The Refugee Academy symposium of July 1st, which took place at the VU and was held in English, was devoted to the role and the resilience of civil society initiatives that aim to contribute to the societal inclusion of refugees in the Netherlands. Since the start of the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ in 2015, civil society initiatives and organizational networks have played a crucial role in helping and supporting refugees who entered the Netherlands. Since governance structures initially failed to adequately cope with the size and complexity of this ‘crisis’, many new grassroots and community organizations were formed that played a role in the field of reception and integration of refugees. They operated alongside and collaborated with national and local governments and established NGOs, and by doing so shined a light on the societal challenges and ambitions related to the inclusion of refugees in current times

1. 1
Learning Crossroads for Refugee Inclusion: How to
map the efforts and resilience of Civil Society
initiatives in the Netherlands
Refugee Academy, July 1, 2019
@ Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
__________________________________________________________________________________
Program
1. Opening by Halleh Ghorashi
2. SteppingStones4Refugees by Nikki Scholten
3. Learning Crossroads Project by Elena Ponzoni
4. Learning Crossroads for Refugee Inclusion: Mapping Gastvrij Oost by Timo Korstenbroek and
Younes Younes
5. Interactive Panel Discussions
 With people from civil society initiatives: Firoez Azarhoosh, Geke Oosterhof, Lian
Priemus, & Pieter de Jong. Moderated by Timo Korstenbroek & Younes Saramifar.
 With people from civil society initiatives and members of the municipal council: Sabina
Kekic, Elisabeth Tuijthof, Naseer Sayedi, Meron Ketala and Mouhamad Alhamad.
Moderated by Kees Boersma & Younes Younes.
6. Interactive Discussion
7. Final Reflections by Tirza de Fockert, Abel Valenzuela, Salim Vally & Yến Lê Espiritu
__________________________________________________________________________________
The Refugee Academy symposium of July 1st
, which took place at the VU and was held in English, was
devoted to the role and the resilience of civil society initiatives that aim to contribute to the societal
inclusion of refugees in the Netherlands. Since the start of the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ in 2015, civil
society initiatives and organizational networks have played a crucial role in helping and supporting
refugees who entered the Netherlands. Since governance structures initially failed to adequately cope
with the size and complexity of this ‘crisis’, many new grassroots and community organizations were
formed that played a role in the field of reception and integration of refugees. They operated alongside
and collaborated with national and local governments and established NGOs, and by doing so shined
a light on the societal challenges and ambitions related to the inclusion of refugees in current times.
Halleh Ghorashi, initiator of the Refugee Academy, opened the meeting and elaborated on how the
Refugee Academy offers an infrastructure in which existing academic, professional and practical
knowledge is brought together. The Refugee Academy aims to create a space where these
stakeholders collaboratively co-create knowledge in such a way that all types of knowledge are valued
equally.

2. 2
Presentations
Nikki Scholten, junior researcher at the VU and co-coordinator of the Refugee Academy and the VICI-
project on engaged scholarship, launched the Steppingstones4Refugees platform. This is a hub that
aims to inform and connect refugees, employers, supporting organizations as well as professional
institutions by collecting, presenting and linking to existing information on supporting organizations.
The website is currently accessible in three languages: Dutch, English and Arabic. The platform
encompasses a mapping (of organizations that aim to contribute to the societal inclusion of refugees)
active in six domains, two of which Nikki briefly touched upon. The first, the mapping of civil society
initiatives, is related to the Learning Crossroads research project and aims to map the efforts and
resilience of civil society initiatives that have emerged in the last four years in the Netherlands. The
second, entrepreneurship, is specifically focused on informing refugees, NGOs and businesses about
the possibilities for refugees and entrepreneurship in the Netherlands. This step-by-step program gives
refugees confidence in the regulatory environment by clarifying what support is available and
providing certainty about rights and regulations. The website, which is still a work in progress, can be
seen as an example of an initiative which has the objective to contribute to a more sustainable
integration of refugees.
“There are so many initiatives concerning refugees. Thank you for putting them all together in one
platform”. I am inspired to create employment opportunities for refugees “through a refugee to work
with refugees” approach (reflection by attendee).
