Urban Contingeny - 2016 - Designing Meeting Spaces by Urban Ecological Planning_NTNU

Designing Meeting Spaces to Facilitate Refugee Integration and Urban Resilience in Trondheim, Norway Report submitted by Sylvia Green Susanne Støyle Alsaker Leonardo Soria Issifu Salifu

10000 10008 10011 10012

To the NTNU Department of Urban Design and Planning On May 27th 2016

Abstract Given the increasing number of refugees seeking asylum in Trondheim, it is important for measures to occur which facilitate refugee integration within their new country, in order to leverage the potential of this migration to have a positive impact and increase the resiliency of the city. This research focuses on finding attributes that facilitate integration within meeting places through field work and a literature review, and highlights some potential locations for intervention. The main social-spatial attributes that were found to facilitate integration in meeting places are a comfortable and warm atmosphere, an association to home, the feeling of being in a social and crowded atmosphere, a link to nature and having an established activity. Ideal areas for future intervention were found to be Lade and City Syd.

Introduction The number of refugees that are seeking asylum in Norway is at a record high, according to an SSB report (ssb, 2016). While the Syrian crisis has generated enormous amounts of media coverage, refugees in Norway are a very diverse group who come from 169 different countries, and comprise 3.6 percent of the total population of Norway (ssb, 2016). In Trondheim, the number of refugees is approximately the national average (ssb, 2016). Each refugee that gets granted asylum starts a new life in Norway, and that new life should be one filled with dignity and opportunity. While it is commonly said that diversity breeds opportunity and innovation, in order to use the diversity to its greatest potential, it is necessary for the community and government to facilitate and invite the integration of newcomers. The ability of refugees to participate fully in a broader community and political spheres normally ensures their successful integration process (Strange and Ager, 2010) . Venues in Trondheim, such as language schools, meeting places and public spaces can allow refugees to familiarize themselves with the city, showcase their cultural uniqueness, learn the local language, and acquire basic skills. This can provide refugees with the foundation to work and sucessfully start a new life in Trondheim, which is a sign of resiliency for the city. This research project is intended to support a larger architectural vision for the city, where the social and physical space itself is welcoming and facilitates integration. Through the identification of physical and social-spatial qualities for integration within meeting places, it will be possible to develop plans to enhance the integrational qualities of spaces of interest. The research from this paper is intended to help inform the location and type of intervention that will occur. 2

Research, including interviews, surveys and a literature review were done to support answering the following research questions for this report: 1) What kind of attributes or features in meeting places encourage and facilitate integration of refugees in Trondheim municipality after refugees official granted temporary visas without working permit (defined later in this report as Phase 5 in the asylum process)? 2) Where should future interventions in refugees integration into Trondheim municipality focus?

Context In Trondheim municipality, there were 450 refugees settled in 2015 (Trondheim kommune, 2016). In 2016 additional 650 will be settled. In prior years, around 300 have been settled. The number of refugees to settle is only expected to rise, as it is shown by the provisional number of 730 in 2017, and 250 of them are unaccompanied minors (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016a). A survey done by The Norwegian Institute of Public Health show that the current population in Trondheim consists of 13 % immigrants (Otterlei & Grafsrønningen, 2016 ). The current scene refugees meet is a homogenous crowd. Settling refugees and integration requires participation from all sectors in the municipality. In the municipal master plan it is stated that one of their main goals is to be an inclusive and diverse city by 2020 (Trondheim kommune, 2010). To achieve this goal, the municipality aims to ensure independence and societal participation of immigrants (including refugees) and qualification for education and work. The municipality plans to facilitate mutual knowledge and understanding between minority and majority groups through organizing areas for interaction. The full asylum application process has been broken down into six phases, which are summarized in Figure 1. This report focusses on asylum claimants who are in Phase 5 of the process. In Phase 5, the application for asylum is accepted, and the refugees begin the integration process in a municipality. The process is generally the same for all applicants, but the level of state support to each applicant, such as the personal stipend provided, dependents on the age, status in application, reception center and family situation of the applicant (The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration, 2016). 3

