 experience migration and how these experiences are shaped by opportunities and limitations of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization. The study is grounded in a qualitative and constructivist methodological framework, and answers the question; how are quota refugees’ migration experiences in Sweden shaped by the opportunities and limitations of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization? Migration systems theory is used to analyze data gathered through semi-structured interviews. It is argued in this study that refugee migration is more socially motivated than it is economic and data shows that resettlement gives quota refugees mobility rights which in turn provide more opportunities than limitations that positively shape their migration experiences. Data also show that social reasons such as love, marriage and ethnic gatherings are the most dominant reasons why quota refugees travel.
Research Topic ... 1
Research Proble m and Aim ... 3
Research Question... 3
Delimitation... 4
Research Design ... 4
Literature Review ...5
Theoretical Framework ...9
Migration System Theory ... 9
Research Method ... 15
Design Philosophy ...15
Se mi-Structured Intervie ws ...15
Partic ipants and Sampling ...16
Data Co llect ion ...16
Setting ...17
Ethica l Considerations...18
Historical Background ... 19
History of Swedish Resettle ment Progra m ...19
Conte xtualizing Re fugee Migration...19
Who are the Quota Refugees from Botswana? ...20
Analysis ... 23
Agency ...23
Mobility ...25
Fa mily Ties and Social Interactions...27
Integration ...30
Conclusion...33
Introduction
Between January and December of 2014, Sweden received nine refugees from Botswana’s Dukwi Refugee Camp through its refugee resettlement program (UNHCR, 2018a). For some of these refugees, it was their first time to travel outside Botswana because of the country’s restrictive policies on refugee mobility1. The country also limits the internal migration2 of refugees through
the issuance of ‘exit permits’ for special purposes only (Amnesty International, 2019). When these refugees arrived in Sweden, they were granted permanent residence statuses which eventually granted them access to mobility rights (Migrationsverket, 2019b). The rights allow them to participate in international migration where they can travel to other countries as migrants.
Research Topic
Suggesting that refugees are migrants provokes a controversial debate about what migrat io n entails, what migrants and refugees are because it combines terms that come from ununifor m driving forces of human mobility; forced versus voluntary. Refugee migration is involuntary but it does not remain entirely involuntary after refugees arrive in the country of refuge because of other forms of voluntary movements they take part in, which have no direct relationship to their refugeeness (Migrationsverket, 2019b). While excluding refugees from the migrant category ignores mobility issues that face this specific group in countries of refuge. To put this into context, by definition a migrant is an individual who moves from one country to another by physically crossing state borders independently and out of free will with the possibility of returning to the sending country (UNHCR, 2019). While a refugee according to Article 1 of the 1951 Refugee Convention, which was modified by the 1967 Protocol, “ is a person who owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself (or herself) of the protection of that (native) country,” (UNHCR, 2017).
Therefore, I will define refugee migration as the voluntary mobility of individual refugees across international borders into another country which is not their country of origin, with a
1 The movement of people, goods and ideas from one place to another 2 Mobility that happens within the state’s borders
possibility of returning to the country of refuge. Nonetheless, there are different categories or groups of refugees which means that there are also different forms of refugee movements depending on one’s refugee status (UNHCR, 2011; Migrationsverket, 2019b). Some refugees remain in countries of refuge to whom the term refugee migration might not be applicable because of the rights given or not given to them (Zetterqvist, 1990),while some move to third-count r ies through resettlement programs where they are given mobility rights to travel internationally and this group is the focus of this study (Migrationsverket, 2019b).
According to UNHCR (2018), “resettlement is the transfer of refugees from the country of asylum to another state that has agreed to admit them and ultimately grants them a permanent settlement,” and it is one of the three durable solutions offered to refugees. Nevertheless, it is only available to a few thousand out of millions of the global refugee population living under the UNHCR protection in accordance to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees3 or
1951 Refugee Convention (UNHCR, 2018c). Therefore, UNHCR together with its implement ing partners has to come up with possible and applicable solutions to each and every individual or group cases (McLeman and Gemenne, 2018). The solutions should be durable in nature taking into account risks associated with overstaying in refugeeness which leaves refugees stuck in a state of limbo.
The category of resettled refugees is referred to as UNHCR quota refugee and a quota refugee “is a person who has fled his or her home country and been selected by the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, to be resettled to a third country which offers them protection” (Migrationsverket, 2018). However, some refugees live in first-countries of refuge for prolonged periods where their mobility rights, access to national identification, social and economic rights are limited (UNHCR, 2004). For these individuals, resettlement is perceived as an opportunity to access citizenship, equal rights, freedom of movement, visit their families, relatives and for many other reasons (Horst, 2006; McLeman and Gemenne, 2018). Does resettlement as a permanent and durable solution eventually answer the question of freedom of movement and access to full mobility rights?
3 The convention is used as the main legal instrument that informs operations of refugee and asylum protection
Research Problem and Aim
It is common knowledge that resettlement presents quota refugees in Sweden with a broad array of rights (Migrationsverket, 2019b). They are given the right to vote, work, reunite with their families and travel around the world like any other person who is not a refugee (Migrationsverket, 2019b). However, there are also limitations such as where not to travel and how long one can stay outside the country attached to their refugee status (ibid). The problem is that not all refugees experience migration similarly because of different factors. For instance, there is a group of refugees which has used its mobility rights but have not exhausted all the opportunities mobilit y rights have to offer, therefore, have not experienced the limitations of their mobility rights. There is also another group that has exhausted the opportunities of mobility rights and are experiencing limitations which shape their migration experiences differently from the first group.
However, Sweden offers a citizenship route to quota refugees to solve the limitations of refugee rights which eventually gives them freedom of mobility equivalent to Swedish citize ns (Migrationsverket, 2019a). Nonetheless, the period spent waiting to meet the requirements for naturalization4 is sometimes longer than expected, ranging from six years instead of four and up
to nine years instead of seven depending on other legalities attached to integrat io n (Migrationsverket, 2019a). This number of years between resettlement and naturalization takes into account the required time of residence plus the waiting period of processing citizens hip applications. This means that the longer the waiting period between resettlement and naturalization, the longer their mobility rights are affected by their refugee status. Therefore, it is imperative to investigate how refugees experience international migration and how their experiences are shaped by opportunities and limitations of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization?
