Norway’s language agency warns against raising residency requirement

The government is proposing to increase the required level of spoken Norwegian from A1 to A2 on the Council of Europe’s language scale — a shift from basic comprehension to the ability to manage simple, everyday conversations. But in its formal response to a public consultation, the council questioned the lack of impact assessment and said the move risked worsening inequality

“It is well documented that stricter language requirements have negative consequences for people with lower qualifications for language learning,” the agency wrote, citing research from the IMPECT project, which studies language acquisition among migrants.

“This applies in particular to people with no or limited schooling, low literacy skills, and those affected by war-related trauma.”

READ ALSO: How changes to Norway’s requirements for permanent residence will affect you

The council, a government agency tasked with safeguarding and promoting the Norwegian language, was the most outspoken public body to object to the proposal, which was circulated for consultation in December. It said aligning the residency language standard with the more demanding B1 requirement for citizenship did not constitute a strong enough justification for the change.

Of the 56 responses to the consultation, a majority were critical. However, many were submitted by individuals or local language schools. Among public authorities, only the Language Council voiced outright opposition. The Directorate of Immigration (UDI) and the Directorate of Integration and Diversity (IMDi) both supported the shift.

Advertisement

The UDI argued it would bring clarity to existing regulations, although it called for the exemptions proposed from taking the language test to be extended to civics test. Applicants who have achieved a grade of 2 or higher in social studies (samfunnsfag) in module 4 of preparatory adult education (FOV), should not have to take an additional test. 

IMDi warned of “an increased burden” on municipalities and testing centres, noting that the new requirement could lead to greater demand for language testing and might disproportionately affect those transitioning from temporary to longer-term permits.

Police chiefs, meanwhile, welcomed the proposal. The Norwegian Association of Chiefs of Police argued the move would better align the residency criteria with those for citizenship, which require a B1 level of Norwegian.

Academics at the University of Bergen’s Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies also submitted a strongly worded objection, arguing that tying residency rights to language ability was unlikely to improve integration outcomes.

Advertisement

“Norwegian and international research finds that the vast majority of immigrants are motivated to learn the language in a new country,” the department wrote. “We do not have research-based documentation that setting language proficiency requirements will have the intended integration effect the ministry wants to achieve.”

Instead, they warned the policy could increase anxiety and psychological stress, particularly among those with fewer educational resources. The department proposed lowering the language requirement for citizenship to A2 to reflect more realistic expectations.

The IMPECT project, based at the University of Western Norway, warned in its response that similar policies in other European countries had resulted in a drop in the number of immigrants who achieved permanent residency and citizenship. Its research also found such requirements disproportionately affected women and refugees from low-income countries.

The charities and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) who submitted responses were all against the reform, with International Commission of Jurists (ICJ-Norge), Kirkerådet (Church Council, Church of Norway), and Caritas Norge, all opposed to raising the language requirement. 

ICJ-Norge argued in its response that the ever stricter requirements for residency in Norway created insecurity for families, negatively affecting children’s social situation and mental health and so worsening the prospects for good integration. When it came to tougher language requirements, it cited the IMPECT project to argue they risked being counterproductive. 

As female immigrants are more likely than men to lack of literacy and schooling to pass language tests, they argued that the tougher requirements were potentially discriminatory.

Caritas Norge, the Catholic charity, which itself helps refugees and offers Norwegian language courses, argued in its response that a better way to ensure that immigrants develop Norwegian language skills would be to provide free Norwegian courses at A1 and A2 levels. 

The Local has contacted the Ministry of Justice for comment on the timing of any legislative proposal.