Figure 1 : Summary of the asylum process in Norway

Phase 5 includes a 2-year program which aims to prepare the refugee for work and introduce them to the Norwegian society. The phase consists of mandatory language training and work experience for applicants aged 16-55, which is paid by the state (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016d). The language program is not mandatory for refugees over the age of 55, but the state is obligated to offer it upon request (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016c). However, to be eligible to apply for permanent residency the program must be completed. The program lasts 600 hours, and with its completion the language requirement of applying for a permanent residency is met. An additional similar program, called the ‘Introduction program’, is offered to people with stronger need of educational support or having a special agreement with The Directorate of Integration and Diversity (IMDi). People who have recently arrived in a municipality (less than 2 years) are also eligible for the introduction program (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016c). The municipality is obligated to provide good information in an understandable language about the Introduction program (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016b). Additionally, the municipality is obligated to offer the program to the target group within three months of settling or upon request from the refugees. The introduction program qualifies the applicant for further education or work (such as secondary school). While participating in the language program or introduction program the refugees receive financial support from the state. The amount is twice the basic support amount of social security, with participant below the age of twenty-five getting two thirds of that amount (The Directorate of Integration and Diversity, 2016e). From 1st of May 2016 the basic financial support of social security is 92 576 NOK per year (The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration, 2016), which means that asylum seekers get 185 152 NOK per year. To compare, the average wage for Norway in 2015 was 518 100 NOK (Statistics Norway, 2016). The financial support is taxable and does not earn pension credit. If the refugee has invalid absence from the program the following month financial support will be reduced.

Theoretical Background Theory of Integration

The theory around the integration of migrants has had varying meanings over time and geographical location. The theoretical background of integration is relevant for this paper due to the multiplicity of understandings of the word, and is included to define the definition and intention of the word for the purpose of this paper. Integration is strongly linked to acculturation, which is the process of cultural and psychological changes that involve various forms of mutual accommodation, leading to some longer-term psychological and sociocultural adaptations between both groups. Acculturation is in essence the dialogue between the interacting groups, and the imposed influence on one or both groups. How that dialogue is directed will determine whether the acculturation is happening as integration, assimilation, separation or marginalization (Kagitçibasi et al., 1997). In the case of Trondheim, the acculturation occurs between two groups, which we have generalized as people native to the area and refugees in Phase 5 of the asylum process. Mestheneos and Ioannidi (2002) illustrated refugee integration as a process of learning to accept and be accepted in the new society but not cultural and personality abandonment of the refugee own culture. A British Home Secretary, Roy Jenkins explained the concept of integration as cultural diversity, not as a process of creating uniformity, coupled with equal opportunity in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance (Rex, 1996). However, the theory that we are using of integration, for the purpose of this paper, relates to the analysis of the type of acculturation that occurs. A framework to distinguish different kinds of acculturation is shown in Figure 2. Integration is defined as the maintenance of cultural identity and characteristics of the minority (refugee) population, while maintaining (and building) relationships with the dominant society.

Figure 2 : Proposed acculturation strategy model (K et al, 1997)