Research Question
• How are quota refugees’ migration experiences shaped by the opportunities and limitatio ns of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization?
Delimitation
This study investigates how quota refugees who were resettled from Botswana to Sweden in 2014 experience international migration and how these experiences are shaped by opportunities and limitations of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization by applying the migration systems theory. Transnationalism and diaspora theories could have been useful to investigate resettlement as an enabling factor in chain migration and how it results in cumula t ive flows of migration through family reunification, ethnic clustering, refugee marriages et cetera. Since this study uses a synchronic case study of Sweden, it does not try to draw generalizations on the entire resettlement program, integration experiences and processes in other participat ing resettling states. Methods such as comparative case study between either two Nordic resettling countries, or between Sweden and a non-European country or expert interviews could also have been useful to capture and compare policy objectives with quota refugee experiences.
Research Design
This study starts by introducing the research topic, problem and aim where it discusses what refugee migration is. The literature review follows after the introduction where the study touches on how other researchers have discussed resettlement and other experiences of quota refugees in third-country of resettlement. After literature review, the theoretical section introduces migrat io n system theory and how it will be used to analyze data and then followed by the method section which discusses how data will be collected using semi-structured interviews to capture migrat io n experiences of quota refugees. The research then makes a brief background discussion and finally, data will be presented and discussed in the analysis section.
Literature Review
To explore the migration experiences of quota refugees, it is imperative to reflect on differe nt approaches used by other researchers to discuss experiences of quota refugees in relation to resettlement programmes. It is important at this moment to highlight that refugee migration is under-theorized and there are a few studies that tried to capture refugee mobility both pre- and post-resettlement.
Cindy Horst carried out an ethnographic study to investigate the impact of transnationa lis m and social relations on resettled Somali refugees in the US (Horst, 2006). The study discovered a commonly used concept of buufi5 among the Somali refugees which describe a longing for overseas resettlement inflated into one’s mind (Horst, 2006). According to Horst (2006), the buufi concept explains an embedded desire for a better future beyond the refugee life in camps that can only be found after resettlement (ibid). From the buufi concept argument, Horst made two main claims about Somali refugees flight and resettlement which are central to her study (ibid). The first assertion she made is that Somalis have prior knowledge of refugee life and the processes that take place afterwards. This information is passed to them through families and social networks and this leads to further flows that follow the same historical routes (Horst, 2006; de Hass, 2013). She claimed that once a refugee is resettled, information is relayed back home which either encourages other members of the network to seek asylum in Kenya or migrate through family reunification to the US.
According to Grace (2019), the impact of third-country immigration policies can necessitate or negatively affect the maintenance of quota refugee family ties and networks after resettlement. Grace’s study looked at how the Trump era immigration policy, especially on refugees from Somalia and other Muslim countries, has a psycho-social impact at individual and collective level on quota refugee and their immediate families (ibid). She implied that the Trump administration “has focused on what types of familial relationships ‘count' as a family in resettlement and family reunification, and extended families have long been a point of contention and difficult to navigate under US resettlement policy,” (Grace, 2019, abstract). The issue of the definition of the family unit becomes imperative because of its use as an instrument to control
immigration from certain groups and resultantly undermining the right to a family which is a fundamental human right (Nicholson, 2018).
Grace’s ethnographic study also highlighted policy implications on refugee
transnationalism at the same time hinting on the refugee’s lake of agency (Grace, 2019). Grace brought out the issue of agency in the discussion of the parameters of policy definitions of who can be included in a resettlement family and who are entitled to family reunification. This means that whether or not a refugee has will and means to reunite with their family, they do not have independence and free choice to bring people over to the US.
Koizumi (1991) investigated the aftercare given to Indochinese refugees in Japan. Unlike in the studies carried out by Horst and Grace, Koizumi looked at the interplay between stakeholders, the government and quota refugees (Koizumi, 1991). Emphasis was put on the institutional and legislative shortfalls that impacted quota refugee integration in Japan. Koizumi argued that the challenges facing refugees are caused by the relinquishment of the governme nt’s responsibility to ensure a permanent and durable solution per resettlement’s definition and guidelines (ibid). The study found out that quota refugees are given temporary accommodation at centres where they learn the language and other social necessities of integration (ibid). After this interim period, quota refugees’ integration responsibilities are left to the employers who only focus on the economic aspects of integration and ignore their social and psychological needs (ibid). Koizumi concluded that the position of the Japanese government in the integration process of quota refugees leaves them vulnerable and, in some cases, unable to self-sustain which may result in psychological effects on refugees (ibid). As similarly argued by Horst, Koizumi stated that the hope of a better and improved lifestyle which can lead to family reunification and further migrat io n is rendered impossible in this case because refugees are unable to support themselves and cannot afford to pay for travelling (Horst, 2006).
However, according to Losoncz (2015), the failure of the Japanese and American quota refugee integration models is not only isolated to the above-mentioned countries but the Australia n state has also failed to address the need to put adequate resources to ensure a successful refugee integration. Losoncz found out that there is much emphasis put on the need for more cultura l integration between the time of resettlement and naturalization (Losoncz, 2015). Additiona l ly, Losoncz (2015) claimed that the lack of emphasis on the social and economic aftercare of the resettlement process results in overburdening the quota refugee with adapting to their new
country’s culture, while less is done to ensure that these refugees are up to speed in other aspects of social and economic integration (ibid).
In spite of the benefits of resettlement such as equal rights, access to the labour-market, travel documents et cetera, limitations of resettlement are not only confined to the selection process of refugees but in the technicality of the vaguely defined terms ‘resettlement’ and ‘durable solution’. The ambiguity of these terms leaves them open to various interpretations by resettling countries (Grace, Nawyn and Okwako, 2018). The definition of the durability of durable solutio ns was put to question by Grace, Nawyn and Okwako (2018) when they discussed access to citizenship for the Burmese and Burundese refugees in Michigan (ibid). In principle, resettleme nt is supposed to extend refugee protection into a state of permanency with access to social and civil rights equivalent to those of citizens (UNHCR, 2018c), but in practice, it does not specify how resettling states should give refugees access to these rights. The issue of global mobility is interpreted within the confines of the permanency of the physical protection of refugees rather than the rights-based approach (Grace, Nawyn and Okwako, 2018).
