| Popis: |
In Sweden asylum seekers may choose to stay in ‘Facility Accommodation’ arranged by the Swedish Migration Agency or in ‘Own Accommodation’ arranged by the asylum seeker. After a decision of residence permit, people in the former continue to be responsible for their own accommodation, while people in Facility Accommodation are transferred from the Swedish Migration Agency run accommodation in the reception system of a municipality. In 2016 the Swedish government introduced a Settlement Law in order to speed up this transfer and encourage the geographical dispersal of refugee reception, making it mandatory for municipalities to receive and organise accommodation for a specified number of refugees. Besides refugees who stayed in Facility Accommodation during the asylum process, the law also includes resettled refugees. Refugees who stayed in Own Accommodation during the asylum process are excluded from access to this planned housing organized by municipalities, as are family members that arrive through family reunification pathways. Swedish accommodation approaches differentiate between different groups of asylum seekers and refugees. The entry pathway and accommodation type during the asylum process will determine access to municipal accommodation as a newly arrived refugee. Moreover, while the Settlement Law is unspecific in itself concerning what kind of (and under what conditions) accommodation is to be provided, it is also implemented differently across Swedish municipalities. GLIMER Research draws on rigorous, qualitative research with stakeholders in the region of Skåne to reach better understanding of the dynamics and implications of on-going transformations of the reception system at the national, regional and local levels. Our findings highlight the contentious dimensions of accommodation governance, the differential treatment of different categories of asylum seekers and refugees, and the ways in which the Settlement Law enforces the municipalities to implement measures of social homelessness in response to structural homelessness. Our findings include responses amongst different municipalities, and highlight issues of equal treatment in the reception system. |