How Integration Facilitates Resilience Introduction to Resilience The term resilience is a relatively recent concept brought into the field of urban development with the rise of preeminence of systemic theories. In Leslie and McCabe’s work about resilience in Social-Ecological Systems, they link to the concept of resilience defined by Walker and Salt (2006) as “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change in a manner that allows for the persistence of system function, structure, and feedbacks” (Leslie & McCabe, 2013, p. 115). Furthermore, Pickren notes that resilience is a process rather than a static phenomenon which can only be understood in context (Pickren in Simich & Andermann, 2014). Following this definitions, if we can understand the urban environment as a social system, resilience within the city would mean its own capacity and the action to respond not only to constraints but also opportunities that come from the influx of a disturbance that affects it. This emphasize on the active part of resilience highlights the opportunity of engaging in the resilient process rather than considering it the passive consequence of certain capacities. Following the review of the concept done by Leslie and McCabe (2013), it’s noted that the most recent additions to it incorporate the dimension of flexibility and adaptive capacity, two key concepts to understand resilience in terms of cultural integration. The Stockholm Resilience Center defines Resilience as 7 main principals, two of which can be directly related to integration, which can be facilitated by meeting places: maintain diversity and redundancy, and maintain connectivity. Therefore, the link between the concepts of integration and resilience are illustrated through connecting the theory of integration to maintaining cultural diversity, redundancy and connectivity. This conceptual framework is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 : Conceptual framework of the link between resilience and integration

Maintaining Cultural Diversity In this context, we identify the arrival of refugees and newcomers to Trondheim as a disturbance in the urban system, since the introduction of people from a varied background modifies pre-existing social, economic and political structures –conditions that we can cluster in the broader concept of culture-. The process of acculturation is far from linear or straight forward, leaning on the margins of belongingness to the host and the native culture: however the urban system interacts with newcomer’s culture defines a process which furthermore can be characterized either as resilient or not. If we refer to Pickren’s definition of culture as “shared learned experience that is transmitted across generations” (2014, p. 20), it’s easy to understand how a diversified range of response emerged from different cultural traditions can increase the ability of action in face of disturbance to a system. This comes in two fronts: from the ability to emulate how similar disturbances have been dealt in the past, and from the ability to produce new reactions to said disturbances. As Pickren states, culture is a resource that teaches both implicitly and explicitly how to be human. Furthermore, culture is also “dynamic, fluid and emergent” , given its responsive nature and is the resource that is produced in response to in a highly shifting world, which gives people the capacity to engage with the emerging systems. In their work, Leslie & McCabe show how response diversity –understood as “the range of reactions to environmental change among species that contribute to the same ecosystem function” can produce functional diversity, a key component for building capacity for the resilient process. While their work relies on standard ecological concepts, they broaden the perspective to include the concept of response diversity in the context of Social-Ecological Systems. We propose to broaden the concept to include a cultural perspective as part of this heterogeneity for the urban context. From the previous discussion surrounding the aspect of acculturation, we can identify that integration is the process that provides a higher cultural diversity within a social system, blending while conserving several aspects of the two or more interacting cultures. It is, therefore, integration the process of acculturation that can build the capacity of an urban system to engage in a resilient process.

Maintaining Redundancy Integration allows for increased redundancy to the system through the facilitation of building social networks. When a refugee comes to Trondheim, they are often reliant on one or two volunteers to connect them to vital information and services, such as transportation, legal services and access to warm clothes and seasonal clothing (Eirin, 2016). The reliance that asylum seekers have on a small number of individuals is dangerous for their functioning within the system. Having refugees build larger and more integrated social networks creates a more redundant social support system, which gives refugees more reliable access to basic and necessary services.

Figure 5 : Eirin, a volunteer from Refugees Welcome to Trondheim

Maintaining Connectivity Having good integration means having a more connected system between refugees and locals. According to the Stockholm Resiliency center, connectivity between different groups increases information sharing and can facilitation trust building (SRC, 2015). Additionally, new perspectives and ideas can be brought to situations to solve local problems. Connectivity is especially important within a diverse space, where the explorative ability of the different actors remains high and the network members are all able to think in different ways. Connectivity is not beneficial for resilience where a homogenized space is created and all actors think in the same way (such as that which occurs in a space which encourages assimilation, rather than a two-way and dialectical integration approach) (SRC, 2015).

