Refugees in Europe: some principles for a new, differentiated approach

As mentioned in the first part of this paper (Refugees in Europe: time for a new, differentiated approach)

"What if we could reframe the current approach to combine the concepts of journey and uniqueness? What if we could provide a clearly defined path towards successful integration in the best place, and to reframe resettlement process requirements in a way that would allow the “joined up” use of many powerful existing tools, practiced and proven in many industries in the private sector, to be able to handle the numbers involved, yet in an individual-centered way."

Let us look at this more closely.

Reframing the challenge

The currently used frame is government-focused and administrative in nature and sees refugees as essentially a difficult and unwelcome problem: large numbers of unfamiliar people requiring food, accommodation, financial, physical and administrative support, without a clear solution for the longer term (except perhaps a hope they will soon return from where they came from). In this frame, refugees are an undifferentiated group of people, who are purely a financial and administrative burden to be borne.

There is very little intuitive “upside” associated with refugees in this perspective. Success is seen as “getting the refugee off the emergency reception books” either through repatriation or acceptance as a legal immigrant in the country.

The administrative frame is necessary for the administrative processing of people. In fact, it is also an important potential source of the information required to develop personalized resettlement journeys. Therefore, I am not advocating the abolition of the current administrative processes. However, I am saying that currently we lose many opportunities to leverage these processes to help provide customized, cost-effective solutions to help refugees prepare for successful resettlement – independent of where this ultimately will take place (ie country of origin in the case of repatriation; country of reception in the case of acceptance; or 3rd country in the case of a desired “onward journey”).

A positive outcome-focused perspective reframes how we see refugees. Rather than seeing them as a problematic, costly, undifferentiated mass of undesired people, we could recognize the refugees as a collection of unique individuals, with their own talents and capabilities, which could be developed into sources of added value to all stakeholders, including the resettlement country, irrespective if resettlement is ultimately in the country of origin, country of reception or a third country. This is the Resettlement Journey.

Shaping the action

How then, should we action this proposed new perspective, building on the concepts of “journey” and “uniqueness” applied to individual refugees? What new ways of working could support the new mindset, and lead to new and effective outcomes in resettling refugees in practice?

The focus of the Resettlement Journey is on activating the “upside” benefits identified for each individual refugee as a new member of the resettlement country’s society.

Currently in Europe we have the administrative/legal reception process which can be summarized as:

1. Arrival, Registration and Initial Screening: When refugees arrive in an EU country, they are usually required to register with the relevant authorities or designated reception centers. After registration, refugees undergo an initial screening process to determine their eligibility for asylum.

o This can occur between a few days to a few weeks after arrival.

2. Asylum Application, Interview, Documentation, Background Checks and Verification: If deemed eligible during the initial screening, the refugee can formally submit an asylum application. Following the submission of the asylum application, the refugee is usually scheduled for an interview with immigration authorities or the national asylum agency. During the asylum process, background checks are conducted to verify the information provided by the refugee.

o Once registered, this process can take several weeks to a few months.

3. Decision and Appeals: Based on the information gathered during the asylum process, a decision is made regarding the refugee's asylum claim. This decision can grant refugee status, subsidiary protection, or reject the claim

o the decision on the asylum claim is typically made within a few months to a year, although it can take longer in some cases.

o the timeframe for appeals also varies, but it generally ranges from several months to over a year, depending on the country and the complexity of the case.

4. Integration and Resettlement: If granted refugee status, the individual is provided with legal protections and entitlements, including access to healthcare, education, and employment opportunities. EU countries may also offer integration programs to help refugees adapt to their new society and facilitate their integration into the local community.

o the integration process can span several years, as it involves accessing services, finding housing, learning the local language, and adapting to the new environment. The duration of integration can vary depending on the support available and the individual's circumstances.

As the focus is on achieving a formal decision on eligibility to stay in the country of reception, the duration of this period, which can last between around 6 months (in the best case) and around one and a half years (and if appeals are necessary, it could take up two and a half years), is often lost time for refugees. This is because currently the actual resettlement process typically only starts after a (positive) decision is made.

Today, when a refugees receive a negative decision, it is a disaster for them: not only have they often lost many months of their lives living in limbo, but they have also not been able to develop any structured perspective of how imagine a practical alternative resettlement journey to what they may have initially hoped for.

It is therefore no wonder that so much energy (time, effort, cost) is expended by rejected refugees on appeals to avoid ending up with a total loss. And for the reception country, the entire effort made around refugees who ultimately fail in their quest to be accepted, is a cost in time, effort, money and bother, without any benefit. It is essentially a lose/lose situation.

Defining the benefits to all stakeholders

The point of introducing the Resettlement Journey and associated Segment Journeys as a parallel process next to the current administrative/legal process is to move from an undifferentiated administrative model to managing refugees in a cost-efficient way, to an individual-centric collaborative approach to resettling people as soon and as effectively possible so that the refugee can become a contributing member of society.

By introducing the Journey approach, the expectation is that the administrative system backlog can be reduced by giving those individuals who desire to advance their resettlement, the possibility to actively work on developing their capabilities necessary for successful resettlement. This sense of “agency” will also help to transform as many refugees as possible from victims of circumstance, requiring aid to get by, to empowered creators of their own new lives.

Although a precise business case will need to be drawn up, the expectation in that having a ‘fast track’ opportunity open to refugees to speed up their ability to becoming active contributors to the societies they will resettle in (independent of whether in country of reception, country of origin or 3rd country), will lower the overall cost of refugee reception, motivate refugees to develop their capabilities, and engage the private sector and society at large in the reception country to collaborate to build value for both the refugees concerned and society (including the taxpayers) in general.

