Civic Integration through Commissioned Communities: On the Cross-Sector Co-Production of Conditioned and Clientised Participation

Abstract

Policymakers across Western welfare states increasingly make full citizenship contingent on refugees adapting to liberal democratic values and practising active citizenship. Simultaneously, the new public governance paradigm has reinvigorated policymakers' belief in civil society as a crucial partner for tackling societal challenges like integration. Consequently, cross-sector co-production of civic communities is increasingly perceived as a model for amplifying the participation and integration of refugees. The practices and outcomes of cross-sector co-produced integration remain underexplored.Based on a three-year qualitative study of four cross-sector integration projects in a Danish municipality, this article contributes knowledge to this important issue. We explore how volunteers and municipal staff co-produce civic communities to enhance the participation and integration of refugees.We find that a recurrent way of co-producing communities is through public agents commissioning communities from voluntary organisations. Next, we identify two recurrent forms of participation available to refugees through those commissioned communities. In the first, conditioned participation, the commissioning of communities is characterised by inter-sectoral distance and knowledge gaps, conditioning participation on the resources of each refugee. In the second, clientised participation, the inter-sectoral collaboration resembles a commissioner/service-provider relation, with refugees as clients referred to voluntary services.

Embedded and exterior practices of cross-sector co-production: the impact of fields

“…As with any other organisational practice, cross-sector coproduction depends on a mixture of digital and physical meeting places for coordination, planning, and everyday practice. Conversely, the absence of stable physical and virtual meeting places or an excessively frequent change in locations may constrain cross-sector interaction and trust-building (Rodner et al, 2020;Grubb & Vitus, 2022). Even though the literature on fields and institutional transformation rarely pays much attention to space and materiality in general (Jones et al, 2017), a growing body of research in organisation studies emphasises the importance of space in shaping and contesting fields (Brandtner & Dunning, 2020;Rodner et al, 2020).…”

In the midst of a paradigm shift from integration to repatriation: Insights into the experiences of young refugees and local integration policy workers during 2018 to 2020

“…Exploring how school practices and resources can support the integration of young refugees, Borsch et al (2019) found that facilitation of language acquisition, commitment to nurturing positive inter-ethnic relationships, a sense of collective responsibilities and an active promotion of inclusive school ethos, were decisive for promoting young refugees' social capital and inclusion in schools. Civil society and NGOs have likewise a long history of contributing to the support of refugees' inclusion in society (LG Insight, 2017, 2019Frederiksen and Grubb, 2021;Grubb and Vitus, 2022). Civil society have been found to play a significant role in co-creation with municipalities, helping vulnerable groups to establish social relationships and become included in social communities and to establish creating social relationships (Frederiksen & Grubb, 2021).…”