Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-lcgwf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-14T16:24:33.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digital Practices of Negotiation: Social Workers at the Intersection of Migration and Social Policies in Switzerland and Belgium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2022

SOPHIE ANDREETTA Open the ORCID record for SOPHIE ANDREETTA [Opens in a new window]  and
LISA MARIE BORRELLI Open the ORCID record for LISA MARIE BORRELLI [Opens in a new window]
SOPHIE ANDREETTA*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire d’Anthropologie Sociale et Culturelle, Faculté des Sciences Sociales, Université de Liège, Place des orateurs, 3 - B.31, B - 4000 Liège, Belgium email: sandreetta@uliege.be
LISA MARIE BORRELLI
Affiliation:
Institute of Social Work, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland, Sierre and nccr - On the Move, Switzerland email: lisa.borrelli@hevs.ch
*
Corresponding author, email: sandreetta@uliege.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Paperwork has always been a central part of bureaucratic work. Over the last few years, bureaucratic procedures have become increasingly standardised and digitalised. Based on interviews and ethnographic fieldwork within welfare offices in Switzerland and Belgium, we reflect on the way evidence is constructed within social policy and cases built for or against noncitizen welfare recipients in order to show how paper truths are established and challenged. The focus on digital practices within public policy implementation highlights how it contributes to enhanced control mechanisms on the implementation level and how migration law continues to guide welfare governance for noncitizens. This allows targeting of the most marginalised groups, whose rights to access state support are institutionally impeded. Through database information flows, official forms, paper reports and face-to-face meetings, we further show how a hybrid form of bureaucratic work emerges, where direct contact with the client is still key, yet highly influenced by standardisation processes.

Keywords

Digitalisationmaterialitymigration controlpaperworksocial serviceswelfare policies