Furthermore, what is entailed as a permanent solution remains unclear in both pieces of literature discussed above. This may result in a lack of consideration of other aspects of refugee rights such as the right to family, freedom of movement and access to citizenship (Grace, Nawyn and Okwako, 2018). Grace, Nawyn and Okwako (2018) further argued that the ambiguity of these legal definitions has a negative impact on the Burmese and Burundese quota refugee in Michiga n. They posited that even though other rights are given to quota refugees, citizenship which results in access to full rights is beyond the reach of economically unsustainable quota refugee families (ibid). This also leads to what they termed ‘neo-liberal market citizenship’ where only those who are economically sustainable have easier access to citizenship and other rights than those who struggle economically.
In conclusion, Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka (1996) carried out a study on asylum-seekers and quota refugees’ well-being after migrating to Sweden. Unlike in the studies carried out in prior discussions, they found out that there is a clear rights-derived distinction between asylum-seekers and quota refugee (Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka, 1996). Their study claimed that quota refugees enjoy more rights than other refugee categories in Sweden (ibid). Another significant finding in their study was the element of agency in asylum-seekers; they claim that asylum-seekers have the option to choose which country to seek refuge to unlike quota
refugees who have no choice in the countries they get resettled (Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka, 1996). Their study agreed with what Horst who alluded in her findings that Somali refugees choose to go to Kenya because of the prospects of being resettled in the future (Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka, 1996; Horst, 2006). Finally, both studies claimed that there is an element of agency in asylum-seekers as a result of the information passed to them through social interactions (Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka, 1996; Horst, 2006).
Theoretical Framework
This study aims to investigate how quota refugees who were resettled from Botswana to Sweden in 2014 experience migration and how these experiences are shaped by opportunities and limitations of refugee mobility between resettlement and naturalization. The study will test if migration system theory which explains how various factors interact and contribute towards the development of both sending and destination countries can be used to analyze and explain refugee migration (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011).
Migration System Theory
Migration system theory according to Castles, de Haas and Miller (2014) focuses on the intrins ic linkage between various forms of exchange such as flows of goods, ideas, money and people and how these flows alter conditions under which migration happens both in origin and receiving countries. Mabogunje in (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011:4) further defines migration systems as a ‘complex of interacting elements, together with their attributes and relationships…. Therefore, conceptualizing systems is to identify the basic interacting elements, their attributes, and their relationships.’ Once this is done, ‘it soon becomes obvious that the system operates not in a void but in a special environment. … [A] system with its environment constitutes the universe of phenomena which is of interest in a given context,’ (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011:4).
While Mabogunje and other migration theorists like de Hass And King used migrat io n system theory to explain labour-driven economic migration from areas of low-income activity to areas of high-income activity such as rural-to-urban migration and other upward migrations from poor to rich destinations and back (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011; King, 2012), this study aims to also use migration system theory to explain refugee mobility as an upward human movement from conflict zones to safety for social and security reasons rather than economic (Piguet, 2018). Refugee migration does not discontinue with the pioneers but it is highly likely that it gives birth to different flows driven by social and cultural factors such as ethnic clustering, ethnic marriages and family reunification (Suckall et al., 2015). Such conditions encourage migration to take place along certain lines and discourage it along others lines (ibid).
According to Russell King (2012) migration does not take place in a vacuum but there are elements, dimensions and relations that necessitate and sustain human mobility. These elements are as follows:
• Environmental settings – deals with the conditions under which migration takes place. These conditions can be economic conditions, government policies in both sending and receiving countries, social and economic values, means and availability of transport and medium of communication (King, 2012).
This study assumes that refugee migration is socially motivated, therefore, economic conditions are not prevalent in causing refugee migration. While government policies in the receiving countries, on the other hand, regulate who migrates and under which conditions (Grace, 2019). The environment set by government policies in receiving and sending countries may also hinder quota refugees from travelling to other countries.
Additionally, for migration to happen especially over long distances, the availability of transport and affordability can dictate the conditions under which migrat io n happens (King, 2012). The mode of transport used to travel over these long distances work as a regulating condition for migration due to costs involved (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011; King, 2012). This means not every member of the network can afford to migrate (de Hass, 2013). In the case of rural to urban migration as discussed by Mabogunje (in Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011; King, 2012), distances travelled in this form migrat io n may be an enabling factor, nonetheless, in regional and international migration, distance works as a barrier to deter further migration flows (ibid).
• The migrant – Different individuals react differently to arising challenges around them (King, 2012). For instance, when conflict arises in one region, some members may have the means to flee but lack the will to do so, while some may have the will but have no means (UNHCR, 2017). This energy and will can also be based on the available incent ives to migrate. The prospects of fleeing to a place with chances of settling peacefully without the fear of fleeing again encourage some people to migrate to one country over the other (Duany, 2016). In economic migration, the hope for a good-paying job in the destinatio n country and the desire to send back remittances motivates the migrants and prospective migrants to move (King, 2012).
• Control Subsystems – control systems are the mechanisms which function within micro and macro levels of migration to determine who migrates (King, 2012). Hein de Haas’ (2013) explained that migration systems expose the aspects of migration inequality where those who ‘do not have' especially economic and social insurance in the country of origin are forced to migrate and at the same time, some who do not have enough social and economic capital may also fail to migrate. De Haas (2013) termed this phenomenon, the migration ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ which is driven by inequalities. However, policy-wise, receiving countries may end up introducing instruments that encourage or allow migrat io n along other lines and discourage migration from the other through immigration, integrat io n, humanitarian assistance, diplomatic relations, national security among others (King, 2012). • Adjustment mechanism – this element is mainly concerned with integration, the flow of goods, services, ideas and development (King, 2012). Once the pioneer migrant has arrived in the destination country, there is a sudden adjustment that occurs in both sides of migration. Depending on the information flowing through the networks, new ideas may start flowing to the sending countries, especially to close the inequality gap (Faist, 2013). This can manifest in the form of economic improvement, change in social status and improved lifestyle (King, 2012). Those who could not afford to migrate due to expensive transport fares over longer distances may start to have means to travel and communicate with those in destination countries thereby triggering further flows of the same type of migration or facilitate new flows (King, 2012; de Hass, 2013). De Haas (2013) also claimed that there is a general perception that ‘once immigrants have settled (integrated) they eventually bring everyone over’
• Feedback Loop – refers to the social relations, networks, familial ties and the way information flows. The kind of information communicated can abet the expansion of the migration system or it can shrink the system (King, 2012). Information about probabilit ies of resettlement in one refugee camp may influence the flight of a certain ethnic or members of a network to flee to certain destinations and seek refuge or encourage some forms of refugee migration in form of reunifications and marriages.