Method

Philosophy of Method We tried to include the philosophy of integration into the research method to answer the first research question. Using the idea of integration as a dialectical relationship of acculturation, we felt that it was necessary to hear the voices of refugees in order to balance the dialogue within future interventions. As it currently stands, meeting points for refugees do not contain attributes that they have directly influenced, due to their newcomer status and other factors, like their social and economic status. The focus of our field-work portion of the method was therefore trying to listen to and highlight refugees’ voices, without imposing our biases on them. In order to provide an opportunity for the refugees to build their own ideas and perspectives on how a meeting space should be designed, open-ended questions were used and the interview process was unstructured. This was intended to facilitate discussions about spaces and gather refugees’ perspectives and input, while reducing our own influence as interviewers, as much as possible.

Answering Research Questions To answer the research questions, a variety of different methods were used. These methods were chosen with the intention to incorporate the first-hand lived experiences of refugees, and cross correlating this to existing literature on the topic. The field work portion of the method comprised of the following: 1) A small survey with three questions were given to twelve groups at a language cafe (APPENDIX A). 2) Seven unstructured short interviews were performed, with randomly selected individuals who were in Phase 5 of the asylum process, at the language café 3) A larger survey with eleven questions (APPENDIX A) was given to 20 individuals in an adult educa tion school 4) Eleven unstructured short interviews were performed, with randomly selected individuals who were in Phase 5 of the asylum process, at an adult education school From these surveys and interviews, attributes of the areas which were perceived as valuable and desirable were extracted and compiled. Additionally, participants identified the areas for home, work, religious centers, and recreation in both the surveys and interviews, and these were compiled and mapped to answer the second research question of where future integration interventions should occur. Figure 6 shows a map of the areas in Trondheim where interviews and surveys were performed.

Figure 6 : Fieldwork locations

A literature review, focusing on the areas of place-making, integrating diversity in spaces and perceptions of social spaces to facilitate integration was performed. From this, a list of attributes was extracted, which complements the attributes compiled from the field work portion of the research. The literature review and the field work was combined to create categorized list of social-spatial attributes to facilitate integration of asylum seekers in Phase 5 of the process.

Figure 7 : Performing interviews

Results : Spatial attributes to Facilitate Integration Results From Field Work

Five spatial qualities in meeting places, which were perceived to be valuable or desirable for newcomers to the city of Trondheim, were extracted from the fieldwork. These attributes were: comfortable and warm atmosphere, an association to home, the feeling of being in a social and crowded atmosphere, a link to nature and having an established activity. These are depicted in Figure 8.

Figure 8 : Attributes of meeting places to faciliate integration

Attribute 1: Association to home Association to home was a factor which was stated to be an ideal attribute of a meeting space in 5 interviews. It was mentioned multiple times that the relatability to space resulted in feelings of comfort. Multiple interviewees mentioned that positive feelings were derived from casual social interaction with other people in the streets, in public spaces and in cafés, which were similar to the interactions they had in their home in Syria. Two interviewees mentioned appreciating the physical presence of a waterbody and their reflections because it made them think of home.

Attribute 2: Association with nature Three interviewees mentioned enjoying the feeling of being outside, and associated positive feelings from thinking about nature and associated activities like hiking and fishing. This could be incorporated in meeting spaces through the inclusion of green space and symbolism related to nature

Attribute 3: Having a pre-established activity Through interviews it was stated from all interviewees arranged events are very important. This can be correlated to the meeting places we visited, as their main focus was language practice. It was mentioned in one interview that it was hard to meet local people, especially outside arranged activities. The same interviewee had only met one local outside arranged activities, which was at a gym. Another interviewee mentioned visiting arranged activities, such as the language café, multiple times a week to improve language skills, and stated that it was a good way of getting in touch with locals.

Attribute 4: Space feels social and crowded A ‘social’ and crowded feeling to the space was something that was commonly mentioned in both the surveys and in the majority of interviews. It was stated in one interview that meeting local people required a lot of effort, which was stressful. In a social and crowded space, there are fewer barriers to making new connections with other people.

