Welfare Regimes in Crisis

Policy Divergence in Sweden and Norway’s Reception and Integration of Ukrainian Refugees

Abstract

This paper examines the contrasting policy responses of Sweden and Norway to the Ukrainian refugee crisis, revealing how two seemingly similar Nordic welfare states have adopted distinct approaches to refugee reception and integration. Although both countries share humanitarian traditions and welfare-oriented governance models, Sweden has pursued a more restrictive and bureaucratic policy, limiting access to long-term residence, welfare benefits, and integration programs. In contrast, Norway has implemented more flexible and inclusive measures, enabling broader access to employment, housing, and language training. Methodologically, the research adopts a qualitative comparative approach based on secondary data analysis. It draws on governmental policy documents, official reports, academic articles, and media sources to trace differences in institutional design, implementation practices, and discursive framing of the Ukrainian refugee response. This multi-source strategy enables an in-depth understanding of how each state operates on humanitarian protection within its welfare and migration systems. The paper argues that these policy divergences reflect broader political discourses and welfare governance orientations: Sweden’s turn toward securitization and administrative control contrasts with Norway’s pragmatic, community-based approach. By comparing these two cases, the study contributes to debates on the resilience and transformation of Nordic welfare regimes under crisis-driven migration pressures.