Global migratory refugee movements have created memories and experiences. After the ending of the Second World War in 1945, the neutral national state Sweden had to revise and revive its governmental strategies as waves of refugees continued arriving at the border. Through the agency of the Swedish “Immigration Board” (Utlänningsnämnden) and its adjacent consultative state organ, the “Migratory Commission” (Utlänningskommissionen), the Swedish state sought to administer governance, control, and implement an official policy vis-a-vi the refugees. The interplay between the board and the commission depended on, above all, to define strategies on how to deal with the arrival of each individual seeking either political asylum, residence permit on Swedish soil, or Swedish citizenship. The paper shall address first, how the experience of the world war challenged and altered previous strategies and practices of Sweden’s asylum policy, and secondly, discuss how the “Immigration Board” actively created physical and psychological categories for the sole reason to exercise control and governance over migrants arriving from contrasting parts of the world. From a governmental perspective, the postwar world introduced a discussion of “a humanitarian motivated immigration policy” on a global scale, however, how did the state answer to the view that Sweden increasingly became noticed as a global refugee portal in times of conflict, uncertainty, and decolonization? By examining individual cases caught up in the migratory maelstrom, based on empirical observations in the files of the “Immigration Board”, the paper highlights the experiences and expectations of refugees arriving in postwar Sweden, and how governmental scrutiny meticulously evaluated each case separately from each other, focusing on lived experiences and memories, the living patterns of the refugee, and usefulness for the state.

This paper critically examines the possibilities and pitfalls of collaborative research between academia and community researchers in global history. In disciplines such as refugee studies, co-researching with the subjects of inquiry has become a pressing methodological imperative (Clar-Kazak 2023). As of yet, this trend has left the writing of global histories mostly untouched. Given that transnational migration and refugee movements constitute central themes within global history, it is crucial to broaden the scope of historical scholarship by incorporating the perspectives of individuals with lived experiences of migration and displacement, both as authors and through the sources we use. This paper argues for merging an analyisis of their personal archives and narratives with more established archival perspectives to foster a more multivocal and nuanced understanding of global history. Moreover, it goes further in reflecting about the practicalities and meaning of co-authorship. Drawing on our own experience of nine years of collaboration (publishing, co-writing and co-teaching) and the recent attempt to establish a community museum focused on migration in Kakaum refugee camp, Kenya, this paper reflects on the writing of global history as a multi-actor conversation across multiple temporal and spatial contexts.