Attribute 5: Comfortable and warm atmosphere The description of an ideal space by five interviewees was feeling comfortable and having the space radiate warmth. One interviewee stated that this warm feeling comes from being in the presence of other people in a relaxed and unpretentious atmosphere, such as the relaxing environment of a café. Another interviewee stated that this feeling of comfort and warmth came from the presence of old buildings and bright colours.

Results from Literature Review A literature review was done to compare findings in other areas to the field work that was done in Trondheim. From this review a insights about design within diverse spaces were gathered, which is compared to the findings of the field work. In research conducted in Australia, which looked at place-making for recently arrived youth refugees, the refugees themselves were asked to draw and take pictures of spaces in their neighbourhood and write descriptions of them. The objective of identifying concepts related to space in this study was to understand how to create a therapeutic landscape. Some of the most commonly stated concepts were learning, studying and reading; beauty; gardens, trees, flowers and other greenery (Sampson & Gifford, 2010). The valuable spaces were in essence places of opportunity, beauty, comfort, sociality and safety (Sampson & Gifford, 2010). The youth also stated a desire to maintain a connection to the social spaces of their past, which was stated to be vital to their sense of identity and well-being. A summary of the findings of this research are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9 : Attributes of spaces to faciliate refugee wellbeing (Sampson & Gifford, 2010)

A collaborative research project, The Public Life Diversity Toolkit, was put together with the aim to understand and test tools related to the complexity of public life within diversity, particularly with regards to social mixing between different economic groups (Ghel Studio SF, 2015). A survey for this project asked random people in two public spaces in San Francisco, USA about demographics, the use of the space, interaction with new people and if they used Instagram. The second largest reason for interaction between new people was stated to be because of an event, concert or class. This demonstrates a type of pre-planned activity. The same research project aimed to see if the design of a public space facilitate connection between people of different backgrounds. The research found that the spaces people love and feel comfortable at are places where they meet new people. The interaction at the comfortable space led to people meeting the same people in new spaces. Additionally, a clear sense of territory (safe space for observing others), artificial closeness or “compression”, having an exit strategy (physical or graceful social exit), and having a space which facilitated the ability to catch one another’s attention were found to be important within social interaction spaces. The key social-spatial attributes that are taken from these studies support the field work findings that connectivity to home, crowded social spaces, feelings of warmth and comfort and association to nature are important attributes for an integration space to have.

Results : Locations for Future Intervention From the graphical display of the gathered information in maps, available in Appendix B, four separate areas contained a significant number of home, enjoyable and fixed locations: the city center, the southwest of the city, Jakobsli and Risvollan. The highest number of locations identified by respondents was unsurprisingly within the city sentrum, which extends from Ila in the west to Lade in the east, and to Øya to the south. This area, as expected, concentrates by far the largest number and frequency of enjoyable locations, and also had a high number of fixed and home locations named (Appendix B). The second most mentioned area is located in the southwest of the city, and stretches from Byåsen in the north to Kattem in the south and follows a somewhat linear pattern. In this cluster, the predominant type of location mentioned was housing, and there were also several occurrences of fixed and enjoyable locations. The third and fourth areas, Jakobsli and Risvollan, are in the eastern and southeast parts of the city, respectively, and have the more isolated and concentrated location clusters. Notable about both clusters is that they don’t seem to be related to larger areas, and seem to appear more as islands in the urban fabric. All of the enjoyable areas identified were either in the city center, in the parks and forests within and surrounding the city or were shopping centers. The fixed locations followed a similar pattern, being predominantly in the city center, except for three religious institutions, two sports clubs and one language café. Based on the data, two main areas of intervention can be proposed. Firstly, based on the high concentration of habitational areas in the southwest area, and given the fact the shopping center City Syd is already a popular venue, it can be suggested to improve places around this commercial cluster to provide spatial qualities currently lacking. To focus on this area would probably improve interaction in the whole southwestern cluster since the connectivity within the whole area is high due to several highly frequent bus routes to and from City Syd. A second area identified susceptible to intervention is around the Lade area, which lacks the same spatial qualities. While Lade is already a popular venue, its popularity relies solely in natural qualities and in the shopping malls comprehending City Lade and Sirkus. Despite the fact Lade is already considered in the sentrum area, Lade’s location as its easternmost point gives an opportunity to create a sub center of its own, further linking the Jakobsli/Ranheim area.

