For the community, by the community: refugee and migrant empowerment through co-designed leisure programmes

ABSTRACT

Conflict, instability and the search for better economic prospects have seen a global migrant crisis necessitating destination countries to rethink social integration and social inclusion policies and programmes. The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals have intensified the urgency for governments to promote the social, economic and political inclusion of their citizens, emphasizing migrant communities. Community level leisure and sport programmes present as an inexpensive option for local governments and social development organizations to support the inclusion and empowerment migrant communities. Using an instrumental case study design with a post-structural lens, this research note explored the power differential inherent in leisure and sport programmes and investigated co-design as process to address the power differential. Findings indicate that even though participants experienced a sense of self-empowerment and enhanced perception of social inclusion, co-design as stand-alone strategy does not fully resolve the power differential within leisure programmes presented to migrant residents.

KEYWORDS:

• Empowerment
• migrants
• refugees
• social inclusion
• community leisure

Introduction

When I signed up to participate in a table tennis program presented by a non-profit at my local community centre, I was excited to use the opportunity to meet new people and participate in a program within my new community. I was not able to play table tennis for a long time. It is a sport that I have played since I was a young teenager. A few other participants and I had some ideas on how to expand the program to include more people; however, we felt that it was not really our place to tell the presenter what to do. We do not want to look ungrateful as we enjoy the program and appreciate everything done for us. However, we have skills and can help to make the program stronger. (Darya, participant in a program in a Western Melbourne suburb)

Between 2015 and 2017, a global migratory crisis resulted in a significant increase in movement of people from their countries of origin (Abbas et al. 2018). As of June 2022, at least 100 million people around the world had been forced to flee their homes because of persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations or events seriously disturbing public order. Among them are nearly 67.5 million migrants. While some migrants are fleeing conflict and persecution, others are fleeing poverty, hunger and lack of opportunity (United Nations, 2023).

World leaders and international communities acknowledged and attempted to address the migrant crisis, as demonstrated by their endorsement of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants in September 2016. This commitment followed the adoption of ‘Agenda 2030’ by the 193 Member States of the United Nations a year earlier, which included an agreement on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (Guo, Al Ariss, and Brewster 2020). Even though the application of the SDGs to migrants within their new country is somewhat vague, Goal 11, Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, applies best to a leisure context.

Migrants and refugees are sometimes referred to as collective group; however, there are distinct differences between the groups, for example in the choice to move from their home country as well as their legal protection under international law. Migrants decide to relocate not due to an immediate danger of persecution or mortality, but primarily to enhance their circumstances by securing employment, or in certain instances, for educational purposes, family reunification, or similar motivations. Unlike refugees who are unable to safely return to their home countries, migrants do not encounter such barriers. Should they opt to return home, they retain the assurance of receiving protection from their government (Hynie 2018; Refugee Council of Australia 2019).

Migrants as a group are diverse with varying levels of education, skills and professional backgrounds (Abbas et al. 2018; Grzymala-Kazlowska and Phillimore 2018; Guo, Al Ariss, and Brewster 2020; Kim et al. 2021). Newly arrived migrants face numerous challenges in adapting to a new country, including language proficiency issues, cultural adjustment difficulties and the experience of discrimination (Kim et al. 2018). These challenges can lead to feelings of exclusion, isolation and a reduced sense of belonging. Limited communication skills can result in confusion and frustration, hinder access to education and social services, and limit the establishment of social connections. These challenges are compounded by their pre-migration experiences, contributing to their overall stress and mental well-being (Grzymala-Kazlowska and Phillimore 2018; Hynie 2018; Kaya et al. 2022)

The rapid growth in the number of migrants in high-income countries has led to expanding support initiatives for their settlement (Hynie 2018). In Australia, settlement services increasingly turn to leisure and sport to assist migrant communities in adapting to their new lives and integrate into communities and cultures (Refugee Council of Australia 2010). Simultaneously, local government bodies have prioritized enhancing the participation of diverse populations in their initiatives (Jeanes, O’Connor, and Alfrey 2015). While leisure is not traditionally considered a primary pillar of the welfare state, it can play a valuable role in promoting societal participation and fostering belonging, social inclusion and a sense of empowerment (Vandermeerschen and Scheerder 2017). Leisure, including sports, can be crucial in addressing social justice issues, including power dynamics, marginalization, human rights and fostering social change (Brake and Misener 2020; Iwasaki, Messina, and Hopper 2018; Kim et al. 2018; Svensson and Woods 2017).

