The distribution of the population has multiple implications on regional development and planning. In-migration is frequently seen as the only possible solution in order to rejuvenate the population and stimulate regional development in sparsely populated regions. A population increase results in greater tax revenues, meaning that local authorities can plan for their inhabitants and expenditures in a more sufficient way. In addition, certain professionals are needed in order to support essential local services such as schools and hospitals. Place marketing with the intention of attracting in-movers has become increasingly popular, especially for rural, sparsely populated Swedish municipalities. Still, the outcome from place marketing efforts are dubious and in addition, migration has a temporal aspect and individual migration propensity usually fluctuates over time. This begs the question – how long do in-movers stay? Is there potential for long lasting development in sparsely populated regions connected to in-movers or is it temporary? This study focuses on the duration of time until an in-mover re-migrates from Region 8 in northern Sweden and which socioeconomic and demographic factors that influences the out- migration. This is studied by applying an event history method with discrete-time logistic regressions. The study follows individuals in working age that moved to any of nine specified municipalities in Västerbotten and Norrbotten County, sometime between 2000 and 2011. Questions posed for the study is: i) On average, how long did people who moved to Region 8 between the years 2000-2011 stay in the region? ii) What are the socioeconomic and demographic factors that influence the out-migration from the region? iii) Do the influencing factors differ between women and men? The results show that the time perspective matters as the risk of moving out was highest in the initial years and that it declines with time. 30 % of the sampled in-movers had moved out again within the time of observation, and on average the in-movers stayed for nine years. The regression results indicated that the factors that had the greatest influence on the out- migration was unemployment, being between 20-26 years old, high education, having and unemployed partner, and having children below school age. Women had a slightly lower likelihood of moving out compared to men, and the most prominent influential factor to outmigration that varied between women and men was unemployment.

In this essay I investigate the role of civil society in relation to migrants in the municipality of Kalix, in a rural area in northern Sweden. The purpose is to discover which subject positions that leaders from the civil society describe as possible and which positions they see as possible for migrants. I also want to see which discourses the leaders from the civil associations are a part of and contribute to. The material comes from interviews completed with people involved in civil society and from meetings, organized by the municipality and with participants from civil associations, discussing the subject. The method used is discourse analysis, influenced by Laclau and Mouffes theory about discourses. Foucault´s theory of governmentality is used to examine how civil society and migrants are affected by state control. This control manifests in control mechanisms such as the Swedish government’s establishment program, legislation about migrants rights and economic grants. The analysis is supported by earlier research and theories about multiculturalism and rights. The leaders mainly moved within four discourses: ´multicultural´, ´repressive liberalism´, ´rural preservation´ and ´quality of life and humanity´. The multicultural discourse had a positive view of cultural and religious differences. This discourse made the subject positions of organizer of cultural activities possible for the leaders. Migrants were described as having the position of representatives of specific cultural groups and as group members in need of extra support. The repressive liberalism discourse viewed difference as something negative. The goal was for migrants to be assimilated into the local culture. The leaders adopted the role of tutors. Migrants were described as occupying the subject positions of employment oriented, able to assimilate, and as representatives of all immigrant people. In the discourse about ‘rural preservation’ activities were motivated by goals for a bright future for Kalix. The leaders’ subject positions were understood as coordinators, mentors and debaters. Migrants were understood as competent in particular professions and as desirable long term residents of Kalix. Governmental Control mechanics were considered to be something that limited migrants’ possibilities. The quality of life and humanity discourse has the goal that everyone shall have the possibility to live a good life. The leaders adopted the role as creators of safety and confidence and migrants were considered to be both victims of unfair regulation that limited their legitimacy, and as developers of civil associations. There were antagonisms between the discourses about rights/justice, integration and culture. Because of these conflicts the activities are striving towards different goals and consider different phenomena to be obstacles. Cooperation and the possibilities of getting along are therefore made difficult. Both these antagonisms and the governmental control mechanisms affect which activities can be performed and thereby which subjects positions that are made possible.