The multi-cultural society

Immigration has existed in Norway for many centuries. According to Statistics Norway (Statistisk sentralbyrå), immigrants, who stem from 200 countries, presently make up 14 per cent of the overall population.


The term ‘modern period of immigration’ refers to immigration that began in the 1960s. Immigrants seeking work, the majority of whom were men from Pakistan, formed the first wave.

The authorities implemented a so-called immigration stop in 1975 with the idea that immigration should be limited and controlled. Political opinions of how well the authorities have succeeded in these ambitions are varied.

The second wave, which lasted from 1975 to 1989, consisted largely of immigrants, many of them children and women, seeking family reunification, which explains why the number of immigrants increased despite the so-called immigration stop implemented of 1975.

The third phase of immigration, 1989 – 2004, was characterized by an increase of asylum seekers. During this time, the situation became more complex with more people trying to immigrate for a variety of reasons. An increase in people seeking work followed the 2004 EU expansion. Employment based immigration became once again a major part of migration to Norway.

In parallel with discussions on the nature and extent of immigration, a debate is taking place regarding the degree to which immigrants should become a part of the society in which they live. The balance between equal rights on the one hand and the right to be different on the other hand informs tensions regarding both goals and means in immigration politics.

Changes in the makeup of the population have ushered in considerable political challenges for the authorities, which include, among others: questions pertaining to duties the new citizens should have: and the manner in which to secure support for the welfare state’s economic and ideological foundations.

The challenge inherent in integration revolves around the balance between the right to equality as it is anchored in the politics of equal rights and the acknowledgement of differences in the practice of cultural and religious activities

The notion of assimilation, in the sense of the pressure to conform, is often used in contrast to the concepts of inclusion and integration. Nonetheless, the discussion includes the notion of degree of difference, in the sense of how great differences can be before society is unable to handle the consequences that may arise. In the same vein, one should address the question of the need for common sets of rules of behavior in central societal arenas.

Integration politics are focused on securing equal access to society’s central arenas, such as schools and the labor market. Consequently, authorities are concerned with legal frameworks for the regulation of labor markets and other activities in order to secure diversity and equal rights.

In addition, the authorities have implemented an introduction program for new arrivals with the intention of providing the information and socialization skills needed to secure a good life in Norway. As education is seen as a very important factor, considerable governmental resources are allocated to the acquisition of language skills such that as many as possible can take part in education.

One source of recurring tension in immigration politics stems from the fact that different parts of society have divergent visions. For example, while the goal of equality regarding salary and career opportunities is not controversial, the situation is different regarding religious and cultural topics, where the recognition of the right to break with the majority norm is strong. It is thus difficult to make a case for one and only one goal for integration politics.

A final consideration regards the fact that integration institutions are national in character whereas immigrant groups are by definition characterized by their global or international nature. Many new citizens find themselves in a situation in Norway where they experience several frames of reference at the same time. Some of them are connected to people and institutions in Norway, while they are also connected to other countries, societies and ethnic groups.