Elena Ponzoni then introduced the Learning Crossroads Project, which is a new engaged scholarship
project of the Refugee Academy that zooms in on the narrative trajectories of some civil society
initiatives that have emerged in the last four years in the Netherlands. The idea of engaged research is
that it creates a circle between knowledge and society that asks: is the knowledge produced
meaningful in local contexts, and are the experiences and perspectives of the lifeworld influencing that
knowledge production? She first outlined the context of the increased influx of refugees during 2015
and 2016. Afterwards, she explained that these initiatives have the potential to not only re-
conceptualize places and neighbourhoods as welcoming cities, but also bring opportunities for
changing the dominant image of refugees from receivers only to actual contributors as the initiatives
encourage participation.
“Has the recent wave of solidarity merely been a wave, forcefully hitting the beach before vanishing back
into the sea, or has it actually changed the structure of the shoreline?” (Vandevoordt & Verschraegen,
2019).
Finally, Elena elaborated on the three phases of the project: 1) mapping, 2) deepening and 3) learning.
The first phase is centred around the mapping of trajectories and networks of social initiatives in both
space and time. The second phase is designed for identifying important themes and connecting existing
knowledge. This phase is strongly connected to the final phase, learning, which is focused on learning
together and thinking about how that knowledge can enable action. Elena emphasized that deepening
and learning are two sides of the same coin as these phases will regularly (and ideally) be conjoined
and thus take place simultaneously during the research process.
In order to illustrate what the Learning Crossroads Project looks like in practice, two of its other
researchers, Timo Korstenbroek and Younes Younes, presented the start of documenting the
narrative trajectories of some civil society initiatives that have emerged in the last four years in
Amsterdam. So far, their research has been focused on the trajectory of the Gastvrij Oost (Hospitable
East) network: a community-based network that was initiated in 2015 in East Amsterdam that focused

3. 3
on the reception and inclusion of refugees. In drawing out the trajectories of these networks, three
temporally and conceptually different phases were distinguished that were then discussed separately.
The first phase (quick response) illustrates how the initial activities of the Gastvrij Oost network were
defined by a sense of immediacy as it was set up in 2015 by civil society actors and neighbourhood
residents who recognized the urgency of the increased influx of refugees. The network’s first project,
Hoost Mauritskade, provided housing for 30 refugees with the idea to connect refugees to the
neighbourhood and give them the opportunity to live in close proximity to other Amsterdam citizens
hereby accelerating their integration trajectory. During the second phase (of experimentation and
positioning), the different initiatives that together formed the Gastvrij Oost network, started to
develop their own ideals and approaches in their search for their own position in the field. The initial
energy hence diverted into several directions where new spaces were created for ‘experimental’
projects like Boost, In My Backyard (IMBY), Casa Minahassa, and the Newest Art Organization, thus
leading to new challenges and opportunities. According to the participants, the initiatives currently
find themselves in a third phase (of consolidating and connecting) as there is a need for new forms of
collaborations. The challenges are becoming too pressing, making it harder for the initiatives to stay
sustainable and alive. Therefore, it has become necessary for the experimental initiatives to reconnect
and find common bases, or crossroads, in order to learn from each other’s experiences, and discover
how to maximize the benefits of collaborations.
Today I learned about “the compassion for refugees and initiatives that develop from this compassion.
It is important to feed the energy in these initiatives, to facilitate them more” (reflection by attendee).
“Use human capital, help refugees redefine the meaning of their lives and build a support system around
it” (reflection by attendee).
