The Danish model of migration and integration, between social cohesion and "adaptation without belonging"
In the last two decades, Copenhagen has transformed integration into an individual contract, where access to sustainable residency and citizenship depends on employment, language knowledge, and civic compliance. According to an analysis by Lucie Tungul, a researcher at the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, this approach represents "a political compromise between social cohesion and liberal openness, where integration becomes an individual responsibility, not collective inclusion."
Successive reforms, from limiting family reunification to restricting social benefits, have stabilized internal political consensus and reduced support for the far right, but have also produced ambiguous social effects.
Denmark has redefined the concept of integration, transforming it from a collective responsibility into a personal obligation. Starting in 2010, access to permanent residency and, subsequently, citizenship has been conditioned on proof of "successful integration," measured by active participation in society, language knowledge, and employment. Each migrant signs an individual integration contract, through which they assume concrete objectives, monitored by the municipality. Evaluation is done through a points system and tests of "active citizenship," which include not only linguistic and professional competencies but also adherence to Danish civic values—democracy, gender equality, freedom of expression, and religious tolerance.
At the same time, reforms adopted after 2001 have directly linked work rights and self-sufficiency, significantly reducing social assistance for non-EU migrants. With the so-called "paradigm shift" in 2019, the focus shifted from long-term integration to voluntary return: refugee status became temporary, and social benefits transformed into "self-sufficiency or repatriation aid," up to 5,400 euros. Those who refuse to return are placed in special centers, without financial support. Many of these measures are possible due to Denmark's opt-out from the EU's common asylum policy, which gives the government a unique maneuvering margin in Europe, but also an increased responsibility towards European law.
According to data cited by Tungul, as of January 1, 2024, immigrants and their descendants represented 16% of the population, of which 10% came from non-Western countries and 6% from Western states. Romanians make up about 5% of the total immigrants and descendants in Denmark, after Turkey and Poland. The employment rate for MENAP groups and Turkey is 60%, while for other non-Westerners it reaches 71%. Women from these groups have an employment rate of only 53%, but the generation born in Denmark reaches 73%, a sign of slow but real integration.
Between 1986 and 2016, the Immigration Act was amended 118 times, an unprecedented frequency in Europe, showing a permanent legislative process adapted to political and social pressure.
Lucie Tungul shows that the Danish approach has succeeded in reducing support for radical parties by the main political forces adopting a common restrictive line. The Social Democrats have even continued to tighten legislation, with a declared vision of "zero asylum applications." However, the researcher emphasizes the costs: "a deterrence-based integration can produce adaptation without belonging, economic participation without a sense of civic inclusion." Significant differences persist in employment, education, and social mobility between Danes and non-Western immigrants, and the legal insecurity of temporary refugees fuels a sense of provisionality.
The territorial dispersal policy has been considered an administrative success, but it has not prevented the emergence of areas with high concentrations of non-Western migrants, leading to the adoption of the law initially known as the "ghetto law." In its current form, renamed the "parallel societies law," the rules are being investigated by the Court of Justice of the European Union for possible discrimination based on ethnic origin. Tungul notes that "the measures may conflict with the fundamental principles of EU law, especially in assessing housing and social mixing," an issue that could have consequences for urban policies in other member states.
The Danish model offers, according to the author, a double lesson: efficient administration, decentralization to municipalities, and a focus on work are replicable elements; however, an integration built on deterrence and conditioning can generate long-term exclusion effects. "Denmark's political success is undeniable, but it remains to be seen whether this model ensures a cohesive and sustainable society," writes Tungul in conclusion.
The Romanian community in Denmark, estimated at about 5% of the total immigrants, stands out with a predominantly economic and integrated profile, based on work and professional mobility. Unlike the non-Western groups targeted by restrictive measures, most Romanians are in sectors such as construction, logistics, agriculture, and services, directly contributing to the Danish economy and benefiting from the freedom of movement guaranteed by EU citizenship status. This orientation towards self-sufficiency places them in a category perceived favorably by local authorities, which apply a different administrative approach compared to that intended for refugees or extra-European migrants.
