Go to the forest! Exploring the orderings of Swedish Nature-Based Integration

Abstract

‘Nature-Based Integration’ (NBI) has been proposed as a solution to two prominent issues in contemporary Nordic societies: increasing separation from nature among ‘modern’ societies; and the need to ‘integrate’ groups of diverse newcomers. This article examines NBI activities in Örebro County, central Sweden, exploring how these practices seek to bring immigrants into a shared Swedish experiential landscape that forms part of the work of ordering Sweden as a community. These activities form part of an ordering project, within which ‘Swedes’ and ‘newcomers’ are situated, drawing on extant nationalist orderings. Likewise, it represents part of an effort to enact a sustainable Sweden in an international world. Drawing on research on environmental racism and (in)justice, this article homes in on the norms implicit and explicit to this ordering. It then discusses the implications of this, highlighting (arguably unavoidable) coercive elements. Furthermore, the long history of outdoor lifestyle as a pillar of Swedish nationalism and the embracing of such activities by the Swedish far right highlight that nature may also become a site of conflict as much as conciliation. Finally, the article considers the types of environmental action arising from the NBI orderings and the likelihood of meaningful environmental change.

Towards liveable cities: A review of ethnicity, public urban nature space and wellbeing

“…For instance, little research exists on how to create guided or facilitated experiences for ethnic minorities to enhance the public urban nature space-wellbeing relationship (Wolf et al 2015 ). Third, existing nature-based integration research points to how participating in outdoor recreational activities is often coupled with environmental citizenship, tied to ideas of wellbeing, place attachment and acculturation (see Pitkänen et al 2017 ; Gentin et al 2019 ; Singleton 2021 ). While outdoor leisure activities are regarded as causally powerful, their relation to wellbeing, and questions of moral and human flourishing to date has been ignored.…”

“…Nature is then often positioned as a safe environment to welcome new migrants, to challenge racialised stereotypes and to ultimately provide a basis for social inclusion by facilitating contact between established communities and migrants (Morris and O’Brien 2011 ; Hordyk et al 2015 ). Examples of officially endorsed nature-based activities include guided public urban nature tours offered to migrants in Austria (Höglhammer et al 2019 ) and Sweden (Singleton 2021 ); structured programs for acculturation through visiting Canadian parks (Hurly and Walker 2019 ); tours provided in community gardens and labyrinths (Hoffman 2019 ), and ‘welcoming walks’ (Leikkilä et al 2013 ). These programs are not a blank backdrop for social inclusion but infused with the cultural values and knowledge systems of the host nation (Peters et al 2010 ; Rishbeth et al 2019 ).…”

“…Consequently, these programs have been criticised because of their political agendas of acculturation and whether physical proximity by bringing people together is enough to dissolve prejudice (e.g. Singleton 2021 ).…”

‘It Was Only When I Came Here that I Learned about Walking’: Creating Meaningful Contact in the Norwegian Outdoors?

“…Similar programmes involving so-called nature-based integration are also taking place across other Nordic countries, which have, much like in Norway, become central to increasing social inclusion, place attachment and acculturation (Gentin et al 2019), through gaining knowledge and practical experience in the outdoors (e.g. Pitkänen et al 2017;Singleton 2021). However, friluftsliv is not a blank backdrop against which social inclusion can just occur.…”

“…Rather, as Rishbeth (2020: 28) aptly states, 'being outdoors is not neutral.' In existing literatures, this is problematised through studies of how migrants' use of greenspaces contributes to their wellbeing (Rishbeth et al 2019), acculturation (Stodolska et al 2017) and social togetherness (Peters 2010), yet also to how they stand out as 'the other' in host societies (Pitkänen et al 2017;Singleton 2021). Migrants'…”