Interactive panel discussions
Panel discussion with initiators
In the interactive panel discussion that followed, Firoez (Meervaart), Lian (IMBY), Pieter (Boost) and
Geke (Newest Art Organization) – who are all involved in societal initiatives – shared their perspectives
on the preliminary research findings presented earlier by Timo and Younes Younes. The reasons for
the four initiators for becoming involved, was a shared sense of responsibility and, for some, curiosity,
when in 2015 large amounts of refugees entered the Netherlands and were housed in tent camps in
the woods. According to Pieter, newcomers cannot integrate when they are situated so far away from
the rest of society. Adding to this, Lian explained that she could understand that people would be

4. 4
afraid if there were 500 refugees living in their street. Therefore, she argued that more small scale
projects were needed so that refugees would be seen as people again instead of a threat. For Firoez,
it was more than logical to become active, given his own background as a refugee. Moreover, he knew
the ways and complexities of Dutch local government systems. Geke had noticed that people in the
camps produced beautiful art works, however, were not in the position to share it. Important factors
that enabled the emergence of the initiatives of the four initiators were, for example, good
connections with housing companies. Thereafter, the initiatives focused on building social connections
between the refugees and the neighbourhoods in which they were situated. Firoez emphasized that
the power of the initiatives lies in the fact that they are run by neighbourhood communities, without
too much financial support from outside. He also stressed the importance of collaborating with people
with a refugee background as they have faced similar obstacles and therefore better understand the
situations many refugees find themselves in.
The conversation between the panel members inspired a number of questions from the
audience. Someone critically noted the ease with which ‘inclusion’ is used in many initiatives: “My
sense is that there is not a real sense of sensitivity for inclusion, but more a sense of helping the other
(…), which is not empowering”. Besides, a woman shared a reflection that “many migrants find it much
easier to say I am an Amsterdammer than I am Dutch”. Halleh concluded this interactive panel
discussion by a quick reflection: even when intentions are good, for instance in helping the other, there
still remains a hierarchical relation. In the final phase of learning, reflection on a mind-set as such is
therefore very important as it allows to deconstruct hierarchical relations.
“Great to hear about initiatives and experiences both organizational and personal, as well as from the
perspective of originally Dutch and newcomers” (reflection by attendee).
“Bringing communities together discussing a pivotal issue. Meeting practitioners with academics and
theorists. Practitioners tackle the issue from various fields of stories and interests. The role of artists in
this is a caring point” (reflection by attendee).
Panel discussion with participants within initiatives and members of the municipal
council
In the second interactive panel discussion, three people active themselves in civil society initiatives
(Mouhamad, Naseer, and Meron), and two members of the municipal council (Sabine and Elisabeth),
engaged in a conversation on the role of the government and municipality in refugees’ integration,
and the importance of having refugees around the table when coming to solutions. Regarding the
latter, Elisabeth told about her diverse team of 70 case managers, all with different backgrounds.
Sabine explained how she set up an advisory board with ten integration experts with a refugee
background in order to bridge the gap between what is happening in cities and what happens in
Brussels. These people, according to Sabine, have changed the ways that the council looks at refugees
and have made them realize the added value of involving newcomers in the process of decision making.
Regarding the former, Meron explained that when he first came to the Netherlands, he used to hate
the “gemeente” (municipality): After one month in Amsterdam, his contact person stressed that he
had to work, but Meron wondered how, given the fact that he did not speak Dutch yet? More so, often
refugees are encouraged to do voluntary work. However, as Meron explained, many refugees do not
see this as beneficial because “you have to realize we had a life: we had houses, degrees, businesses”.
The discussion flowed into the question on how to define success. For the Dutch government, this
might be speaking Dutch and doing voluntary work. Newcomers, however, would rather achieve
economic independence as it enables them to regain their power and be fully recognized as part of

5. 5
society. The following question was raised: what would be best for newcomers – to be coached by
someone with a refugee background, or by a Dutch native who understands the Dutch context? People
held different opinions on that matter. Next, Pim Scholte (a psychiatrist) introduced the following point
of discussion: that refugees’ traumas often are ignored in the contemporary Dutch discourse in which
fast integration is the ideal norm. Elisabeth wondered whether even psychiatrists are ready to
understand the mental problems that can develop in people who have been exposed to situations of
severe (military) conflict and the atrocities of war.
“Attention should be paid to the emotional aspect! Refugees have to redefine themselves as a
refugee/person in a new country” (reflection by attendee).
