Forced Migration in the OIC Member Countries:
Policy Framework Adopted by Host Countries
177
predict a budget increase of SEK 80 million for 2018 and SEK 150 million for 2019
(approximately USD 9.8 million and 18.5 million, respectively).270
The long-term effects of the increased asylum flows will thus depend to a large extent on how
well newcomers are integrated into the labor market and are able to become self-
supporting.271 There is the potential for positive economic and fiscal effects. The newly arrived
asylum population has in recent years been very young (with over 80 percent below the age of
35 in 2015), and will have many working, and tax-paying, years ahead of them if they are
successfully brought into the labor force. But protection beneficiaries have long struggled to
integrate into the Swedish labor market, and economic outcomes for forced migrants are
typically low. Concerns about economic exclusion among refugee populations have caused
policymakers to invest heavily in programs and interventions designed to facilitate self-
sufficiency. Time will tell whether these substantial investments will pay meaningful
dividends.
Most critically, the challenges of the past year have drawn attention to an implicit tension
within the Swedish system between the generosity of the protection policies and numbers of
people who can effectively be provided with protection at such a high standard. Looking
ahead, several factors are also likely to dictate the sustainability of Sweden's current approach
to protection. First, while most authorities and stakeholders seem to view the current,
reduced rate of arrivals as largely sustainable, many have expressed doubts that the system
could withstand another surge in asylum flows like that seen in the fall of 2015. Should the
pace of arrivals rise again, the capacity of the system will be rapidly exceeded. Second, in a
system predicated on long-term acceptance of refugee populations, successful integration is
critical. If the latest cohort of new arrivals is not rapidly and effectively integrated into
Swedish society and institutions, and especially the labor market, it may call into question the
sustainability of the system as a whole. The potential for the growth of a large unauthorized
population of rejected asylum seekers that exists outside of the highly developed formal
inclusion structures is a further risk. Finally, the consequences of the recent reforms for the
functioning of the system itself remain to be seen. While the reforms purport to reduce
demand for protection in Sweden, and thus provide some breathing room for the key elements
of the protection system, key stakeholders have expressed concerns that the changes will in
fact be detrimental by increasing the complexity of system (and making it more burdensome
to implement) and by undermining the effectiveness of integration efforts.
270 Försäkringskassan, Budgetunderlag 2017-2019, (Stockholm: Försäkringskassan, 2016),
ac30e7a7819d/budgetunderlag_del_2_2016-02-19.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
271 Aiyar et al., “The Refugee Surge in Europe: Economic Challenges”