Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper examines municipal responses to restrictive national policies by focussing on welfare provision for non-removed rejected asylum seekers. Using an analytical framework of multi-level governance, we investigate processes of conflict and cooperation and the demarcation of responsibilities between government tiers at the intersection of migration and welfare policy. In an in-depth analysis of the cases of Amsterdam, Vienna and Stockholm, we argue that in order to explain the divergences of public welfare provisions for non-removed rejected asylum seekers, it is necessary to look into their respective legal-institutional framework and formal competences, but also beyond, meaning into the relations of those municipalities with civil society actors and other local governments. We find that, on the one hand, the relationship between local NGOs and the municipality has an influence on the scope of services provided and that, on the other hand, alliance-building between municipalities is crucial for strengthening a political standing.
Highlights
The involvement of local governments in providing welfare services to irregular migrants exemplifies how cities have become important actors in migration policy; even though their involvement may be distinctly at odds with national policies (Spencer 2017)
In an in-depth analysis of the cases of Amsterdam, Vienna and Stockholm, we argue that in order to explain the divergences of public welfare provisions for non-removed rejected asylum seekers, it is necessary to look into their respective legal-institutional framework and formal competences, and beyond, meaning into the relations of those municipalities with civil society actors and other local governments
On the one hand, the relationship between local NGOs and the municipality has an influence on the scope of services provided and that, on the other hand, alliance-building between municipalities is crucial for strengthening a political standing
Summary
Hepburn and Zapata-Barrero (2014) argue that sub-state levels of government started to steadily gain influence in migration policy, especially in the delivery of welfare services for irregular migrants, a development referred to as the “local turn”. Based on Kos, Maussen, and Doomernik (2015) and Delvino (2017), we carve out two important dimensions of local responses to welfare-restricting national policies: political responses and alternative local service provision The former grasps actions to build up social and political pressure by mobilizing public and political actors. With this theoretical framing we join a recent literary strand, which highlights the importance of horizontal relations in multi-level governance constellations (Campomori and Caponio 2017) Informed by this theoretical debate, which delivers insights on the role of horizontal relations and their impact on the agency of the cities, we analyse how the relations of three selected cities with NGOs and among each other influence their responses towards NRAS’ access to welfare services in restrictive national policy contexts. We employ the MLGlense for its strength to enable more thorough knowledge on the interaction between political and societal institutions and their effects on political decisions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
