Organizations and Networks of Migrants in the Co-Creation of Social Protection

Evea Gnzal^*
*Correspondence: Evea Gnzal, Department of Social Science, Ruhr-University Bochum, 44801 Bochum, Germany, Email:

Keywords

Migrant organizations • Networks • Social protection

Introduction

It literally covers everything from A to Z, including psychological treatment, customs, and the office for foreigners. This quote was obtained during a 2021 project called "Migrant Organizations and the Co-Production of Social Protection" (MIKOSS) interview with a representative of the migrant organisation (MO) Together e.V.1. It demonstrates the variety of activities that MOs serve their target populations with on a daily basis throughout Germany. Over time, MOs have developed into a solid pillar in Germany's daily social protection of immigrants. MOs, who are relatively new players in the German welfare landscape, now go beyond simply addressing the issues of their target groups inside the confines of their organisations. Several empirical studies and scholarly contributions have already looked at secular and religious MOs and their work in Germany, including their involvement in the Context of social protection Similar to this, research has also been done on how MOs collaborate with other governmental and civil society actors). With the exception of the research done by Halm et al. (2020), we still don't fully understand how these networks are constructed or how they affect MOs as social protection providers. By investigating MOs in relation to their social protective roles and their network embeddedness in three different approaches, we intend to close this research gap. First, we'll list the organisational traits and operational procedures used by the 15 MOs chosen for this study in the field of social protection. Second, we'll look at the relationship-level correlational elements that make their network partners important for such MOs. Third, we'll provide two case studies to illustrate how different MOs organise their daily tasks and collaborate with other social protection players. The results will then show distinctions based on the kinds of network partners, their regional reach, and their applicability to these two MOs [1,2].

Methods

The Ruhr region is an appropriate research framework for investigating societal as well as individual dynamics within the context of migration because of its long history of movement. As a result, we gathered information in Dortmund, Bochum, and Duisburg. We aimed to choose groups that were as diverse as possible using a theoretical sampling technique, including religious congregations, cultural associations of various countries of origin, professional and less professional associations, and associations that specifically target women. We employed a gatekeeper method to connect with these organisations because it was challenging to get field access during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted our fieldwork between January and November of 2021. We conducted semi-structured expert interviews with representatives from a total of 15 secular and religious groups. The interviews were conducted either at the facility or over the phone where COVID-19-related restrictions precluded a face-to-face contact.via video calls or one of the organisations. Each interview lasted between one and two hours [3-5].

Discussion

This study looked at 15 MOs that offered their target populations both formal and informal social protection in order to assess how embedded in the network these organisations were. Three strategies were used to achieve these goals: (1) describing their organisational characteristics and work patterns in the field of social protection; (2) examining correlational factors in terms of the relevance of network partners; and (3) describing how MOs design their daily work, which functions they fulfil, and how they are connected with other actors in the field of social protection by highlighting our results. First, we discovered that MOs offer a wide variety of formal and informal forms of social protection that aid each target group's response to social dangers. In addition to providing these support services, MOs are a part of networks that typically have 21 different participants. Additionally, MOs use a variety of networking techniques to accomplish their objectives when it comes to social protection [6].

Conclusion

The size and make-up of the networks—i.e., the different kinds of network partners that make them up—vary. However, in their day-to-day social protection-related activities, MOs are mostly connected to local actors, despite the fact that national institutions also play a significant but less prevalent role. Second, we found that governmental actors and welfare organisations were most crucial for social protection-related behaviours, whereas other organisations, including other MOs, played a modest role. This was done by concentrating on the relevance of the 15 MOs' network partners. Surprisingly, local network partners were far more significant than Since MOs rely on them for financing and expertise, local government actors (such municipal integration centres) and welfare groups stood out as being particularly significant collaboration partners. However, not all organisations are equally respected in local hierarchies, and partnerships are not always marked by amicable cooperation; conflicts and unequal power dynamics between the network partners can undoubtedly occur.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Aşkın, Basri, Anke Wagner, Mesut Tübek and Monika A. Rieger. "Die Rolle von Migrantenselbstorganisationen in der Gesundheitsversorgung. Ein integrativer Review." Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 139 (2018): 37-45.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Baldassar, Loretta. "Missing kin and longing to be together: Emotions and the construction of co-presence in transnational relationships." J Intercult Stud 29 (2008): 247-266.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Barglowski, Karolina. "Cultures of transnationality in European migration: Subjectivity, family and inequality." Routledge, 2019.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Barglowski, Karolina. "Transnational parenting in settled families: Social class, migration experiences and child rearing among Polish migrants in Germany." J Fam Stud (2021): 1-18.

Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Barglowski, Karolina and Lisa Bonfert. "Beyond integration vs. homeland attachment: How migrant organizations affect processes of anchoring and embedding." Ethn Racial Stud (2022): 1-24.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Barglowski, Karolina and Lisa Bonfert. "Migrant organisations, belonging and social protection. The role of migrant organisations in migrants' social risk‐averting strategies." Int Migr (2022).

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at