Limitations to research There are limitations to the method and the procedure carried out in this research. The first was that the two surveys were inconsistent, where one survey was more detailed than the other. This was because, in some ways, the research method evolved throughout the course of the research, as more nuanced understanding of the context was obtained over time. Therefore, the survey results cannot be amalgamated and compiled into one analysis. Additionally, the nature of the unstructured interview resulted in topics of conversation that diverged from the research question, and highly variant data. Finally, the survey was written in Norwegian and English, which was not the native tongue of participants, and therefore it would have been easy for misunderstandings to have occurred.

Future Studies Based on limitations of our research we propose following research to be conducted in the future in order to complement knowledge in the field of spatial attributes and refugees’ relation to space. * Study with an increase sample size and/or variation of participants’ origin * Include a subject group of local people to see if there is variation of the use of public space between the groups * While this research focuses on spatial qualities, to include a temporal perspective comparing time usage of urban spaces would be critical to further understand newcomers’ use of public space in a holistic manner. * During the research, it was revealed that transport plays a major role in early stage asylum seekers’ access to urban services. While said stage of the asylum seeking process is out of the scope of this research, finding out the relation between urban connectivity and interaction is particularly relevant to understand the whole integration process. * The process of mapping also highlighted the high incidence of religious places associated to housing in the southwestern cluster. While the relation is unclear, it provides a important field of research to identify if social interaction is somehow conditioned to religious adherence in certain areas or groups, a fact that could prove crucial to understand newcomers’ social dynamics.

Conclusion The measures which were found to facilitate refugee integration in meeting places in Trondheim, in order to leverage the positive potential of the recent increases in migration for increasing the resiliency of the city, were found to be a comfortable and warm atmosphere, an association to home, the feeling of being in a social and crowded atmosphere, a link to nature and having an established activity. This was affirmed by both field work and a literature review. Ideal areas for future intervention were mapped from field work activities, and were found to be Lade and City Syd.

References Cumming, G., Barnes, G., Perz, S., Schmink, M., Sieving, K., Southworth, J., ... Holt, T. (2005). An Exploratory Framework for the Empirical Measurement of Resilience. Ecosystems, 8(8), 975-987. doi:10.1007/s10021-0050129-z Elmqvist, T., Folke, C., Nyström, M., Peterson, G., Bengtsson, J., Walker, B., & Norberg, J. (2003). Response diversity, ecosystem change, and resilience (Vol. 1, pp. 488-494). Ghel Studio SF. (2015). Public Life Diversty Toolkit: a prototype for measuring social mixing and economic integration in public space. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/gehlarchitects/docs/gehl_publiclifediversitytoolkit_pag Kagitçibasi, Ç., Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Pandey, J., Dasen, P., Saraswathi, T., & Segall, M. H. (1997). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Social behavior and applications. Allyn and Bacon. Leslie, P., & McCabe, J. T. (2013). Response Diversity and Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. Current Anthropology, 54(2), 114-143. doi:doi:10.1086/669563 Sampson, R., & Gifford, S. M. (2010). Place-making, settlement and well-being: The therapeutic landscapes of recently arrived youth with refugee backgrounds. Health and Place, 16(1), 116-131. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.09.004 Simich, L., & Andermann, L. (2014). Refuge and Resilience : Promoting Resilience and Mental Health among Resettled Refugees and Forced Migrants. Dordrecht: Springer. Stockholm Resilience Centre. (2015). Applying resilience thinking. Retrieved from http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2015-02-19-applying-resilience-thinking.html Strang A. & A.Ager. (2010). Refugee integration ,emerging trends and remaining agendas. A Journal of Refugee studies 23(4):589-607 Strang A. & A.Ager. (2008). Understanding Integration: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Refugee Studies, 21, 166-191.

