European immigration and integration : Finland

Abstract

The 1990s witnessed a period of strong immigration in Finland with the number of foreign arrivals increasing five-fold during the course of the decade. A major reason was the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the arrival of the Ingrians and other ethnic Finns. A significant proportion (roughly one-fifth) of the immgratory flow were refugees. Yet Finland remains an homogeneous society, with the proportion of foreign citizens accounting for only 1.9 per cent, the lowest among EU countries. Nevertheless, the challenge Finland faces is one of transition from a monolithic to a polyvalent culture. The recent increase in immigration has created a number of problems. Unemployment among foreign citizens is still over 30 per cent; it is eight per cent nationally. Negative attitudes and xenophobia among the native population towards foreigners remains. The varied composition of migration - refugees, asylum seekers, displaced persons, ordinary migrants and family members – places unique pressures on policy-makers and the citizenry alike. The flows have become more flexible, and the incidence of illegal migration and people smuggling is increasing. To address these challenges, the EU is gradually moving towards adopting a common policy on immigration and refugee issues as flagged under the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. This shift to greater supra-national authority is inevitable. Finland is currently alone among EU states in having a Russian border. However, this will soon change with the imminent enlargement of the EU to Central and Eastern Europe, constituting a major challenge for the EU’s migration policies. The eastern parts of Germany and Austria will receive most of the migratory labour from the newly-admitted nations, although the size of this flow is uncertain. Obviously the net intake of immigrants from existing EU nations will continue to increase, but access will be strictly controlled and mostly short-term. The EU’s express objective is to ensure the efficiency of migration policy by emphasising integration. Finland is not alone in needing migrants to resolve problems associated with a rapidly ageing population. The test will be its willingness to do so. Immigrants are still often seen as undeserving competitors in the labour market. Finnish society’s attitudes will have to adjust to both the temporary and permanent presence of an increasing number of people of a foreign background. Immigrants and their children will be a great asset to Finland in the future, as the Australian example attests. The key questions are how many and what type of immigrants should the country admit? On these and other issues, clear goals and guidelines are yet to be defined.