Reintegration trajectories in contexts of high mobility: insights from Albania and Kosovo

Abstract

Understanding and facilitating reintegration requires a holistic perspective that includes understanding people’s reasons for leaving as well as their migration- and return-related aspirations. These determine whether migrants aim and prepare for their return themselves, resulting in different levels of return preparedness and pointing to potential reintegration barriers. Data from this study shows a clear correlation between (a) aspiring to return at the time of migration and self-organised (unassisted) return and (b) between a lack of return aspirations resulting in low or no return preparedness and assisted return. A lack of willingness and / or readiness to return is what makes reintegration assistance a particularly challenging endeavour. Migration and return are embedded in social and often transnational networks, with the most substantial and reliable reintegration support from family networks. Support capacities of these networks are, however, often negatively correlated to the needs of returnees. Family support can dwindle or stop altogether while support capacities of families are often only maintained through those who have migrated. While economic opportunities are the most prominent reasons for migration and obstacles to reintegration, the long-term data analysis shows that migration itself has only a limited effect on improving livelihoods. In most cases, the potential to capitalise on migration-related opportunities depended on resource and network endowments from before migration; otherwise, positive effects of migration are confined to maintaining a livelihood. Rather than by geography, respondents more likely defined 'home' and belonging as a social place (often the family) and / or as a state of mental and psychological well-being. At the same time, they experience an inability to combine everything they aspire to in one geographical place and having to live continuously in transnational families as well as re-negotiations of social relations upon return as distressing. Return and reintegration assistance is part of the contested multi-stakeholder field of return governance, leading to a diversity of approaches and gaps regarding access, needs orientation and evidence base. In the initial phase after return, reintegration assistance can be critical to some returnees. What makes for a sustainable effect are long-term trustful relationships, flexibility and needs orientation, actively engaging returnees in shaping their future, opening social spaces and helping to (re-)establish connections. A more systematic matching of individual-level and structural / institutional assistance and including vulnerable non-migrants can increase positive effects.