The elements of migration systems relate to the central themes which will be used as variables to analyze data and explain the problem. These variables are agency, family ties/social interactio ns,
mobility and integration. Below is a table that demonstrates how these variables are related to the elements of the migration system theory discussed above.
Research Theme Theoretical Elements
• Mobility • Environmental Settings
• Control Subsystems
• Agency • Migrant
• Environmental settings • Family Ties and social
interactions
• Feedback loops • Environmental settings
• Integration • Control subsystems
• Adjustment mechanisms
Fig 1: Operationalization
Agency
Migration system theorists make an assumption that there is the migrant who exists and interacts with various factors as he/she migrates. and this migrant has the will to choose when, how and where to move to (King, 2012). The migrant element of the migration system in this study will be used to find out if refugees (migrant) have agency in the forms of migration they take part in. Agency is by definition the ability of migrants to act independently6 of free choice7 to move to
places of their choice (Bakewell, de Haas and Kubal, 2011). Therefore, agency will be used to point to the elements of the refugee’s independence and free choices to migrate.
Family Ties and Social Interactions
Feedback loops and environmental settings elements of the migration systems theory works with
the assumption that information about the destination and sending countries is sent through social networks and family relations (Faist, 2013). A family is defined as the primary social structure consisting of parents and their offspring, the function of which is the provision for its members
6 Free from outside control and not subject of another's authority
7 The discretion to choose and the power of making choices that are not predestined by natural causality, fate or
(Asis, 2017). A family unit can also be defined differently in different political jurisdictions. It can limit the unit to spouses and their children, while in some jurisdictions a family unit can extend to groups of persons related by blood or common ancestry (Grace, 2019). Therefore, migration or movements that are influenced by spousal relations, parental or familial reasons shall point to family ties. While other relations that take place outside the family unit will point to social interactions. Social interactions take place in a social structure made up of individuals, groups and organizations (Bakewell, 2014), or simply put, it is a network of interacting individuals and personal relations (Clifton-Sprigg, 2019). Therefore, whenever migration takes place for social reasons such as friendships, vacation, or with aspirations to start a family it shall point to social interactions.
Mobility
Environmental conditions and control subsystem elements of the migration systems theory regulate
conditions and forms of migration that take place, when and how (King, 2012). The two elements will be linked to the mobility variable to find out how they positively or negatively impact quota refugee migration experiences. One of the issues associated with refugee mobility is the states’ primary focus on refugees physical protection (Hermansson, Hornqvist and Timpka, 1996). This physical protection approach may result in the limitation of rights such as freedom of movement and the right to family (Koizumi, 1991). Therefore, refugee movement, opportunities, limitat io ns and conditions under which migration takes place and states’ effort to regulate migration flows will point to mobility.
Integration
The question of integration was linked to the element of adjustment mechanisms together with
control subsystems. This will be used to find out how integration eventually allows subsequent
flows of people, goods and services. Simplistically, resettling countries view integration as a long-term process of becoming a member of society (UNHCR, 2013). In a more complex manner, integration does not only passively happen, but an individual also has the choice to actively take part in the process (UNHCR, 2013). The process is often initiated by host governments whom in-turn require the refugee to contribute towards certain aspects of the process to ensure a cohesive,
equal, enabled and achieving society (Clifton-Sprigg, 2019). ‘The range of ways in which governments do this vary from facilitation and enablement to encouragement and coercion’ (ibid). However, disparities may intervene as governments may view integration one way, while newcomers live it another way’ (UNHCR, 2013:13).
Policies and instruments are put in place to regulate how refugees become self-sustaining, independent and part of the society; however, these integration policies may also be instrumentalized to reduce immigrant-clustering, secondary migration and transnational demands for family reunification by redefining what a family unit should or should not consist (de Haas, 2013). Hein de Haas posits that these countermeasures are put in place because there is a general perception that ‘migrants will help everyone to come over’ (de Hass, 2013:00.08). Therefore, all cases where quota refugees are required to have achieved or met certain standards before they are granted access to certain mobility rights will point to integration.
Research Method
Design Philosophy
This study seeks to investigate the migration experiences of quota refugee in Sweden using a constructivist methodological approach. According to Creswell “social constructivism is qualitative in nature and believes that individuals seek understanding of the world in which they live and work thereby developing subjective meanings of their experiences …. meanings directed toward(s) certain objects or things” (Creswell, 2014, 37). The constructivist approach provides varied and multiple meanings which leads this study to look for “complexity of views rather than narrowing meanings to a few categories and ideas” (Creswell, 2014, 37). This quest for social meanings will be achieved by relying on various individuals’ lived experiences and opinions of the phenomenon as much as possible by deductively analyzing the interview data through the lenses of migration system theory and inductively categorizing emerging themes during data collection
Semi-Structured Interviews
To explore the migration experiences of quota refugees, primary data will be collected through semi-structured interviews. An interview is a conversation for gathering information which includes the interviewee and the interviewer (observer) who coordinates the proceedings of the interview conversation and poses questions (Zarinpoush, 2006). Interviews can be conducted face-to-face, over the telephone or via video conferencing with individuals or groups (Zarinpous h, 2006; Creswell, 2014). Semi-structured interview method which will be used in this study takes place when the interviewer uses a set of predetermined thematic questions but not limited to these questions only. It allows the respondent to freely answer in their own words (May, 2001). Semi-structured interviews provide room for probing further follow-up questions depending on the interviewee’s responses to explore the various angles of the research (Zarinpoush, 2006). This can be achieved by using open-ended questions to allow the interviewer to restructure a question and adjust it to suit different scenarios to enhance comprehensibility. This will allow the interview to capture as much information from the interviewee as possible (Creswell, 2014). Even though the questions are not rigidly structured as is the case in structured interviews, this study will be deductively guided by the themes derived from the research aim and theory while emerging themes
will be inducted, categorized and integrated into the results. This study uses predetermined themes which are mobility, agency, family ties/social interactions and integration discussed in the theory section. (See also appendix 1)
Participants and Sampling
The study is carried out on a specific category of refugees within the broader refugee group in Sweden. The five participants in this study are refugees who arrived in Sweden between January and December 2014 from Botswana’s Dukwi Refugee Camp through UNHCR refugee quotas. Due to the objectives of this study, the sample is only limited to adult quota refugees from the age of 18 and above who are heads of their respective families. The challenge facing this study is that the quota refugee population from Botswana from this period is small, however, finding one quota refugee from this group will lead to references to other refugees from the same group. Therefore,
snowballing–which means the use of interviewee’s social networks will be central to the
recruitment of other participants (May, 2001). Furthermore, due to the limited size of the sample from this specific group, it will be difficult to gather them in one place for interviews. However, latest digital technologies allow interviews to be conducted face-to-face by people in differe nt geographical locations and in a convenient, less time consuming and cost-effective way.
