Immigrants in Sweden are often problematized in political and media debates especially in relation to lack of integration into the labor market. This study is based on secondary data analysis on the challenges that highly educated non-EU immigrants face in the process of integration into the Swedish labor market. Previous knowledge on the topic was found at the Malmö and Lund University Libraries and their databases. The aim of this study is to identify the challenges for non-EU immigrants to integrate into Swedish labor market, and to find out if the jobs they get is compatible to their academic qualifications obtained from their home countries. Also, it is to identify measures taken by the government to facilitate immigrants’ access to the labor market. The theories I used in this study are integration, human capital, and discrimination. The findings revealed that, poor knowledge of the Swedish language, lack of social network, discrimination and lack of recognition of immigrant’s educational qualifications were the main obstacles faced by highly educated immigrants from integrating into the labor market. Also, the findings reveal that the job positions of the highly educated immigrants in the Swedish labor market were lower than the educational qualifications they have from their countries of origin. In addition, the government had identified some of these challenges and have discussed plans for possible policy development to tackle these challenges.

Denna uppsats belyser problemet med användandet av begreppen EU-medborgare och EU-migrant, samt vad det är som avgör huruvida man skall bli betraktad som antingen det ena eller andra. Det råder fri rörlighet för alla EU-medborgare mellan medlemsstaterna, det skapar problem när grupper som rent juridiskt inte klassificeras som medborgare, och i stället klassificeras som migrant. Skillnaden mellan att vara EU-medborgare och EU-migrant är bland annat att det skiljer sig i åtnjutandet av det sociala skyddsnätet. Romer används som ett exempel genom hela uppsatsen då de har en historia som inte påminner om någon annan, samt för att det är ett aktuellt ämne i dagens EU. Genom en komparativ studie mellan två välfärdsstater, samt en diskursanalys där Benhabibs teori ”the rights of others” appliceras diskuteras huruvida alla inom EU kan åtnjuta de mänskliga rättigheterna. Benhabibs teori tydliggör nationalstaters rädsla gentemot det främmande och bekräftar att det sker en kränkning av de mänskliga rättigheterna när människor saknar medborgarskap. Slutsatsen av denna studie är att orsaken till att romska grupper ofta faller utanför det skyddsnät som finns är på grund av avsaknaden av subjektivitet. Nationalstater ser ofta romska grupper som icke-hanterbara och det smittar av sig på civilsamhället och den generella attityden gentemot romer är negativ. / This thesis highlights the problem with the use of the concepts “EU-citizen” and “EU-immigrant”, as well as what determines whether someone should be considered one or the other. Since freedom of movement is granted EU-citizens between member states, problems arise when groups that technically do not qualify as citizens, but are classified as migrants, utilize the freedom of mobility. The difference between being classified as an EU-citizen vs an EU-immigrant is the differences in the ability to enjoy the social safety net provided by the state. The Roma people will be used as an example throughout the thesis, as the history of the group is unique, and it is currently a topic of discussion in the EU.Through a comparative study of welfare states, along with a discourse analysis utilizing Benhabib’s theory of ”the rights of others”, a discussion will examine whether everyone in the EU have the opportunity to enjoy human rights.Benhabib’s theory clarifies the nation state’s fears of that considered foreign and confirms the violations of human rights that occur when people lack citizenship.The conclusion of the study is that the reason Roma groups often fall outside the social safety net is because the lack of subjectivity of states. Nation states often view Roma groups as non-manageable, the perception rubs off on civil society and generates generally negative attitudes towards the Roma.