Conclusions and policy recommendations

• Author: Mehtonen, Susanna
• Pages: 27-30

The inte gration of refugee s in Finland

PE 638.397 27

5. CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusions

Finla nd has a func tioni ng re cep tion a nd integr ation s ystem that has gone t hrough se veral changes , in

parti cular followi ng the surge of asylum applicants in 2015. Several legislative amendments in 2016

have cha nged t he functi oning of the as ylum proc edure and infri nged upon t he ri ght of as ylum s ee kers

to a fair procedure. The overall trend in recent years has been to try to m ake Finland a l ess attrac tive

destination country for asylum s eekers, rather than focusing on the international responsi bilities of

Finland to allow asylum seekers fair access to protection. While Finland still has a well-fun cti oni ng

reception system with a good level of preparedness, the impact of the recent amendments are

long-term. The res tricti ons of the asylum de termi nation procedure (as the restrictions on procedure

only app ly to as ylum see kers ) and the re stri cti ons on the right to family reunification create actual and

per ceived i nequalit y, othe rness and dis criminat ion among asylum seekers and refugees, which leads

to difficulties in integrating into society.

Several projects on integration have received EU funding and while there have been several successful

proj ect s with ne w inno vations a nd an accum ulati on of know-how, i ntegr ation activities should not rely

on proje ct-fundi ng as heavil y as t hey curre ntly do. Proje ct-bas ed integrati on is realised by different

actors , with di ffere nt timel ines and in differe nt re gions and areas of the country. It is essentially

fragmented integr ation. Integration is by de sign a long-te rm, holi stic undertaki ng - for many it is

perhaps even a life-long undertaking. Proj ect -based funding does not al low for the long-t e rm p l a nni ng

and activities required for thri ving integration.

5.2. Po licy recommendations

The main chall enges in term s of poli cy, relate to the perm anent cuts and restric tions made in the

asylum determination procedure after 2015. The lessons learnt from such restrictions is that restricting

free legal aid only pr olongs the procedure and p ushes t he focus of the asyl um de term ination

procedure to the appellate phase. It also leads to a rise in renewed applications and thus prol ongs the

overall length of the asylum procedure.

One of the key c hallenge s is that a lo t of the acti vitie s and expe rtise i n recept ion and integr ation in

Finland is fragmented to p roje cts that function wi th short-t erm proj ect fundi ng. This impairs the

devel opm ent of m ore c omp rehe nsive p ractic es and the sc ali ng of inform ation i nto l arge r aggre gates

and m ay thus als o undermine integration measures. On the whole it is therefore imperative to have

more long-ter m funding and large -scale projects, with enough flexibility to carry them out locally. This

would decrease the regional inequality of asylum seekers and refugees when i t comes to the ac cess

and quality of servi ces.

In addi tion to the policy recomm endations listed bel ow, some r esearch p rojects have very recently

pro duced i ntere sting and novel policy recommendations for integration and tools for b etter

underst anding i ntegrati on. For example: the TRU ST-project supported by the Academy of Finland

pro duced a roadmap for the integration of unaccompanied minors82 and the curre ntly r unning

Dwe ll ers in Ag ile Citie s proj ect has p roduc ed a two-way research-based integrat ion path for adul ts who

82 Anna-Kaisa Kuusisto & Kristiina Korjonen-Kuusipuro, 2018, Tiekartta: Yksin tulleiden alaikaisten maahanmuuttajien kuulumisen tunteen

tukeminen ja sosi aalisen tuen k ehi t tamine n Suomessa.

Avail able at : http://www.transculturaltrust.net/wp-conte nt/u pload s/2 018/ 09/Fi nal _Trus t_Ti ekar tta.p df.