Glossary

The mere fact that people return to a country or place where they have previously been living does not mean that the reintegration runs smoothly. No matter how return happens, returnees may face a number of challenges to their successful reintegration, and those challenges can have a serious impact on their well-being. Many factors may present opportunities for or barriers to migrants’ sustainable reintegration. These factors include the individual capacities and vulnerabilities of returnees, the capacity of the community to absorb the returnees, the community’s perceptions of returnees, and the external environment.

For instance, do immigrants or returnees feel secure in their new communities or do they experience xenophobic and discriminatory responses? Do host communities feel secure with their new or returned neighbours? Do immigrants, returnees or receiving societies and communities feel that their cultural or religious views are threatened? Do immigrants, returnees and host communities live in the same neighbourhoods? Do they interact socially?

While there is no universally agreed definition of sustainable reintegration, IOM defines it this way:

Glossary
Image / Video
Figure 3. Integrated approach to reintegration
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

Note: The factors highlighted in this figure are examples of factors which can potentially affect the reintegration process and are not meant to be exhaustive.

Achieving sustainability requires an approach that addresses the needs of individual returnees and households as well as the communities in a mutually beneficial way, while responding to any relevant structural factors.

National and local governments have primary responsibility for reintegrating their nationals. However, sustainable reintegration is often beyond any one actor: an integrated approach is necessary. The success of reintegration largely relies on the combined efforts and engagement of a variety of actors – governmental and non-governmental, public and private, local, national and international – with different mandates and areas of expertise. These areas can include humanitarian assistance, community stabilization, migration management and development cooperation (IOM, 2018a). Policies that foster reintegration also link closely to those related to labour, health, housing, the environment, and integration and social cohesion.

Policy Approaches
Key considerations for developing and implementing comprehensive reintegration policies

To be effective, reintegration policies should:

  • Be migrant centred. That is, it should promote the returnees’ ownership of, and active participation in, the reintegration process;
  • Support sustainable reintegration processes and enable returnees to cope with migration drivers even after assistance is no longer necessary or available. The same applies for sustainable reintegration assistance programmes.
  • Be multidimensional, that is, they should include economic, social and psychosocial dimensions;
  • Be strategic and tailored to the specific situation, based on an analysis of the unique circumstances of the return environment;
  • Be adequately resourced;
  • Be delivered through coordination and partnership;
  • Be evidence based and involve systematic monitoring and long-term evaluation to assess their effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability;
  • Be built on the principles of confidentiality and “do no harm”;
  • Be built on the whole of government approach and government ownership;
  • Be situated within an overarching migration governance strategy.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

Comprehensive reintegration policies should include systematic monitoring, both at the programme implementation and beneficiary level. It should also include long-term evaluation to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability of the measures implemented. Comprehensive and harmonized data collection and analysis are necessary to determine which interventions have the best results in different contexts. Such harmonized data collection and analysis contribute to developing and expanding monitoring and evaluation and can provide a baseline for understanding how reintegration is and isn’t happening. It can therefore help to learn, adapt, and refine migrant- and community-centred reintegration initiatives.

To Go Further
Individual reintegration assistance

Because no two returnees are the same, every returnee faces a unique reintegration situation. Individualized reintegration support (that can include, when relevant, support for family members or households) is particularly important, especially when there are significant vulnerability factors to consider (see more about Individual protection and assistance).

Individual reintegration support can address the specific needs of the returnee. In instances where no larger-scale intervention is necessary or available, individual reintegration support is the primary means for providing direct support and assistance. It is also the most direct form of assistance and can be administered within a short timeframe. Individual assistance empowers returnees to take ownership of the reintegration process.

Example
Examples of individual reintegration assistance

Common types of assistance include:

  • Counselling, needs assessments and referrals to service providers;
  • Financial allocations (in cash, in kind, or in a combination of the two; grants to several returnees can also be pooled for collective reintegration efforts);
  • Income-generating activities;
  • Education and skills development, including vocational training or apprenticeships;
  • Housing, food and nutrition;
  • Legal and documentation support;
  • Health-related support;
  • Transport;
  • Security;
  • Psychosocial support.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

Policy Approaches
Individual reintegration assistance

Programmes for individual assistance should be based on underlying principles such as gender responsiveness, attentiveness to vulnerability factors and sensitivity to specific migratory and return experiences. With this in mind:

  • Map existing services and support schemes;
  • Provide for counselling and individual needs assessments;
  • Develop referral mechanisms to match identified needs with existing services and support opportunities;
  • Facilitate portability of social rights acquired abroad;
  • Ensure that newly acquired skills of returning migrant workers are formally recognized.

 

Good Practice
Individual reintegration support for Afghans returning from Austria

Together with the European Union, the Government of Austria has been funding reintegration support for voluntary returnees from Austria to Afghanistan since 2011. Through a series of projects, returnees have been supported in their efforts to reintegrate in Afghanistan in a participatory and consultative manner, taking into account the individual needs and skills of each participant. The projects provided pre-departure information in Austria, conducted family assessments and researched available health support. They also assisted in the organization of travel, including pre-departure airport assistance as well as assistance on arrival, temporary accommodation and onward transportation support in Afghanistan. After their return, project beneficiaries received a cash grant to address immediate needs, and in-kind assistance to invest in individual reintegration projects. These could range from education to agricultural activities or starting a small business. In addition, expenditures addressing medical needs could be covered through the project.

