Presents a research design on why and how states should manage cultural diversity with the emphasis that different combinations of neutrality and recognition work better depending on the circumstances. The concept of difference, reason for toleration, the concept of harm and the ends of toleration are discussed. Research design from case selection to material is briefly brought up. L. Pitkaniemi
The immigration of people from other parts of the world has meant new challenges to the Nordic welfare model and its fundamental idea of social integration and full citizenship. Current policy in Scandinavian countries calls for distributing newly arriving refugees between different regions and housing areas. This article examines the dilemmas created by this policy, and how such dilemmas are perceived and handled in Sweden, Denmark and Norway. With reference to previous related research, similarities and differences between the three countries' policies are analyzed at both national and local levels. The article's authors note that an immigrant policy characterized by the goal of social integration has created tensions between the ideals of integration versus the preservation of ethnic cultures, the individual versus the collective, and egalitarianism versus specialized treatment of immigrants as a group separate from the general population. Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have differed in their handling of these tensions, with Sweden opting for an approach based on a multicultural model, whereas Denmark has adopted a strict integrationist policy, including limits on the immigration of foreign residents' relatives, and Norway adopting a middle position. On the local level, the immigration policies and practices of Malmo, Arhus, and Oslo, as respective representative communities of the three countries under study, are compared. Adapted from the source document.