Definitions of social inclusion and empowerment within the context of migrant resettlement highlight the importance of social interactions, strategies that enhance capabilities and opportunities for individuals to have control over their lives, make choices and actively participate in the host society (Forde et al. 2015; Li and Stodolska 2021; Spaaij 2015). Even though leisure can facilitate social inclusion and empowerment, the inherent power relationship in the services provided to and for participants must be recognized. Programmes that actively involve participants in decision-making processes, leadership roles and skill-building activities are more likely to achieve the objectives of empowering participants and fostering their social inclusion (Horolets 2015; Vandermeerschen and Scheerder 2017).

This study explores co-design as a strategy to address the inherent power differential within leisure programmes presented at the community level aimed at the social inclusion and empowerment of migrant residents. Adopting a post-structural lens informed by Michel Foucault’s work on issues of power, this research note addresses the following research question: ‘How does co-design address issues of power in the design of a leisure programme to promote social inclusion and empowerment for migrant participants? The next section will unpack the concept of ‘empowerment’ within a leisure context, followed by a section probing co-design as an empowerment strategy. The remainder of this paper presents a case study, results, discussion and conclusion.

Empowerment and social inclusion in the context of community leisure and sports programmes

Empowerment is a challenged concept that carries significant assumptions about having a voice and the ability to take action. Empowerment entails broadening available opportunities and believing in one's capacity to influence or change the possibilities in one's life (Dykstra-DeVette and Canary 2019). Kabeer (1999, 2017) unpacks the concept of empowerment as an action that ‘relates to processes of change … the processes by which those who have been denied the capacity for choice gain this capacity’. (650). The ability to exercise choice consists of the following three interrelated dimensions which must be addressed for empowerment to become possible: resources as pre-conditions, agency as process and achievement as outcomes (Kabeer 1999, 2017). Whereas resources are acquired through a multiplicity of social relationships conducted in the institutional domains of society, for example family and community, agency refers to a person’s ability to define their life-choices and to pursue their own goals (Kabeer 1999, 2017).

Even though community-level leisure and sports programmes can support empowerment and social inclusion, programmes can unintentionally disempower participants by using a top-down approach of providing a programme for migrant participants by a person or organization separate from the community itself. In this context agency is exercised in the more negative sense of ‘power over’ thereby overriding the agency of others (Kabeer 1999, 2017; Kyza and Agesilaou 2022). The notion of an expert knowing what is best for migrant communities without deliberate representation disregards the knowledge, skills, and experience within the community (Dykstra-DeVette and Canary 2019; Mata-Codesal, Peperkamp, and Tiesler 2015).

Foucault's conceptualization of power and power dynamics within modern societies presents a helpful lens through which to examine the complexities of social inclusion and empowerment programmes for migrant residents in the context of community leisure and sports (Gallagher 2008; Golob and Giles 2015). Foucault views power as a pervasive force closely tied to the knowledge that flows through discourse. Discourses represent how individuals conceive and interact with the world, influencing what is considered normal or true. Therefore, discursive power is not merely a product of a person's position but also relates to the dominant ideas they endorse (Barker-Ruchti et al. 2013; Spaaij, Knoppers, and Jeanes 2020).