The multi-cultural society



Research Director, Professor
Doctoral Researcher
Research Professor
Head of Research
Doctoral Researcher
Beret Bråten og Ragnhild Steen Jensen
Fafo-rapport 2018:09
Beret Bråten og Ragnhild Steen Jensen
Fafo-rapport 2016:25
Jon Horgen Friberg
Fafo-rapport 2016:43
Anja Bredal, Beret Bråten, Kristin Jesnes og Anne Hege Strand
Fafo-rapport 2015:40
Beret Bråten og Hanne Bogen
Fafo-rapport 2015:39
Anne Britt Djuve, Hedda Haakestad og Erika Braanen Sterri
Fafo-rapport 2014:34
Beret Bråten, Nina Drange, Hedda Haakestad og Kjetil Telle
Fafo-rapport 2014:44
Jon Horgen Friberg og Olav Elgvin
Fafo-rapport 2014:43
Tove Mogstad Aspøy og Beret Bråten
Fafo-rapport 2014:07
Beret Bråten og Olav Elgvin
Fafo-rapport 2014:16
Beret Bråten og Miriam Latif Sandbæk
Fafo-rapport 2014:23
Anne Britt Djuve og Anne Skevik Grødem (red.)
Fafo-rapport 2014:27
Beret Bråten og Olav Elgvin
Fafo-rapport 2014:32
Lene Bore, Anne Britt Djuve og Kristian Rose Tronstad
Fafo-rapport 2013:11
Micheline van Riemsdijk and Matthew Cook
Fafo-report 2013:44
Nerina Weiss
Fafo-rapport 2013:47
Jon Horgen Friberg, Olav Elgvin og Anne Britt Djuve
Fafo-rapport 2013:31
Olav Elgvin, Jon Rogstad og Sarah Fossen Sinnathamby
Fafo-rapport 2013:02
Miriam Latif Sandbæk og Anne Britt Djuve
Fafo-rapport 2012:27
Hanne Bogen og Nina Drange
Fafo-notat 2012:19
Anne Britt Djuve, Miriam Latif Sandbæk og Henriette Lunde
Fafo-rapport 2011:35
Anne Britt Djuve og Kristian Rose Tronstad
Fafo-rapport 2011:07
Anne Britt Djuve, Hanne C. Kavli og Anniken Hagelund
Fafo-rapport 2011:02
Fafo-notat 2011:25
Anne Britt Djuve, Hanne C. Kavli og Kristian R. Tronstad
Fafo-notat 2011:06
Anne Britt Djuve og Hanne Cecilie Kavli
Fafo-notat 2010:10
Fafo-notat 2010:09
Hanne Bogen og Kaja Reegård
Fafo-rapport 2009:31
Anniken Hagelund, Hanne C. Kavli og Kaja Reegård
Fafo-rapport 2009:18
Hanne C. Kavli
Fafo-rapport 2007:22
Jon Horgen Friberg og Monica Lund
Fafo-rapport 544
Monica Lund og Jon Horgen Friberg
Fafo-rapport 495
Monica Lund og Jon Horgen Friberg
Fafo-rapport 446
Anne Britt Djuve og Jon Horgen Friberg
Fafo-notat 2004:32
Anniken Huitfeldt og Hanne Cecilie Kavli
Fafo-notat 2004:23
Andre Fafo-utgivelser
Fafo-rapport 342
Anne Britt Djuve og Hanne Cecilie Pettersen
Fafo-rapport 262
Gudmund Hernes og Knud Knudsen
Fafo-rapport 109

Jon Horgen Friberg

Does selective acculturation work?
Cultural orientations, educational aspirations and school effort among children of immigrants in Norway

Jon Horgen Friberg

Konflikt, fellesskap og forandring
Foreldreskap og sosial kontroll i innvandrede familier fra Pakistan, Somalia og Sri Lanka

Grung Anne-Hege & Beret Bråten.

Chaplaincy and religious plurality in the Norwegian context

Tidsskrift for praktisk teologi

Hanne Cecilie Kavli

Adapting to the Dual Earner Family Norm?
The Case of Immigrants and Immigrant Descendants in Norway

Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies

Anniken Hagelund, Hanne Cecilie Kavli og Kaja Reegård

«Å bytte lag». Deltakere og deltakelse på statsborgerseremonier

Anne Britt Djuve, Anniken Hagelund og Hanne Kavli

Innvandrede kvinner i kvalifisering
Arbeidslinja når helsa skranter, utdanningen er lav og barna mange

Tone Fløtten og Hanne Cecilie Kavli

Barnefattigdom og sosial deltakelse

Anne Britt Djuve og Hanne Cecilie Kavli

Integreringspolitikk i endring

Anne Britt Djuve og Hanne Cecilie Kavli

Velferdsstatens skreddere

Anne Britt Djuve og Kåre Hagen

Etnisk segregasjon og sosiale kontaktflater
Noen spekulasjoner om ghettoisering i Oslo