Social and civic integration are crucial for the overall cohesion and stability of host societies, enabling migrants to contribute fully and fostering inclusive communities. In the context of increasing migration and its implications for social cohesion, the ability of national statistical systems to capture these dimensions is essential for evidence-based policymaking.
This report examines the indicators currently used to assess migrant integration, specifically focusing on social participation and civic engagement, across the Nordic region. While Nordic countries are committed to monitoring integration, their approaches and indicators vary. Measuring these aspects is challenging due to their more experiential nature; however, doing so can provide empirical evidence to inform policy, evaluate programme effectiveness, monitor progress, and support academic research. Comparing Nordic countries offers valuable insights in light of their shared welfare state models but divergent integration strategies.
The report’s methodology involved examining publicly available databases and reports from National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) in the Nordic countries, conducting interviews with NSI personnel, and reviewing international statistical databases and surveys. As measurable variables used to represent complex phenomena such as social and civic integration, integration indicators aim to capture the essence of these multifaceted concepts.
An outlook on the status of Nordic indicators available through the Nordic Statistical Institutes reveals a heterogeneous and uneven landscape for measuring migrant social and civic integration. While certain dimensions such as political participation (voting, representation) and naturalisation are relatively well-documented in most countries, there are significant deficiencies in other key areas. Notably, indicators for feeling of belonging, trust in host-country institutions, and perceived discrimination are largely absent or not disaggregated by migrant status.
Furthermore, there is limited and inconsistent attention to everyday interpersonal integration, including social contact between immigrants and host-society members, interethnic marriage, and participation in religious or ethics communities. This indicates that current statistical measurement is skewed towards formal and legalistic dimensions at the expense of more experiential and relational aspects of integration.
Interviews with Nordic Statistical Institutes representatives highlighted that while register-based data is central to monitoring structural integration (employment, education, income), data collection for broader social inclusion or civic engagement is less developed and often occurs on an ad hoc or project basis. No formal, standardised definitions for social inclusion or civic engagement are used by the institutes. Major challenges in measuring these dimensions include resource constraints, low survey participation rates among migrants, cultural and linguistic barriers, and challenges posed by high mobility or unstable residence. The political context also shapes data collection, with a cautious approach to sensitive topics, although growing societal interest is driving demand for more nuanced data.
Beyond Nordic Statistical Institutes, data relevant to social and civic integration is available from other national-level institutions, as well as international and European sources such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), Gallup, World Values Survey (WVS), European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC), and European Social Survey (ESS). However, these sources often have limitations such as data aggregation, small sample sizes for detailed migrant analysis, or a lack of specific focus on social and civic dimensions.
Developing a multidimensional assessment of integration could provide a more comprehensive understanding of this complex process. Current approaches typically emphasise economic indicators while neglecting important social dimensions. Significant data gaps remain for these ‘softer’ dimensions such as culture, identity, social ties, and discrimination, which are crucial components of social and civic integration. Developing robust and comparable indicators calls for the expanded use of available register data, the implementation of targeted surveys and/or larger sampling strategies, as well as efforts to address methodological constraints.