From a Foucauldian perspective, the othering of individuals who are different contributes to the construction of difference and identity over time, impacting the experiences of belonging and othering for marginalized groups (Udah and Singh 2019). ‘Otherness’ is a concept rooted in the perception of difference, emphasizing distinctions between individuals or groups, often leading to an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mindset. Knowledge of places and engagement in specific leisure activities boosts self-esteem and self-confidence among migrants (Kim et al. 2021). This is especially important for individuals with limited control over other aspects of their lives (Barker-Ruchti et al. 2013; Mata-Codesal, Peperkamp, and Tiesler 2015).

Co-design as an empowerment strategy

Co-design is a participatory approach in which consumers and users of products and services are involved in the design process. This approach has become an often-used process in the design of community programmes by both government agencies and social development organizations (Kyza and Agesilaou 2022). Collaborating with participants allows for power sharing to occur with participants articulating and exchanging ideas, engaging in storytelling and leveraging other’s experiences to design and create their own solutions (Chen et al. 2020; Kyza and Agesilaou 2022).

Co-design presents as possible strategy to address and mitigate power imbalances within service provision for migrant community participants (Chen et al. 2020; Dias et al. 2021; Jiang et al. 2022). Co-design emphasizes agency and shared ownership (Chen et al. 2020; Dias et al. 2021) with participants co-designing as experts of their own experiences (Jiang et al. 2022; Kyza and Agesilaou 2022). In a study by O’Driscoll et al. (2014) co-design was shown to be an effective empowerment strategy for members of the Karen community in Australia who co-designed a physical activity programme for their community. One of the study findings highlighted that a co-design approach in which community participants were empowered to deliver input into a programme may result in an increased sense of ownership and belonging.

Research methodology

An instrumental case study was used to understand the impact of co-design as an empowerment and social inclusion strategy in designing a leisure programme with refugee and migrant participants. This study design was selected as it enabled the exploration and testing of established points of view about empowerment and social inclusion (Kekeya 2021). Approval from the university's Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) approved the researchers to proceed with the study. Ethical standards were upheld, including maintaining data confidentiality and ensuring the participants’ privacy.

Participants

Participants included migrant residents and facilitators of community leisure and sports programmes presented at two community centres in Wyndham City Council area, Melbourne, Australia. Participants were offered the opportunity to participate in a series of co-design workshops to design a new leisure programme for the centre. Ten participants and two facilitators agreed to participate in a series of five co-design workshops as part of the study. The researcher participated as third co-facilitator. All participants had a migrant background and had lived in Australia for less than eight years. Two of the co-facilitators were not migrants and were born in Melbourne Australia. All participants can speak a minimum of two languages and although English was not the first language for any of the participants, they could participate without a translator's assistance. Participants included six females and four males with one male and one female facilitator. The age group of the participants and facilitators ranged between the youngest participant as 21 years of age and the oldest as 63 years old. Participants have all participated in leisure and sport programmes at either of the two community centres and knew each other by sight.

Researcher reflexivity

The researcher was known to the participants as a community volunteer and participated as co-facilitator in the co-design workshops. As recent migrant to Australia with English as second language, the inclusion of the researcher as co-facilitator may have impacted to the outcomes of the study as it contributed to a shared sense of identity in the group.

Data collection

Participant recruitment utilized a non-probability purposeful sample in which participants were selected based on their availability and their knowledge about or experience with the study phenomena (Stratton 2019). Data collection included three focus group discussions and observational notes taken during the five co-design workshops. The co-design workshops were based on the methodology proposed by Burkett (2019) consisting of the following two stages: the generative phase consisting of discovery and definition, and the developmental phase consisting of developing and delivery.

Fieldwork site

The co-design workshops were facilitated at two community centres in the Wyndham City Council area. Wyndham City Council, located in the Western suburbs of Melbourne, has been actively involved in various initiatives supporting refugee and migrant residents since joining the Refugee Welcome Zone initiative. In 2021, 48.0% of the population was born overseas, of which 12% arrived in the last five years (Wyndham City Council 2021).