Data Collection
The study will conduct semi-structured interviews using open-ended questions to collect primary data. A total of four thematic sections each with its own separate set of guiding questions are used to allow the observer/interviewer to control the interview proceedings (May, 2001). All interviews will be conducted via internet video conferencing to ensure that similar conditions prevail in all interviews without bias or prejudice. Two electronic devices are used, one for video conferencing and one for audio recording. The recording device will be kept offline for the entirety of the research process to ensure data privacy and to protect the identities of the interviewees.
Data will be collected using the interview thematic guide. The table below demonstrates how these themes will be arranged in relation to the theory and objectives.
Theme Objectives Theoretical Elements • Personal
Information
• Specific standardized questions that will initiate the dialogue and
contextualize the interview.
• The migrant
• Mobility • What are the opportunities
and challenges experienced by quota refugee during and after resettlement?
• Environmental Settings • Control
Subsystems
• Agency • Does the quota refugee
have free choice and independence in the forms of migration they take part in? • Migrant • Environmental settings • Family Ties Social Relations
• How does family ties and social networks influence further flows of quota refugee migration?
• Feedback loops
• Environmental settings
• Integration • How do integration
policies interfere with the quota refugee’s right to freedom of movement?
• Control subsystems • Adjustment
mechanisms
Fig 2: Method and theory relationship
Setting
The research is carried out on participants who live in different locations throughout Sweden and due to this reason, all interviews are similarly conducted via online video conferencing to ensure similar environmental conditions prevail in all interviews thereby minimizing bias and prejudice (May, 2001). Since the participants are adults who are either working or studying, the video conferences will be conducted on weekends or any other time which is agreed upon by the interviewer and interviewee. This will be done to avoid pressuring the interviewee and disturbing
their daily routines. Interviewees are required to be in a home setting or any other place deemed safe by both the interviewer and interviewee due to the sensitivity and nature of the information to be shared. Therefore, it is of great importance for this study that the interviewees are as comfortable to share their in-depth experiences and opinions as possible.
Ethical Considerations
Due to the sensitive nature of the sample group, this research takes precaution not to expose information that might jeopardize the participants’ protection. Tim May (2001) reiterates on the issue of the protection of participant, and Vetenskapsrådet also claimed that quite often researchers limit these protections to only participants but due to the nature of the sample group, protections will also be extended to their families and acquaintances (Vetenskapsrådet, 2017). Therefore, all call histories will be deleted afterwards and only audio material will be recorded using an offline device to maximize data and identity privacy. The audio recording will be stored in a secure environment and eventually destroyed as soon as it is transcribed and verified by the participants. Participants will be assigned codes to protect their identities and no further references shall be given in respect to their places of habitual residence, occupation, family size, gender or any other details that might reveal traces of their identities.
Before the interviews commence, participants will be informed about the purposes of this study and how the data will be used and shared. Participants will also be informed of their rights to opt-out of the interviews at any point and request their interview data to be destroyed. A consent form will be provided for every participant to sign and email it back before the interviews begin. The email records will be deleted after downloading the copy of the consent form. As soon as the consent forms are received the participant’s name is redacted.
Historical Background
The history of refugee resettlement dates back to the end of World War II when more than one million refugees were resettled to third-countries between 1947 and 1951, and most of them were resettled outside Europe (UNHCR, 2018b). The initiative was carried out to ensure displaced people who were vulnerable in post-war Europe could find new homes to settle (ibid). By 1951, the International Refugee Organization (IRO) had resettled 80% of all European refugees to countries outside Europe (ibid). The IRO was established as a non-permanent organization in 1946 and later succeeded by UNHCR in 1950. UNHCR was formed to seek durable solutions for European refugees of war. In the early days of UNHCR, resettlement was the only durable solution and it eventually became an integral part of the UNHCR operations (ibid). Ever since 1950, most refugee migration and resettlement took place within Europe, however, by the end of the 1990s, resettlement was from non-EU member states to the EU, USA, Canada, Sweden and other participating states (ibid).
History of Swedish Resettlement Program
Since 1950, Sweden has provided refuge to millions of quota refugees and asylum seekers from many countries around the world who seek protection for different reasons and these refugees use different routes to reach Sweden (Migrationsverket, 2018). According to Migrationsverke t’s website (2019), “the Swedish refugee quota has increased from 1900 to 5000 places since 2016”. This increase made Sweden the third-largest recipient of quota refugees. One can argue that the reason why Sweden is the third-largest recipient of quota refugees is due to its geographic location and population demographics (Triandafyllidou, 2010). The Nordic country’s geographic location as compared to other Schengen member states gives it an advantageous edge on migration policies over states like Italy and Spain because Sweden does not directly deal with the influx of clandestine migration, or at least not as compared to states in the outskirts of the Schengen geographic zone (Triandafyllidou, 2010).
Contextualizing Refugee Migration
When individuals and groups flee from conflicts and disasters in pursuit of asylum in another country, they embark on perilous journeys to safety (Triandafyllidou, 2010). Some fled with their
families, some alone and some as unaccompanied minors. It is quite common that refugees do not have enough time to prepare for these journeys therefore, some leave their homes without
travelling documents8 or any form of national identification (Zetterqvist, 1990). While
identification and travel documents are not necessary during the asylum application, they are important in the future if the refugee goes for resettlement or take voluntary repatriation (Migrationsverket, 2019b). The usefulness of identification after resettlement will be discussed later in the findings.