Such a mechanism could also help the resettlement countries in strengthening demographic weaknesses in their societies and economies.

Making the Resettlement Journey and Journey Segmentation work in practice

How could we transform a lose/lose into a win/win – for any type of refugee? For example, from the “Resettlement Journey” perspective, there are three types of refugees, based on a mix of ambition and legal possibilities:

1. Final Settlers: those who will ultimately resettle in the country of reception

2. Returnees: those who will ultimately be sent back to their country of origin for resettlement

3. Settlers in Transit: those who will ultimately journey onward to a 3rd country of resettlement

Each of these refugee types, there will be a clearly defined process, where the steps are clear (inputs/outputs), the funding needs are clear, the expectations/obligations of all actors in this process are clear and focused on achieving a successful outcome. This is important because each unsuccessful outcome wastes resources (effort, time, money, opportunities) and leads to zero-sum attempts to shift the resulting burden on to others. No one wins.

Using the current administrative process as a reference point, we can define how the Segmented Resettlement Journey fits with it, and also where it adds value, how it does it, and what is necessary to have in place to ensure it can do this.

Once this Resettlement Journey high level process (skeleton) is defined, we can move to defining what the Journey steps are for each of the three types of refugees (in addition to the mandatory administrative/legal steps) and plan for these in time, expert support and money, using a Resettlement Journey Segmentation prism. We can then also clearly define expectations, behaviors and milestones expected from the refugee for each resulting “Segment Journey”.

The Resettlement Journey Segmentation should be seen as way of unburdening the current administrative process, especially for those refugees who are able and willing to pro-actively invest in the success of their own resettlement. This Resettlement Journey will be governed by the authorities but carried out by the refugees in collaboration with approved private sector partners as part of some form of Public Private Partnership (PPP). This will allow proven private-sector tools, techniques, processes, practices to be the basis upon which the refugees are able to develop their capabilities required for successful resettlement.

Not all refugees will be capable to participate equally in this program. This is why there could be two levels per Segment, the “Standard” and the “Advanced” levels, which reflect the relative speed and/or intensity of the Segmentation program offered (standard = lower speed; advanced = higher speed). In addition, one of the Segments caters specifically to resettlement skills for dependents and newcomers to the professional world (eg dependent spouses, older children). This Segment will be based on the current standard offered by the government provided resettlement process today.

Key Success Factors for the Segment Resettlement Journey

It is important to stress the outcome-perspective of each Segment Journey, and to clarify underlying success principles. In setting up the Segmentation programs, it is important to maintain an approach based on principles and targeted outcomes. A danger to guard against is allowing an increase focus on the process, rather than the outcomes. Process checks should be done separately, through a Quality Control mechanism.

Here are some Key Success Factors that need to be addressed in designing the Segment Resettlement Journeys:

o Resettlement Journeys focus on personal capability development: Although the process itself seeks to achieve a measure of social justice within the process the focus needs to be on achieving targeted outcomes to support successful resettlement for each of the three resettlement options, and for each of the defined Resettlement Journey Segment objectives.

o Resettlement Journeys are principle-based: Each Resettlement Journey is dependent on clear rights and duties for all stakeholders. Failure to adhere to these, can result in being denied further support, or escalation of issues in the provision of the agreed support to the highest authorities.

o Resettlement Journey Segments are outcome-focused: Each Resettlement Journey Segment is aimed at achieving specific outcomes for the clients of the Segment.

o Flexible segment journey reclassification: Those refugees who cannot or will not handle the requirements of their Segment Journey, will need to be allocated to the least demanding Segment, which will be more social care-focused, rather than capability and outcome-building focused. Equally, those refugees who desire a faster, more ambitious approach to building their resettlement journeys, will be able to change their Segment Journey.

o Resettlement Journey processes should be well-defined, timed, costed and adequately funded: by ensuring that each Resettlement Journey has a well-defined set of steps, with a robust set of financial assumptions behind each step, each refugee can count on a minimum support to help him or her throughout their chosen journey to resettlement.

o Resettlement Journeys should use proven technology, tools, and methods: to maximise speed and impact of outcomes: preferably open source, but focus is on accessibility (SaaS), ease of use (eg Video based), clarity of outcome.

o Resettlement Journeys should be an open system of “refugee client” support: providing flexible and situation-relevant solutions to refugee needs as per the governing body overall requirements, and the individual refugee’s needs (role of coach).

o Resettlement Journeys processes require good Governance: for example, a Resettlement Journey Governance Board is PPP in nature and sets the overall structure, processes, standards, expectations and budgets. Implementation is governed by Segment Journey Governance Board, which is responsible for complying to overall direction and standards, but which shape the strategic direction and resourcing for each Segment, and which manages the Segment Journey Coaches who are assigned to the “client refugee”. The Segment Journey Coaches work with each “client refugee” to develop a customized strategy and plan for each individual or family, using a series of standard tools, resources, etc. The Coaches work similarly as the assigned government Social Workers, but focused on achieving real world resettlement objectives with their clients.

o Resettlement Journeys Procurement should be flexible but robust: use of government tender as per PPP agreements, but dynamically adopting new tools and technologies where these promise more speed and impact of the targeted outcomes. The key to flexibility will be in how the tender requirements are formulated to ensure the appropriate focus on achieving the desired outcomes, rather than a fixed solution process.

The above proposed approach to designing and implementing a Resettlement Journey, with associated Segment Journeys, in parallel to the existing administrative/legal resettlement process is meant to capture the creativity of both refugees and process stakeholders, so that the focus is fixed on the outcome of a successful resettlement, as quickly and cost-effectively as possible.