Østby, Lars. (2016). Refugees in Norway. Retrieved from http://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/refugees-in-norway Otterlei, S. S., & Grafsrønningen, M. (2016 ). Disse bydelene har høyest innvandrerandel NRK. Retrieved from http://www.nrk.no/hordaland/disse-bydelene-har-hoyest-innvandrerandel-1.12805766 Statistics Norway. (2016). Lønn, alle ansatte, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.ssb.no/arbeid-og-lonn/statistikker/lonnansatt/aar/2016-03-03 The Directorate of Integration and Diversity. (2016a). Anmodnings- og vedtakstall for bosetting av flyktninger. Retrieved from http://www.imdi.no/planlegging-og-bosetting/anmodning-og-vedtak/ The Directorate of Integration and Diversity. (2016b). Grunnleggende om programmet, roller og ansvar. Retrieved from http://www.imdi.no/opplaring-og-utdanning/introduksjonsprogram/grunnleggende-om-programmet-roller-og-ansvar/ The Directorate of Integration and Diversity. (2016c). Hvem har rett til hva slags opplæring Retrieved from http://www.imdi.no/opplaring-og-utdanning/hvem-har-rett-til-hva-slags-opplaering/ The Directorate of Integration and Diversity. (2016d). Introduction programme and Norwegian language training. Retrieved from http://www.imdi.no/en/introduction-act/introduction-programme-and-norwegian-language-training/ The Directorate of Integration and Diversity. (2016e). Introduksjonsstønad. Retrieved from http://www.imdi.no/ opplaring-og-utdanning/introduksjonsprogram/introduksjonsstonad/ The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration. (2016). Rutiner og satser for økonomiske ytelser til beboere i statlig mottak, regulerte satser 2016. Retrieved from https://www.udiregelverk.no/no/rettskilder/udi-rundskriv/rs-2008035/rs-2008-035v1/#_Toc442260112 The Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. (2016). Grunnbeløpet i folketrygden. Retrieved from https://www.nav.no/no/NAV+og+samfunn/Kontakt+NAV/Utbetalinger/Grunnbelopet+i+folketrygden Trondheim kommune. (2010). Kommuneplanens samfunnsdel: 2009-2020. Retrieved from https://www.trondheim.kommune.no/attachment.ap?id=49965 Trondheim kommune. (2016). Flyktninger og asylsøkere i Trondheim. Retrieved from https://www.trondheim. kommune.no/flyktning/ Walker, B., & Salt, D. R. W. (2006). Resilience Thinking : Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press. 18

APPENDIX A - SURVEYS QUESTIONAIRE 1 1. Write the name of three different places/spaces you really like in Trondheim (it can be indoors or outdoors) 2. Why do you like these places/areas/spaces/buildings? 3. What do you do when you are there? QUESTIONAIRE 2 1. In which area/neighborhood do you live? 2. Where do you go to school or work (if you do)? 3. Where do you buy your groceries most of the time? Are you a regular? Do you talk to the shopkeeper? 4. Do you attend to church/mosque? Which one? Do you go alone or with someone else? Do you know people there? 5. What do you like to do on your spare time? Do you go somewhere in particular? 6. Do you attend any classes, workshops or gatherings regularly? If so, where and do you know people there? 7. Do you practice group sports? If so, where? Are you friends with your sport mates? 8. Mention 3 neighborhoods, areas or specific places that you really enjoy going to (could be a park, a street, a shopping mall, a bar…) 9. How do you get around the city? Which transport do you use if any? 10. How did you move around when you first arrived? (How easy was it to move?) 11. Which country do you come from? THANK YOU!

APPENDIX B - MAPS