While in the country of asylum, refugees in Botswana are given refugee identification cards which they can use as alternative national identity cards, but they have no access to some civil rights (UNHCR, 2018a). Refugees do not have the right to travel beyond state borders unless in stakeholders’ facilitated journeys. This means that some refugees have never travelled outside a country as long as they remained refugees (Amnesty International, 2019; RefWorld, 2019). This results in challenges to maintain family ties over longer periods.
Who are the Quota Refugees from Botswana?
Botswana is located in the south-central part of Africa and it is neighbouring to Zimbabwe, Zambia, Namibia, and South Africa. Botswana is historically home to thousands of refugees from all over Africa (Zetterqvist, 1990). In its history, it has been home to thousands of African refugees. Among its neighbours, Botswana has provided asylum to refugees from Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibian Caprivi ethnic group and Angolans (ibid). As of recent, Botswana hosts 2300 refugees from African states (UNHCR, 2018a). This number has dwindled in the past decade from 5400 refugees in 2012 to 2300 in 2018 (ibid). The asylum and refugee space in Botswana continue to shrink each and every year due to the country’s restrictive refugee and asylum policies. In 2018, UNHCR recorded a 6% reduction and 22% in 2015 (UNHCR, 2018a). This reduction was contributed to by a couple of factors such as refoulment of the two largest refugee populations, Angolans and Namibians (Amnesty International, 2018). Voluntary-repatriation of Zimbabwean refugees has also resulted in the reduction of the refugee population. Other than repatriation, a
8 A passport given to non-citizens as an alternative to a national passport. It does not act as a formal identification
large number of Angolan refugees were integrated locally and some refugees were resettled to the US, Nordic, Europe, Canada and Australia.
Of the three durable solutions available, refugees in Botswana have only two solutio ns offered which are resettlement and repatriation. Local integration was removed from the durable solutions list after the integration of Angolan refugees in the early to mid-2000s (UNHCR, 2012). The shutting down of the programme left refugees competing for scarce resources. Some have chosen to voluntarily repatriate, while some remained in the camp for indefinite periods resulting in a protracted refugee situation (Kapitako, 2019). Even though Sweden has increased its refugee quotas to 5000 in 2018, it only took nine refugees from Botswana in 2014 (Migrationsverket, 2018). This number is influenced by several factors ranging from the limitations of the refugee selection process, the size of the refugee population in Botswana's Dukwi Refugee camp and the level of protection needs for refugees living in Botswana compared to other countries.
Meanwhile, the country maintains a centre for refugee detention which is run by the Botswana Prison Services to house refugees who leave the refugee camp without exit permits (UNHCR, 2018a). This resulted in increased refugee dependency and forced refugees to resort to harmful coping mechanisms and take risky decisions (ibid). As a result, some refugees resolve to repatriate back to their home countries which also puts their lives in danger (UNHCR, 2018a). The situatio n in the refugee camp becomes a push factor instead of it being a haven for safety to those who are persecuted in their home countries (Amnesty International, 2019).
The issue of refugee mobility in Botswana is another challenge to the state, stakeholders and refugees alike. Botswana is an emerging economy that was ranked as a poor economy two decades ago, that is the reason why it still maintains protectionist policies to preserve jobs for locals (Zetterqvist, 1990). As a result, refugees cannot legally get employment. On the other hand, the labour-market prefers the precariat refugee because they can work under harsh conditions at low wages (Nhongo, 2018). On the other hand, the effects of growing refugee businesses in the camp are feared that it will attract more migration to the country and bogus refugee claims by economic migrants (Zetterqvist, 1990).
In conclusion, those who are granted refugee statuses remain in the camp for as long as they are refugees. The issues surrounding this lack of mobility means that they cannot mainta in relations with relatives and at the same time relatives are not permitted to visit the camp without
the consent of the Office of the President (RefWorld, 2019). The other problem associated with the restrictions on mobility is that refugees cannot access job markets which makes them economically dependent on UNHCR, as a result, they cannot afford to maintain internet presence to keep in touch with the outside world, families and relatives (Amnesty International, 2019). This restrictiveness on mobility motivates the aims of this study to find out how these refugees experience migration after arriving in Sweden for resettlement.
Analysis
This section presents the findings of the study which were collected through semi-struct ured interviews of five quota refugees from Botswana’s Dukwi Refugee Camp. The interviewed quota refugees arrived in Sweden between 2014 and 2018 which is four years. The findings are not presented in any chronological order but according to the themes discussed in the theory section in line with the elements of the migration system theory to answer research questions;
• How are quota refugees’ migration experiences shaped by the opportunities and limitatio ns of refugee mobility rights between resettlement and naturalization?
Agency
In order to understand how refugee migration takes place and how migration decisions are made by refugees after resettlement, it was imperative to ask them if they have choices and independence in the forms of migration they participate in and how other environmental conditions such as governmental policies, social and economic conditions affect their choices and independence (King, 2012).
Interviewees shared similar views and experiences about free choice. They exhibited through their responses that, to a larger extent, they have free choice in migration. This is because Migrationsverket gives them travelling documents specifically for refugees who are under the 1951 Refugee Convention protection. The travelling document allows quota refugees to travel to any country of their choice. They said that they have been out of Sweden for business, studies, work, vacation among other reasons in different countries in four continents. Some said that they chose to travel back to Botswana, their first-country of refuge on their own for a variety of reasons.
According to King’s (2012) paper, the migrant and, in this case, the refugee does not migrate in a vacuum but interacts with other elements that condition the environment in which they migrate. Therefore, whether or not refugees identify opportunities to migrate, the ability to then travel depends on factors such as the immigration policies and the perceptions of the refugee travelling document by the countries to which the refugee intends to go to. These policies and perceptions affect the refugee’s ability to choose destinations and in this case, the refugee travelling document allows them to choose any country except their home countries. One
interviewee said, “I have been to Botswana, the US and recently I chose to do my exchange studies
in Israel for a year”
However, the fact that the refugee has free choice to travel around the world and partake in the forms of migration they participate in alone does not imply they have agency. Follow- up questions were then asked to establish if refugees were independent when making these migrat io n choices. For instance, if the refugee manages to circumvent the conditions put forth through policies and perceptions in the receiving country? Are there other factors that affect the refugee’s independence to migrate? The results of this study demonstrate that to some extent, refugees are not independent of migration regulations imposed on them by Sweden and they are also not independent because of their refugee status.
