The role of institutional opportunity structures for refugee integration in Vienna. Learnings and modifications in the aftermath of the long summer of migration in 2015

Abstract

Austria's exclusive model of citizenship, and restrictive policies on migration, refugee reception and asylum, dating back to the 1990s, create structural barriers to refugee integration in the country’s economic and socio-cultural life. In this article, we shed light on Vienna, a city renowned for its comprehensive social policies. However, the inclusive integration approach adopted by the city clashes with the stricter national migration and asylum policies. By relying on actor-centred institutionalism, we trace the interdependencies of various policy fields shaping refugees’ integration pathways after their arrival. From a methodological perspective, we draw upon document analysis and semi-structured interviews with policymakers and NGO workers. The findings show that refugees' and asylum seekers’ integration within Vienna depends on multiple actors with partially overlapping responsibilities, which creates a strong network of (institutional) opportunity structures. This multi-level system may benefit from the expertise of, and strong relations between the actors involved. However, its weakness lies in its dependency on funding and the limited participation opportunities for civil society. In this paper, we emphasize the high degree of institutionalization in the Viennese integration policy regime, which is equipped to modify provision to address current needs, while civil society actors remain underrepresented in the policy-making process.

Keywords:

• Refugee Integration
• Institutional Opportunity Structures
• Migration Policy
• Multi-level-governance
• Vienna

Acknowledgements

This paper is supported by research funded within INTERREG Central Europe Project SIforREF-Integrating Refugees in Society and the Labour Market Through Social Innovation (CE1527). The authors are grateful for funding and support within the project and would like to thank all interview partners.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 This paper is based on transnational research within the INTERREG Central Europe Project SIforREF- Integrating Refugees in Society and the Labour Market Through Social Innovation. It draws on findings from the baseline report which was completed in 2019 (SIforREF 2019).

2 www.integrationsfonds.at

3 As for the asylum-seeking process, the legal framework of deportation and expulsion changed over time. Before the changes in policies in the 1990s, deportations were only possible when there was a violation of the rights or if a refugee or asylum seeker was considered as a danger to public safety. Additionally, expulsions (Ausweisungen) and deportations were allowed on grounds of illegal entry. However, new possibilities for a right to stay for rejected asylum seekers have evolved on a federal level, even though they are restricted to, for instance, humanitarian residence permit or subsidiary protection (Merhaut and Stern 2018). In 2018, the Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (BFA) introduced the programme ‘Voluntary return – a new start with prospect’, which provides financial incentives to encourage the assisted return to the countries of origin (OECD 2018) heading for a similar direction as the ‘Return’ programme in Germany (see Federal Office for Migration and Refugees n.d.).

4 This sentence depicts the situation at the time of data collection. However, two decrees (passed in 2004 and 2018) permitting asylum seekers to work only temporarily may be repealed.

5 Basic Care (Mindestsicherung) is a financial aid given to people who are long term unemployed – regardless of migration or refugee background. Basic Welfare support (Grundversorgung), in contrast, is a social aid for asylum seekers only during the asylum procedure, comprising accommodation, clothing, health insurance, small pocket money, etc.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Interreg Central Europe [Grant Number CE1527].

Notes on contributors

Judith Schnelzer

Judith Schnelzer is a researcher at the Institute for Urban and Regional Research, Austrian Academy of Sciences, and a PhD candidate at the Department of Geography, University of Vienna (Austria). Their recent research interests revolve around migration and integration research, socio-spatial inequalities of urban development, residential displacement and visual methodologies.

Yvonne Franz

Yvonne Franz is a university post-doctoral assistant at the Department of Geography and Regional Research, University of Vienna (Austria). Her research interests revolve around neighbourhood and urban development, local housing market and gentrification processes, social innovation and urban living labs. She is scientific director of the postgraduate course “Cooperative Urban and Regional Development“ at the Postgraduate Center, University of Vienna.

Elisabetta Mocca

Elisabetta Mocca is a university post-doctoral assistant at the Department of Sociology, University of Vienna (Austria). Her research interests revolve around urban and territorial politics, political participation and environmental politics. On these topics she has published in leading international journals.

Yuri Kazepov

Yuri Kazepov is a professor of International Urban Sociology and Compared Welfare Systems at the University of Vienna (Austria). Among his fields of interest are multilevel governance, the territorial dimension of social policies. On these issues, he has been carrying out comparative research and evaluation activities for the EU and National Agencies.