Source

IOM field experience

Community-based reintegration initiatives

The success of sustainable reintegration depends not only on the individual, but also on the larger community. In some cases, receiving communities are not able to support reintegration because they lack basic infrastructure or facilities. Especially when there are a considerable number of returnees, there may be challenges to the returnees’ reintegration:

  • Returnees may have acquired different skills or sociocultural norms that are not needed or welcome in the local environment;
  • Returnees compete with the other population for resources and jobs;
  • There may be disputes over land and property between returnees and occupying residents;
  • Perceived or real imbalances between the support structures in place for the returnees and those available to the local population can create tensions.

Community-based approaches can address these factors and help support sustainable reintegration.

When considering community-based interventions it is important to identify the needs of the community itself and the impact that return migration will have on the community as a whole. Depending on the local context and migration dynamics, community-based initiatives are most effective when they foster dialogue, social cohesion and empowerment as well as measures to reduce the vulnerability of the local population to external shocks. As well, it is important to ensure local ownership of initiatives. This helps ensure that any positive effects are sustained, even after the assistance has ended (Graviano et al., 2017).

A “do-no-harm” approach can ensure that migrants and communities are not negatively affected by the actions taken. It provides the basis for conflict-sensitive programming which requires that interventions are undertaken based on a full evaluation of potential risks, as well as the elaboration of mitigating measures to ensure assistance does not adversely impact reintegration. Such measures will differ between contexts and are focused on protecting and addressing the needs of both the individual migrant and the community they return to in a mutually beneficial way (IOM, 2021b).

Example
Examples of community-based reintegration support activities
  • Setting up training courses for vocational training;
  • Establishing job creation initiatives, in partnership with the private sector;
  • Establishing forums to promote dialogue between returnees and local population;
  • Implementing small-scale infrastructure projects (such as water irrigation or road construction).
Policy Approaches
Community-based reintegration support
  • Design and decide upon interventions in partnership with community members, both returnees and non-migrants;
  • Identify the needs of the community itself and assess the estimated impact that return migration will have on the community as a whole;
  • Focus on the short and medium term to address community barriers to reintegration;
  • Make sure that community-level interventions involve and benefit both returnees and non-migrants;
  • Foster dialogue, social cohesion and empowerment;
  • Use and promote language that values the potential of returning migrants, without signalling preference for them. This can help to create positive attitudes towards them.
  • Support the longer-term sustainability of intervention outcomes.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

To Go Further
Structural interventions to facilitate reintegration

Structural factors that affect reintegration are related to the political, economic and social conditions at the local, national and international level. These structural factors have an impact on returnees’ access to employment, to basic services such as housing, education, health and mental health, and to psychosocial support. Such factors include the existence or absence of return-and-reintegration-related policies and legal instruments, cooperation between various government departments at the local and national levels, and the engagement of the private sector, diaspora, and civil society.

In some countries of origin, capacities and infrastructure are not sufficient to provide returnees and local population with adequate services, protection and assistance. To address these gaps, it may be necessary to provide policy and technical assistance as well as material support to public institutions, the private sector and civil society. Various models of cooperation are possible. Depending on the existing conditions and interests of countries involved, government-to-government agreements; joint reintegration programmes; local-to-local public and private partnerships; or the development of standard operating procedures, protocols, and other tools such as memorandums of understanding (MoUs) or training curricula might be preferable. (For a concrete example of such cooperation, see details on global skills partnerships in Partnerships: The need for cooperation and coordination)

To provide the overall conditions for sustainable reintegration, structural reintegration support should start at the beginning of reintegration assistance programmes. Attention to the structural aspects of reintegration should continue as long as assistance is provided. Consideration of the overall political, institutional, economic and social conditions for sustainable reintegration is particularly important in countries with high numbers of returnees.