Theoretical lens

A post-structural lens incorporating Foucault’s conceptualization of power was used during data collection and analysis. Post-structuralism denies the possibility of an objective, independent reality and highlights the role of discourse and power in reproducing knowledge, social reality and social regulation (Allan 2013; Cameron and Gibson 2005; Müller et al. 2008), reality, knowledge and perceptions of the world are, therefore, discursive.

Data analysis

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) was chosen to analyze the power dynamics in the research and its relation to social practice (Pederson 2009; Roger et al. 2005). Fairclough's (2012) three-tiered CDA framework was used. This study utilized a three-tiered CDA framework, as outlined by Fairclough (2012). Data analysis employed an inductive-deductive logic process. Themes and codes were constructed inductively, following Fairclough's three tiers: text, discursive practice and sociocultural practice. Due to the selected research note format, only the text tier of the textual level of analysis will be shown.

Results and discussion

The findings of the first level of data analysis will be discussed in the results and discussion section, which includes the ideational, interpersonal and textual levels. Although the themes that emerged during the final level of textual analysis indicated that co-design was an effective approach for promoting empowerment and social inclusion, the analysis at the ideational and interpersonal levels revealed that the power differential between facilitators and participants must be actively addressed.

Ideational level

The ideational analysis aimed to identify the current meta-narratives in the co-design workshops’ interactions between participants and facilitators. In analyzing the construction of meta-narratives within transcribed data, the dichotomy is illustrated as narrative inclusion (NI) and exclusion (NE) as seen in Table 1.

Table 1. Narrative inclusion and exclusion in text.

Research participant	NI or NE		Example in text
Workshop participant	‘our’ ‘we’	NI	‘Our group identified several potential leisure programs … ’ (Participant 10) ‘working together made me realise that we can make a difference in our community’ (Participant 3)
	‘they’	NE	‘The facilitators really tried to include us as participants into making decisions. They always made sure that we had the opportunity to contribute’ (Participant 5).
Facilitator	‘we’ ‘them’ ‘they’ ‘their’	NE	‘We supported them to trust that they can be leaders in their community’ (Facilitator 1). ‘I am so excited that we have found a way to include them’ (Facilitator 1).
	‘we’ ‘us’	NI	‘We were all in the process together – none of us knew exactly where this would go’ (Facilitator 2).

The existence of dichotomy in the text between included and excluded, disempowered and empowered indicates that although participants and facilitators perceived co-design as an empowering strategy that aims to socially include participants, issues of power and exclusion remain. The discourse that positions the migrant participant as someone to be included and to provide services for contributes to the othering of participants can be seen in the statements by facilitator 1 and should be addressed in future co-design programmes (Udah and Singh 2020).

Interpersonal domain

This domain focused on the meaning of social relations between the participants and facilitators within the group. Analyzing the cohesion and contradictions within the text involved examining the degree of uncertainty and the use of pronouns.

The degrees of uncertainty within the text are signified using modalities categorized as either a low, moderate, or high level of uncertainty illustrating contradiction. Participants illustrated a low level of uncertainty: Co-design has made me feel like I have something to contribute to Australia (participant 2) and a moderate level of uncertainty: This type of workshop allows everyone to work together as a team. Yet, in reality, I don't think many organizations will adopt this as approach (participant 9). One of the facilitators showed low uncertainty; for example, Co-design is the way forward. Community-level service providers must adopt this strategy to ensure that participants are included in decisions about their lives (facilitator 2). This was an important finding, as facilitators showed a higher rate of using narrative exclusion within the ideational level of analysis.

The analysis of pronouns uncovered a dichotomy in co-design to address the power differential between facilitators and participants. Three patterns of pronouns were found and included inclusive, exclusive and othering pronouns (Udah and Singh 2020). An example of othering pronouns can be seen in a statement by one of the participants: The facilitators appreciated that we worked with them. They were grateful for everything that we did (participant 7).

Textual domain

Two of the themes that surfaced during the textual analysis include empowerment as process; and, social inclusion and sense of belonging.

