× Dismiss

Never Miss an Update.

News Deeply will use the information you provide to send you newsletter updates and other announcements. See our privacy policy for more.

Refugees Deeply is designed to help you understand the complex web of geopolitical, human rights, environmental, legal and other factors combining to make the refugee issue one of the most challenging of our lifetimes. Our editors and expert contributors are working around the clock to bring you greater clarity and comprehensive coverage.

Sign up to our newsletter to receive our weekly updates, special reports, and featured insights as we widen the lens on this critical – and quintessentially human – issue.

How Grocers in Denmark Became the Key to Refugee Integration

Rural stores in Denmark contain vital lessons for making asylum centers work. Researchers Zachary Whyte, Birgitte Romme Larsen and Mona Schaldemose uncover a quiet success story.

Written by Mona Schaldemose, Birgitte Romme Larsen, Zachary Whyte Published on Read time Approx. 5 minutes
Demonstrators stage a protest against Denmark's asylum seeker law. Ayhan Mehmet/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

In Denmark, asylum seekers are required to stay in asylum centers while their asylum applications are processed. During this time they are not allowed to work or pursue education but are provided with accommodation and a small stipend to buy food and other essentials.

Waiting times range from around six months to more than 10 years in some extreme cases, and the number of asylum centers fluctuates with the number of asylum applicants and the length of processing times: In 2007, there were only seven asylum centers in Denmark; in 2016 the number exceeded 100 – and it is currently 22.

While the Danish Immigration Service is responsible for asylum seekers in Denmark, they subcontract the work to asylum center operators, either the Danish Red Cross or one of several rural municipalities. Rural municipalities now administer more than half of the centers. Rural communities in Denmark, as across the Global North, are characterized by an aging and reducing population, declining job opportunities and the closure of local businesses as well as welfare institutions such as schools and retirement homes. There are therefore good economic arguments for rural municipalities to host asylum centers.

First, the closure of many welfare institutions in rural areas means that there are unoccupied buildings – often municipally owned and relatively cheap to rent – that can be quickly refitted. Second, rural municipalities are particularly interested in the jobs and secondary economic benefits derived from the asylum centers, such as the creation of demand for other services including remodeling and maintenance, which means more work for locals in a context where the creation of even a small number of jobs has a big impact. Third, the enrollment of asylum-seeking children in local schools can stave off school closures. Similarly, asylum seekers of all ages can support local associational life, for example, by participating in local football clubs.

Finally, because of the relative isolation of many rural asylum centers, asylum seekers often have little option but to spend their money locally, which in particular means buying their food at local grocery stores. When we asked grocery store managers to rate the importance of asylum centers to their overall business only one felt the center had no positive effect on their business; seven reported a small effect, eight a medium effect and three a powerful effect. Three managers told us that their stores were dependent on the business from the asylum center for their survival.

Social Hubs and Gatekeepers

As well as being merchants, the store owners and managers whom we interviewed saw themselves as upholders of their communities. One said, “We say that we are kind of an unofficial mayor. It is important that we are present at town events and support local initiatives.”

Partly as a result of the closure of other informal social meeting places such as schools, stores were increasingly central to local community life. They provided locals with a place to meet and talk, but they also supported local associations and institutions in a deeply interwoven circuit of economic and social exchange. The threat of closure of such stores was understood to have real economic consequences for the entire community. In this context, grocery stores could function as gatekeepers for asylum centers.

One store manager on the island of Langeland, for example, asked his staff to only speak positively of the town’s newly opened asylum center, feeling that so long as there had not yet been any negative experiences it was important to support it as he would any other new institution in town.

One store manager on the island of Langeland, for example, asked his staff to only speak positively of the town’s newly opened asylum center, feeling that, so long as there had not yet been any negative experiences, it was important to support it as he would any other new institution in town. This was in part due to his appreciation of the custom that the asylum center brought to his store, but also as a way of bolstering the collective spirit in the town and showing that the community could make it work. For him, this also meant working with local voluntary associations (particularly the local football club, which he sponsored) to create opportunities for asylum seekers to participate.

Another store manager explained that she quickly found herself helping asylum seekers to navigate her store, the local community and in some cases even the asylum system, and so had become a contact point for interactions between the asylum center and the local community. For asylum centers, having good relations with local communities can open opportunities for cooperation with local institutions and voluntary associations, which can widen the social opportunities of asylum seekers and combat the sense of isolation and frustration that tends to characterize their waiting time.

Social and Economic Incorporation

While polarized national debates often frame asylum seekers as either victims in need of saving or threats to the social order, local communities tended to be more pragmatic through experiencing asylum seekers’ participation in local community life, for example, as consumers, football players or school pupils. One of our rural respondents said, “Now that [the asylum center] is here, the question is ‘How do we make the best of it?’”

However, local communities sometimes complained about the relative seclusion of asylum centers from local community life – often understood as a lack of involvement with local institutions and a certain obscurity as to their daily operation – as well as a perceived lack of communication from authorities and center operators. The resulting disapproval could exacerbate the local isolation of asylum centers and those living there, as well as put local political pressure on the hosting municipalities to limit their cooperation with the Danish Immigration Service.

Managers and staff at the asylum centers may contribute to this shift by buying necessities for the center locally, using local venues for events and hiring locals, thereby involving the institution in local economic life

At best, this would mean a failure to capitalize on the opportunities available through local cooperation; at worst, this could spell the closure of the local asylum center. There is thus important work to be done in building and expanding relations and communication with local associations and institutions.

Managers and staff at the asylum centers may contribute to this shift by buying necessities for the center locally, using local venues for events and hiring locals, thereby involving the institution in local economic life. These steps in turn create dialogue and intersections with local associations, who can provide opportunities for asylum seekers and voluntary support for the asylum center.

This might mean developing and sharing a local playground rather than building a separate one for the asylum center, or asking local associations if they can use unneeded furniture from the center rather than throwing it away. Local communities prove useful partners for asylum centers, but this relies on actively working to interweave asylum centers with local social and economic life, rather than operating them as isolated – and isolating – institutions.

This article originally appeared in edition 58 of Forced Migration Review, Economies: rights and access to work.

× Dismiss
We have updated our Privacy Policy with a few important changes specific to General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and our use of cookies. If you continue to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies. Read our full Privacy Policy here.

Suggest your story or issue.

Send

Become a Contributor.

Have a story idea? Interested in adding your voice to our growing community?

Learn more