Information

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , April 2024 , pp. 329 - 347
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andreetta, S. (2019), ‘Writing for Difference Audiences’. Journal of Legal Anthropology 3 (2): 91–110. https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.030206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ataç, İ. and Rosenberger, S. (2019), ‘Social Policies as a Tool of Migration Control’. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies 17 (1): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1539802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, V. (2018), Nordic Nationalism and Penal Order. Walling the Welfare State. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bolderson, H. (2011), ‘The Ethics of Welfare Provision for Migrants: A Case for Equal Treatment and the Repositioning of Welfare’. Journal of Social Policy 40 (2): 219–35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279410000899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borjas, G. J. (1999), ‘Immigration and Welfare Magnets’. Journal of Labour Economics 17 (4): 607–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borrelli, L. M. and Andreetta, S. (2019), ‘Introduction’. Journal of Legal Anthropology 3 (2): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3167/jla.2019.03020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borrelli, L. M., Kurt, S., Achermann, C. and Pfirter, L. (2021), ‘(Un)Conditional Welfare? Tensions Between Welfare Rights and Migration Control in Swiss Case Law’. Swiss Journal of Sociology 47 (1): 73–94. https://doi.org/10.2478/sjs-2021-0007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovens, M. and Zouridis, S. (2002),‘From Street-Level to System-Level Bureaucracies: How Information and Communication Technology Is Transforming Administrative Discretion and Constitutional Control’. Public Administration Review 62 (2): 174–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowes, A. M. and Meehan Domokos, T. (1998), ‘Health Visitors Work in a Multi-Ethnic Society: A Qualitative Study of Social Exclusion’. Journal of Social Policy 27 (4): 489–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727949800539X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broeders, D. (2007), ‘The New Digital Borders of Europe. EU Databases and the Surveillance of Irregular Migrants’. International Sociology 22 (1): 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580907070126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broeders, D. and Engbersen, G. (2007), ‘The Fight Against Illegal Migration: Identification Policies and Immigrants’ Counterstrategies’. American Behavioral Scientist 50 (12): 1592–1609. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764207302470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmel, E. and Sojka, B. (2021), ‘Beyond Welfare Chauvinism and Deservingness. Rationales of Belonging as a Conceptual Framework for the Politics and Governance of Migrants’ Rights’. Journal of Social Policy 50 (3): 645–67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279420000379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carstensen, K., Burau, V., Dahl, H. M. and Hald, A. N. (2021), ‘How Welfare Professions Contribute to the Making of Welfare Governance: Professional Agency and Institutional Work in Elder Care’. Journal of Social Policy, April, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004727942100027.Google Scholar
Carswell, G. and de Neve, G. (2020), ‘Paperwork, Patronage, and Citizenship: The Materiality of Everyday Interactions with Bureaucracy in Tamil Nadu, India’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 26 (3): 495–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.1331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cijan, A., Jenič, L., Lamovšek, A. and Stemberger, J. (2019), ‘How Digitalization Changes the Workplace’. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal 8 (1): 3–12. https://doi.org/10.17708/DRMJ.2019.v08n01a01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clasen, J., Clegg, D. and Goerne, A. (2016), ‘Comparative Social Policy Analysis and Active Labour Market Policy: Putting Quality before Quantity’. Journal of Social Policy 45 (1): 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279415000434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Eule, T. G., Borrelli, L. M., Lindberg, A. and Wyss, A. (2019), Migrants Before the Law: Contested Migration Control in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, T. and Harris, J. (2004), ‘Street-Level Bureaucracy, Social Work and the (Exaggerated) Death of Discretion’. The British Journal of Social Work 34 (6): 871–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Federal Act on Foreign Nationals and Integration. (2019), https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/20020232/index.html.Google Scholar
Gilliom, J. (2001), Overseers of the Poor. Surveillance, Resistance, and the Limits of Privacy. Chicago Series in Law and Society. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/O/bo3626685.html.Google Scholar
Hansen, H-T., Lundberg, K. and Syltevik, L. J. (2018), ‘Digitalization, Street-Level Bureaucracy and Welfare Users’ Experiences: Digitalization, Street-Level Bureaucracy and Welfare Users’ Experiences’. Social Policy & Administration 52 (1): 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henman, P., and Marston, G. (2008), ‘The Social Division of Welfare Surveillance’. Journal of Social Policy 37 (2): 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279407001705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoag, C. B. (2010), ‘The Magic of the Populace: An Ethnography of Illegibility in the South African Immigration Bureaucracy’. Political and Legal Anthropology Review 33 (1): 6–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm Vohnsen, N. (2017), The Absurdity of Bureaucracy. How Implementation Works. Manchester: Manchester University Press -. http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9781526101341.Google Scholar
Hooijer, G. and Picot, G. (2015), ‘European Welfare States and Migrant Poverty: The Institutional Determinants of Disadvantage’. Comparative Political Studies 48 (14): 1879–1904. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414015597508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, M. S. (2012), Government of Paper: The Materiality of Bureaucracy in Urban Pakistan. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Infantino, F. (2016), Outsourcing Border Control. Politics and Practice of Contracted Visa Policy in Morocco. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Joh, E. E. (2014), ‘Policing by Numbers: Big Data and the Fourth Amendment. 89 Wash. L. Rev. 35: 35-68.’ 89 Wash. L. Rev. 35: 35–68.Google Scholar
Knotz, C., Fossati, F., Scalise, G. and Hooijer, G. (2020), ‘The Roles of Employers and Trade Unions in Immigration and Welfare State Policymaking’. Journal of European Social Policy 30 (5): 521–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928720960592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lafleur, J. M. and Mescoli, E. (2018), ‘Creating Undocumented EU Migrants through Welfare: A Conceptualization of Undeserving and Precarious Citizenship’. Sociology 52 (3): 480–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038518764615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lafleur, J. M. and Vintila, C-D. (2020), Migration and Social Protection in Europe and Beyond (Volume 1): Comparing Access to Welfare Entitlements. IMISCOE Research Series 1. Springer Open Access.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, M. (1980), Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Publications of Russell Sage Foundation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Morgan, K. J. (2020), ‘Policing Markets: The Role of the Social Partners in Internal Immigration Enforcement’. Journal of European Social Policy 30 (5): 571–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928720960576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordinance on admission, residence and gainful employment (Verordnung Über Zulassung, Aufenthalt Und Erwerbstätigkeit) (2019), https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/20070993/index.html.Google Scholar
Pors, A. and Schou, J. (2020), ‘Street-Level Morality at the Digital Frontlines: An Ethnographic Study of Moral Mediation in Welfare Work’. Administrative Theory & Praxis, June, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2020.1782137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenblat, A. (2018. Uberland: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Rules of Work. Oakland, California: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, C. and Teney, C. (2019), ‘Access to General Social Protection for Immigrants in Advanced Democracies’. Journal of European Social Policy 29 (1): 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928718768365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnegg, B. and Matter, S. (2010), ‘Von Der Unterstützung Der “Würdigen” Armen Zum Recht Auf Existenzsicherung: Die Ausgestaltung Der Schweizer Sozialhilfe Im 20. Jahrhundert’. In C. Kehrli (ed.), Schwerpunkt: Armut Verhindern. Sozialalmanach: Vol 20, 129–42. Luzern: Caritas.Google Scholar
Schönenberger, S. and Achermann, C. (2012), ‘Pilotprojekt „Integrationsvereinbarungen“ in Ostermundigen Schlussbericht Der Externen Evaluation’. Schlussbericht der externen Evaluation. Neuchâtel: SFM und ZFM.Google Scholar
Shutes, I. (2016), ‘Work-Related Conditionality and the Access to Social Benefits of National Citizens, EU and Non-EU Citizens’. Journal of Social Policy 45 (4): 691–707. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279416000234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solano, G. and Huddleston, T. (2020), ‘Migrant Integration Policy Index 2020’. https://mipex.eu.Google Scholar
Spire, A. (2008), Accueillir Ou Reconduire. Enquête Sur Les Guichets de l’immigration. Paris: Raisons d’agir.Google Scholar