Example
Examples of structural interventions

Stakeholder engagement, capacity-building and ownership

  • Engaging and reinforcing local and national capacities to deliver reintegration-related services through technical and institutional support; For instance through:
    • Building and strengthening structures, processes, coordination mechanisms and referral mechanisms for sustainable reintegration;
    • Helping national institutions analyse national indicators for monitoring reintegration, and integrating the indicators into wider migration and development-monitoring frameworks;
    • Training and mentoring local and national government agencies, service providers and implementing partners to provide services to beneficiaries in a targeted, accessible and equitable manner, in line with their mandate;
    • Providing funds or in-kind support for equipment, infrastructure or additional staff to support service provision or coordination;
    • Improving coordination for reintegration management between international, national and local actors;
    • Helping local governments develop or strengthen their ability to analyse return and reintegration issues within the wider migration and development context, and to identify and articulate priorities;
    • Support local authorities to collaborate with civil society
  • Increasing sustainability of reintegration interventions by fostering their ownership by local and national authorities and other stakeholders in countries of origin; for instance by  establishing a coordination mechanism involving the relevant government and non-governmental actors
  • Fostering effective international cooperation, for instance through
    • The establishment of appropriate frameworks to reinforce cooperation between actors in host and origin countries; provide reintegration assistance starting at the pre-return stage; adaptat reintegration measures to the needs and capacities of the countries of origin; create mechanisms to tailor reintegration measures to the needs of individual beneficiaries; or monitor and evaluate systems to track the progress and success of return and reintegration measures.
    • the establishment of partnerships, such as government-to-government agreements, joint reintegration programmes, regional cooperation processes or local-to-local partnerships.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

Policy Approaches
Structural interventions to facilitate reintegration in countries of origin

In countries of origin, structural interventions may aim to strengthen national capacities to provide reintegration services. The following actions can help achieve this:

  • Analyse, revise or upgrade policy frameworks, to develop return-friendly policies;
  • Develop partnerships with key stakeholders (such as subnational authorities and the private sector, including employers and employment agencies);
  • Facilitate cross-sectoral coordination through the creation of appropriate mechanisms, including referral mechanisms;
  • Provide capacity-building support to key stakeholders,
  • Organize conferences and consultations with stakeholders, to exchange lessons learnt;
  • Provide access to returnees to existing structures and services;
  • Ensure that social security entitlements and earned benefits are portable through measures such as enabling voluntary affiliation in national social insurance schemes, exportability of social security benefits or programmes focused on national workers employed abroad.
  • Develop standard operating procedures, protocols, and other tools, such as memorandums of understanding (MoUs) and training curricula;
  • Develop an appropriate international cooperation system to foster sustainable reintegration processes;
  • Mainstream reintegration considerations into relevant national and local policies and strategies, including development strategies.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019; Olivier, 2017.

Good Practice
Strengthening reception processes and comprehensive assistance for returning families and unaccompanied migrant children, El Salvador

In 2014, activities were launched in El Salvador to support the capacity of national actors to assist, care for, and protect returning unaccompanied migrant children as well as migrant families after their arrival. With the help of USAID and IOM, the main reception centre – Dirección de Atención al Migrante (DAMI), in the community La Chacra – was renovated and equipped, and staff capacities were strengthened. In coordination with the Directorate of Immigration (DGME) and national institutions that were supporting returnees, a new reception process was designed that prioritized migrants in vulnerable situations, including unaccompanied migrant children. The government institutions now have designated staff who work permanently in DAMI and who coordinate on a daily basis. The centre also has established protocols for care and referral processes to services at communities of origin for follow-up in dedicated reintegration mechanisms. As of 2019, nine different government institutions and several civil society agencies as well as IOM work together in the reception centre, which is managed by the central government and has an annual budget allocated for its operation.

Source

IOM field experience.

Table
Table 1. Preconditions for successfully mainstreaming return and reintegration into policy frameworks
Strong high-level political support Encouraging high-level political actors to champion mainstreaming return and reintegration into the country’s agenda will help to ensure that relevant national and local-level actors participate actively and sustain the process.
National and local ownership The government in the country of origin must be the lead actor in the mainstreaming process, so that its priorities are accounted for and the outcomes are sustainable over the long term. Whenever possible, all levels of government should be involved.
Inclusive participation based on clear roles Key stakeholders such as groups of returnees, migrant community groups, diaspora groups, civil society, academics, employers’ associations and development stakeholders need to become partners in the mainstreaming process. This will bring in different perspectives, new information and data, political and social support and funding. Broad participation supports a process that is not driven by a single government institution or a few individuals. Inclusive participation requires that the respective roles and responsibilities of different actors be clearly specified.
Shared objectives Developing a shared understanding of objectives helps avoid divergent agendas being pursued. To establish and maintain a coherent agenda, promote a clear vision, transparency and regular dialogue between stakeholders.
Define and follow feasible time frames Provide sufficient time for reflection, gathering of evidence and consensus building. This will avoid unrealistic expectations and allow for flexibility and learning throughout the process.
Source

Biella-Battista et al., 2019.

To Go Further
Key messages
  • Reintegration is a process that enables individuals to re-establish the economic, social and psychosocial relationships needed to maintain life, livelihood, dignity and inclusion in civic life.
  • Reintegration can be considered sustainable when returnees have reached levels of economic self-sufficiency, social stability within their communities, and psychosocial well-being that allow them to cope with (re)migration drivers. Having achieved sustainable reintegration, returnees are able to make further migration decisions a matter of choice, rather than necessity.
  • Many factors at the individual (and household) level, the community level, and the structural level can influence a migrant’s reintegration after return.
  • Different support schemes at different levels, addressing the economic, social and psychosocial dimension of reintegration, can have a positive impact not only on the individual returnees, but also the communities that receive them.
PreviousForced returnNextReturn and reintegration of migrants in vulnerable situations