Understanding Bosnian refugee integration and how it differs by country of resettlement: Denmark and the United States of America

Abstract

Wealthy countries have responded to the world\u27s refugee crisis by instituting diverse resettlement policies aimed at providing protection, economic support, and integration into the host country. Reflective of host countries\u27 ideologies and beliefs about refugees\u27 needs, these policies reveal little insight into refugees\u27 perspectives and offer little foresight into the achievability of integration over time. Juxtaposing refugee perspectives and policies, this study compared “lived experience” with policies on paper. This qualitative comparative case study explored the cases of 48 Bosnian refugees who had resettled in Denmark and the USA. The study examined their integration and how similarities and differences in achieving integration related to the resettlement country\u27s policy contexts, programs, and ideological traditions. A qualitative case study approach was chosen because it was the most effective way to gain knowledge of refugees\u27 experiences and perceptions in the context of the societies in which they resettled. Data included interviews with refugees and key informants, participant observation, and documents. Findings revealed that both groups struggled with language and employment challenges to integration. Social support networks that included Americans/Danes aided integration as they provided significant support in navigating resettlement. American congregational sponsorship mediated struggles church-sponsored participants faced, facilitating integration. A key difference between the groups was the extent to which participants felt a sense of national affiliation and were able to move beyond integration to achieve normalcy. In Denmark, participants tended to feel separate from Danish society and did not believe that Bosnian culture was valued and accepted on par with Danish culture. In the USA, where participants endured financial struggles, particularly in the first year, their unwavering faith in America as a land of immigrants and their belief that they could fully belong in American society distinguished them from refugees in Denmark. Implications included a reevaluation of American resettlement policy regarding national standards for resettlement services; wider recognition of refugees\u27 educational qualifications and an inclusion of refugee voices in planning and implementing resettlement programs in both countries; a reevaluation of Danish integration policies to address refugees\u27 segregation; and an acknowledgement of the changing fabric of Danish life to legitimately incorporate ethnic minorities