Empowerment as process

Empowerment surfaced as a strong theme from data analysis. Participants experienced the co-design process to be self-empowering:

I learned how things work – the facilitator worked on the skills and knowledge that the group had. The facilitator showed the group how things work, but everyone was responsible for stepping up … It was not something that the facilitator did for us. We did it. (participant 9)

Collaboration of participants and facilitators as one group allowed power sharing to occur and enhanced the participant’s agency by providing them with the resources, information and opportunity to actively participate in decision-making processes (Mainwaring 2016).

The value of co-design workshops for participants was in its focus on the process of empowerment and social inclusion instead of the outcome:

For me, it was during the workshops that I started to realize that I am starting to gain more control over what I participate in … over what I can do … it did not happen at the end, but throughout – like a flower blooming. (participant 1)

As multi-levelled concept, empowerment seem to occur as a progression from individual agency to small group to community organization (Kabeer 1999, 2017) during the co-design workshops as highlighted by a participant: I was not aware that one can book a room at a community centre. That we can bring an activity from back home to share with our new community. We had an event at the centre the other night and everyone participated in activities from our home country – even the Australians! (participant 9).

Social inclusion and sense of belonging

The standard approach to developing programmes for migrant participants often assumes a linear process of helping a participant move from an outsider to an insider with a fixed cultural identity (Mata-Codesal, Peperkamp, and Tiesler 2015). The strategy of co-design played a significant role in this context, going beyond mere coping and adaptation:

English is my third language. This workshop used my strengths and my skills without the barrier of language – not once did I feel like who I am is not okay. It was celebrated that together we brought so many experiences. (participant 3)

Participants highlighted the validation of non-Western values during the co-design process:

I am from a culture where we value community – for us, it is not about the success of the individual. Co-design made me feel that my culture and values were important. But more than that. It was not my values or your values. It became our values. (participant, 8)

One facilitator highlighted the experience of social inclusion during the co-design process:

This process is a game changer. This was the first time that I felt included in a community very different from my own. I usually feel like an outsider, even when I facilitate a program, especially during break time. I was not responsible for trying to include participants – it was a shared responsibility. (facilitator 2)

Belonging is a fundamental aspect of one's identity and is closely linked to feeling part of a community. Belonging is conceptualized as a process involving boundary-making, encompassing exclusion and inclusion (Forde et al. 2015; Li and Stodolska 2021; Udah and Singh 2019), as highlighted in the following quote: ‘I have been active in my community group, but just within the group of people I know. I now feel like I have a new community group of people who think like me and value my opinions and skills’ (participant 3). Even though the study aimed to explore the use of co-design as tool to support empowerment and social inclusion, the process of co-design also contributed to the generation of social capital amongst the group (Clutterbuck and Doherty 2019): ‘As we worked together, I came to think that as a group we can really make things happen for our community. We have worked well together, and I know that I can trust this group of people.’ (participant 3).

Conclusion

This study explored whether co-design presents an effective strategy to address the inherent power differential within community-level leisure and sports programmes to empower and socially include refugee and migrant participants.

Empowerment and social inclusion involve mutual respect and facilitate greater access to and control over resources by people lacking an equal share of resources within a community. The study's findings indicate that co-design can facilitate an enhanced sense of agency and, as result empowerment, especially when it is incorporated as a process and not set as the end goal. However, there is a need for a more nuanced understanding of the identity formation amongst migrant participants.

Even though social inclusion, a sense of belonging and elements of social capital surfaced as outcomes of the co-design workshops, the rate of narrative exclusion used by facilitators combined with the lower level of certainty indicated by participants shows that co-design as stand-alone strategy is not sufficient in addressing the inherent power differential in community level leisure and sports programmes aimed at empowering and socially inclusion of migrant community residents. Empowerment and social inclusion should be included as multi-levelled constructs within the co-design process to allow co-design to contribute to social inclusion and empowerment of migrant participants.

Disclosure statement

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