Civil society organisations engaged with illegalised migrants in Bern and Vienna: co-production of urban citizenship

Abstract

In recent years, several studies have shown that, within Europe, innovative approaches towards migration emerge at the local level against the backdrop of increasingly restrictive and polarizing national and EU immigration policies (Agustin and Jørgensen 2019; Ataç, et al. 2020; Bauder 2019; Darling 2017; Spencer and Delvino 2019). The political space of the city has thereby become a “dynamic battleground” (Hajer and Ambrosini 2020) and a field of experimentation not only around the future of migration regimes but also for a fundamental democratization of urban life in the sense of a general right to the city for all. Looking at this “local turn” specifically in the field of illegalised migration, we observe a growing activism by both municipalities and local civil society actors calling for the inclusion of migrants without legal status in public service provision, for formal rights protections, and for democratic participation. Various comparative studies indicate that policies and practices of solidarity towards illegalised migrants vary greatly, depending not only on place-particular circumstances and factors such as national and regional legal frameworks; varying institutional competences of cities; the constellation of political parties in power; the ethnic diversity of the electorate; as well as the financial wealth of the municipality but also on the presence and strength of civil society actors (Ataç, et al. 2020; Bauder 2021; De Graauw 2016; Kaufmann and Strebel 2019; Kron and Lebuhn 2020). In recent years, several researchers (such as Kreichauf and Mayer 2021; Lambert and Swerts 2019; Hajer and Ambrosini 2020; de Graauw 2021; Holm and Lebuhn 2020) have identified civil society actors as crucial in improving the precarious situation of illegalised migrants. Nevertheless, there is often little investigation and theorizing about the variety of civil society actors engaged in urban citizenship practices and their interplay with formal politics and municipal bureaucracies. We argue that, for a more nuanced understanding of urban citizenship, we must take a closer look at the role of CSOs in urban contexts in relation to the provision of inclusionary services for illegalised migrants and the construction of urban infrastructures of solidarity. Drawing on empirical data from two cities (Vienna and Bern), we therefore engage in an in-depth analysis of the variety of actors co-producing and negotiating local welfare arrangements for illegalised migrants within urban settings. We thereby examine the organisational structures and practices of CSOs who support illegalised migrants and how they differ in their relation towards the city and urban authorities. To do so, we use Agustin’s and Jørgensen’s (2019) typology of three types of solidarity (institutional solidarity, civic solidarity, and autonomous solidarity) and refine it in relation to CSOs in the field of illegalised migration. The article proceeds as follows: We first present our theoretical framework (2.) and our methodological approach as well as the context of our empirical fields (3.). We then analyse the practices of multiple CSOs working with illegalised migrants and highlight some commonalities and challenges they face on the ground (4.). To draw a more precise picture of the landscape of CSOs in this field, we differentiate between three types of CSOs and discuss their organisational structures and their relations to municipal authorities (5.). In the concluding section, we summarise the results and discuss the relevance of our empirical findings for debates on urban citizenship (6.)