Interviewees pointed to two issues that affect their independence when migrating. These two issues have to do with the inscriptions in the travelling documents. The first issue deals with the refugee’s lack of national identification from the native country and the second one deals with where the refugee is told not to go. One of the respondents opened a page from his travelling document and the first inscription read, "identity of the holder has not been established". The other inscription read “this document is valid for all countries except (country of origin).” When I asked the respondents what their experiences were in relation to these inscriptions; three of the five interviewees who frequently travel answered that they have had difficulties with visa applicatio ns and they are required to physically present themselves at embassies to answer some questions and complete their applications. One interviewee claimed that a visa application was once denied on grounds of unverified identification of the holder stated in the travelling document. One interviewee said, “this is one of the problems of being a refugee, your identity is uncertain and
officials do not take you for your word and financially it is difficult to tick all the boxes on visa financial requirements.” Another interviewee added that “there are a lot of problems because immigration officers do not understand the document. You have to explain a lot and its embarrassing.”
Additionally, interviewees’ independence to travel proved to be limited due to the second inscription which states that the holder is not permitted to go to the country of origin (Migrationsverket, 2019b). This inscription puts a condition to limit the holders where they should and where they should not go. This means that the choice to go to their country of origin is out of question, thereby minimizing refugee migration space. The ability to visit home countries is
entirely dependent on the issuer of the passport who sets conditions about when a refugee can travel there (Migrationsverket, 2019a). Interviewees were not aware of the consequences of defying this statute and none of them had ever tried to do it before. The results also prove that there is a direct relationship between the agency element in this study to integration and mobility and also agree with Mabogunje’s assumption that migration systems are a complex of interacting elements, relationships and attributes. The rules that hinder independence and to a smaller extent, the choices of the refugee can be resolved once one becomes a citizen. Points of attributes and elements relationships and interactions will be fully discussed in the integration section of this analysis.
Finally, the findings of this section agree with the migration system theory as discussed by King (2012) and Mabogunje (in Bakewell, 2014) that migration does not happen in a vacuum but the refugee is an element in the migration system that interacts with different socio-economic settings, policies and other factors which in turn shape how they experience mobility. To a greater extent, the results demonstrate that quota refugees in Sweden have free choice to migrate to any destination, but to a smaller extent, their independence is limited by the policies that control the issuance of the travelling document. The results also demonstrate that the lack of independence is only interim until they have acquired citizenship which in turn will give them full mobility rights.
Mobility
According to King (2012) and Mabogunje (in Bakewell, 2014), migration does not happen in a vacuum but it is shaped by various elements which define the conditions under which it happens. King (2012) claims that migration takes place because there is the migrant who has the will to migrate and this migrant interact with other elements that set certain conditions on how migrat io n happens. These conditions which King (2012) called environmental settings can be in the form of governmental policies, means and availability of transport, communication, social and economic values. In this section, I argue that these elements as suggested by King help to shape the migrat io n experiences of individual quota refugees differently.
When interviewees were asked about the mobility opportunities. All five of them shared similar views when talking about the opportunities they have realized so far. They all claimed that they can travel as frequently as they wish and resettlement has presented them with more mobilit y rights than their previous experiences as refugees in Botswana and their home countries. Refugees
also claimed that their economic situations have changed and the improvement in their economic status allows them to travel to any country of choice except their home countries because they can afford to buy air tickets over longer distances. They also claimed that their migration experiences with a refugee travelling document in Europe were satisfactory due to its proximity, affordabilit y, the availability of different modes of transport, the perception and knowledge of refugee travelling documents by EU member states.
Interviewees also added that mobility rights have allowed them to travel in Europe visa-free for an unlimited period. These opportunities are not only limited to the right to migrate visa-freely, but they also have the right to live and work in any EU country. However, when I asked the interviewees if they have taken advantage of this right. They all said that they have not lived in any EU country for more than five days and when they visited these EU countries, they were either on vacation, social gathering of ethnic grouping or to visit a consulate of a none EU country. I further asked interviewees if they have ever taken advantage of their mobility rights to seek employment or non-social or non-economic services and they all said that they have not.
When asked about mobility challenges and limitations, there were divergent views and experiences between those who have not travelled outside the EU from those who have. Therefore, conditions that shape these five interviewees’ migration experiences differ when it comes to the limitations and challenges. This is because those who travelled outside EU apply for visas to every country they have travelled to and one interviewee said that a visa application was once “denied
because I could not produce identification from my home country.” Those who travel outside the
EU also bemoaned that the cost of travelling and visa applications limits their travelling experiences because it is too expensive and unaffordable due to the distances incurred and modes of transport used.
Interviewees who have travelled outside the EU also claimed that they have suffered some humiliating moments while travelling due to their refugeeness attached to the travelling document (Migrationsverket, 2019b). They said that immigration officers of the countries they visit are not familiar with the travelling document given to quota refugees by Migrationsverket. One interviewee said,
“Yes, I had some problems in Israel, I was stopped for more than an hour because they did not understand my document. This is a challenge also facing most of my friends.”
Another interviewee said,
“It is difficult and expensive to secure visas; I can’t wait to become a citizen. I had a lot of problems when I wanted to go to the US. I had to go to the embassy in person while citizens just do it online…The document helps but there is a mountain of challenges I faced that I can’t start sharing right now. It’s like people are not familiar with it and they ask a lot of questions. It’s embarrassing to be a suspect of forgery especially when you are a refugee. Everyone looked at me as if I was a dangerous person. I felt humiliated during the flight."
Finally, according to the above two interviewee accounts, the humiliation they encountered at the hands of border authorities was not related to issues of ethnicity, crime, race or terrorism but their refugee statuses makes it difficult for them to be identified. Results also demonstrate that there is migration discrimination of refugees at some borders and these experiences are not encountered while travelling within Europe but in countries outside the EU. This can be a result of various factors such as the unfamiliarity of the refugee travelling document, mobility restrictions put on refugees by non-resettling states, the unidentified passport holder status of quota refugee and stereotypes against refugees which are based on the perception that refugees are economic migrants who will take away jobs from the natives (Zetterqvist, 1990).
