Rhetoric, Practice and the Dynamics of Institutional Change: Immigrant Policy in Sweden, 1964-2000

This article explains why different policy changes can occur on different institutional levels at the same time. I distinguish between the rhetorical and practical levels. Previous studies have described the different functions of rhetoric and practice: losses on one level can be compensated by gains on the other; to minimize conflicts between the two levels they are kept separate. However, no causal explanation of such decoupling has been suggested. I suggest that the reason why rhetoric and practice are decoupled is that they are evaluated in different ways: rhetoric is eva‐luated in public political debates whereas practice is evaluated through government audits and different questions are asked in the two arenas. This argument is tested through a study of Swedish immigrant policies between 1964 and 2000. The main conclusion is that the rhetoric of immigrant policy has changed, whereas the practice of immigrant policy has not.