Family Ties and Social Interactions
In the literature review section, I discussed Horst’s (2012) study on Somali quota refugees where she raised the issue of transnationalism and how information which travels through social networks encourages refugees to migrate. Horst claimed that quota refugees use family reunification to bring their family members over from their home countries and former countries of refuge (Horst, 2012; de Hass, 2013). I further discussed how feedback loops are maintained through family ties and other forms of social interactions (King, 2012). The interviews started by reflecting on the interviewees' background history when they fled their home countries to contextualize the impact of family and social relations in refugee mobility.
Findings of this study prove that even though some refugees knew about Botswana as a good country to seek asylum, they did not have prior knowledge about resettlement and they did not know what resettlement was until the time they were already in the refugee system. None of the interviewees claimed to have any relations or interactions with people in the refugee camp before they became refugees which do not agree with findings from Horst’s study on refugees
from Somalia. To a certain extent, the results of this study prove that interviewees did not take resettlement as an alternative for economic migration since they did not know about it before they became refugees. However, it might not be fair to dismiss Horst’s claims based on the data gathered in this study due to the size of the sample and it will also be unfair to the results of her study to suggest that refugee migration is not influenced by some degree of economic interests, especially after resettlement. This assumption will be tested below.
Furthermore, in the theoretical section, I assumed that refugee migration is not economically driven but rather social. To test this assumption, interviewees were asked questions about the forms of migration they take part in. All five interviewees’ responses were somewhat similar. They all claimed that they have travelled at least once ever since the time they arrived in Sweden. These responses did not take into account where the person had travelled to but only asked if they have ever crossed Swedish borders into another country. Interviewees were then asked what their reasons for travelling were and how many times they have travelled. They all gave responses that fit into the codes of familial ties and social interactions. One data set demonstrates that refugee migration is to a smaller extent economically driven and a larger extent socially driven for reasons such as ethnic traditional gatherings, ethnic food markets, love, family, vacation and education. Two of the five interviewees travelled to Copenhagen only to participate in an ethnic food market where they met other people from their respective countries of origin and bought ethnic food supplies. The other three have also participated in food markets in Norway and Finland, and these three have also travelled outside Europe for social reasons such as marriage, meeting their loved ones and vacation.
The second data set demonstrates that those who came with their spouses and children to Sweden did not have any intention of bringing someone over even after they have settled and these interviewees have not left Europe ever since their arrival. They also claimed that they are focusing on integration at the moment and as soon as they become citizens, they wish to travel to meet their relatives in home countries instead of bringing them to Sweden. This group preferred to complete their integration process, get full mobility rights and then travel.
The third data set came from a group of quota refugees who were unmarried, single and alone when they arrived in Sweden. This data also conform to the assumption that to a greater extent, refugee migration happens for social reasons. The three interviewees who were not married when they came to Sweden have all travelled to the first-country of refuge, Botswana, where they
have maintained social contacts with other refugees in Dukwi Refugee Camp. They also claimed that their reasons for travelling there were for love and family or the prospects of starting a family with someone who is a refugee in the camp in Botswana.
One interviewee said,
“I got married to my fellow refugee boyfriend in Botswana, Gaborone and my traditional marriage was in Kigali Rwanda… lately, I have travelled between these countries and I will do so until my husband gave up his refugee status for repatriation. He (my boyfriend) could not get help from UNHCR to reunite with me through resettlement because Sweden was not prioritizing refugees from Botswana in the past few years. When he revoked his refugee status to return to Burundi, he started applying for a visa to come over here. If he gets the visa, I will not have to travel much because my reasons for travelling now are because of love and maintaining my children’s relationships with their father.”
The other two interviewees who fall in this same category shared similar experiences with the above statement and said that they have travelled for love and other reasons such as holiday vacation and studies. Even though interviewees demonstrate an interest to meet their families and friends, they only travelled for love and other elements that fall into the social interactio ns category.
In conclusion, the results of this section demonstrate that to a greater extent, existing family ties did not contribute to the migration experiences of quota refugees and some extent it is also the reason why some interviewees did not experience migration at all. Quota refugees who came to Sweden without families and not married did not travel to maintain existing familial relations but to start a new one and existing family ties have influenced migration experiences of quota refugees. This is because those refugees who were resettled with their families did not show any intent to travel for familial causes in the interim and those who have travelled did not do so for existing familial relations. The intent to start a new family is not defined as a family tie because of the definitions used to define what constitutes a family unit (Grace, 2019), and what King (2012) discussed about social settings which can cause or necessitate flows of goods, ideas and people. Results also demonstrate that the group of refugees that did not travel have not done so because they have their families with them in Sweden and extended family units are not a priority for them. Therefore, even though this group did not travel, family ties are the reason why they did not and
the absence of migration helped to shape how they interact with other elements in the migrat io n system, thereby shaping their migration experiences differently from those without families.
Finally, the results also demonstrate that to a greater extent, social interactions simila r ly shaped the migration experiences of all interviewees. This is because all interviewees had travelled more than once for social reasons other than familial relations. Even though the number of times they travelled outside the country, the distances and destinations travelled vary, they all have experienced social interactions at different levels and to different extents. The results have also proved that the experiences of these quota refugees have been greatly shaped by migration for social reasons and none of the data points to economically motivated migration reasons.
Integration
Integration was defined earlier using a summary of definitions used by most resettling countries to explain the process by which a migrant/refugee becomes part of the host society (UNHCR, 2013). The process of integration happens in multiple dimensions where the host society sets conditions on how one becomes part of the host and the migrant is an active agent in this process (Clifton-Sprigg, 2019). This study assumed that integration is one of the elements that interact with the migrant and helps to shape the migrant's migration experiences. By using King’s (2012) discussion of the elements of the migration system theory, the assumption was made to suggest that integration falls somewhere between the elements of control subsystems and adjustment mechanisms. Control subsystem being the conditions set by the host country and adjustment mechanism being the efforts of the migrant to become part of the host society (King, 2012).
Interviewees were asked if integration policies and processes in Sweden shape their migration experiences and data demonstrates that there is a direct relationship between the integration processes of refugees and migration. There are two categories of migration experiences that are related to integration which were realized through variations in the way intervie wees responded in the discussion.
The data categories realized are as follows; the first group consists of quota refugees who have identity documents from their home country and the second group does not have any form of identification. This categorization reflects the previous discussion which touched on the issues of inscriptions written in the travelling document which affect the refugee’s agency and mobilit y. Interviewees expressed how the inscription which says, ‘identity of the passport holder is not