Interactive discussion
Halleh opened up the discussion by formulating three important points to be discussed further. First
of all, she discussed some problems with the notion of voluntary work in the Dutch context, by showing
how it generally is imposed and is considered ‘the best way of integration’ while in practice, it often
turns out it is not. Research has shown that many refugees who do voluntary work do not get a paid
job when there are positions available in the same organizations. So the promise of voluntary work as
a path towards integration does not seem to work in practice. Second, in response to the comment
made earlier on whether Dutch natives or people with a refugee background would be best suited for
guiding newcomers, Halleh explained that this is a question of who is best capable of listening to
newcomers and their needs. Firoez replied immediately to Halleh’s second point and emphasized that
making a distinction between Dutch or non-Dutch is undesirable, and in fact useless. He argued that it
is not about being Dutch or not, but about human capital, which, according to Firoez, is not utilized
and supported enough by the Dutch government. Meron shared how he realized through his work as
a translator that many people have gone through traumatic events which often remain undealt with:
“you have to give us some time to heal, to find out”. Moreover, he is struggling to integrate into a
society where racist traditions like Zwarte Piet are considered normal.
Third, Halleh refers to the earlier mentioned point on the absence of race/racism in the present
discussions on refugees and integration. She explains that speaking of racism in Dutch society is taboo,
most likely because of the dominant image of the Dutch to be tolerant, open-minded and willing to
help or take care of others. However, in ‘taking care of the other’, again a hierarchy is created, where
people are so busy helping the other that they do not reflect how this contributes to the notion of
refugees as people in need. Halleh therefore suggested to create sources of uneasiness by opening the
discussion about things people prefer not to talk about, this can encourage people to step outside their
comfort zone in order to create moments and spaces for reflection and learning.
One attendee wondered how people who are not interested in, for instance, doing voluntary work,
still can be encouraged to engage without forcing them. Another attendee noted that integration and
inclusion should not be used interchangeably. Halleh replied and explains that integration has a rather
one-sided character while inclusion has a more mutual perspective in it: you learn from each other
instead of “I teach you”. Yet another attendee wondered how to achieve change in a system which is
mostly run by people who are not present today in this meeting. He argued it is important to also
include those who think differently about inclusion by bringing them on board in an alternative way.
As a response, an audience member urged that instead of trying to change the minds of those holding
polar opposite views, it would be better to focus on the people who are rather ambivalent.
“There is uneasiness about racism and hierarchy coming from good intentions of the welfare state. That
is really important; we need to include more of that uneasiness in the discussion” (reflection by attendee).

6. 6
“I learned about different needs and perspectives of refugees who have been in the Netherlands in
different time frames” (reflection by attendee).
Final reflections
Towards the end of the symposium, several people were invited to share their reflections on the
meeting. Tirza de Fockert, member of the Amsterdam city council on behalf of the Green party
(GroenLinks), started off by saying that one of the biggest problems of exclusion and racism when it
comes to the integration of newcomers, is that within the Dutch system, the ‘own’ (Dutch) educational
qualifications and work experiences are considered superior to those of newcomers. Second, she had
realized that the government should shift from caring to facilitating. Finally, she noted the need to “de-
refugeeize” people; we must come to realize that being a refugee is an experience, and that people
are not refugees for their entire lives and thus should not be treated as such.
“The government should move from caring to facilitating” (reflection by attendee).
After Tirza, three of the partners of the VICI research project on engaged scholarship, who were
present as they wanted to see how the Refugee Academy works, also shared their thoughts on the
symposium. Salim Vally, partner of South Africa, started off by saying that he had experienced the
meeting as refreshing. He referred to the South-African concept of Ubuntu: you are human through
interaction with other humans, and the notion of solidarity of cooperation is universal. Still, there are
some, like populist groups, who are fighting against this. Though there is no manual, given that we are
all from different contexts, the mixture of issues both practical and philosophical is vital. The initiatives
as discussed today are all about recognizing and making visible the richness of people. They understand
that people should not be seen as deficit, but as a way of making society richer. He continued to say
that the question of building a community or nation is not about borders or legal documents, nor is it
about language, instead it is about how people relate to each other; it is about issues of power,
discrimination and humanity. Today has shown that building community can only be done through
learning, which does not only entail structured learning, but also learning about the process, about
how people experience. He concluded by saying that even though throughout the world we learn that
there are no alternatives, this meeting has proven that there are alternatives, and that is very
encouraging.
Yến Lê Espiritu, partner in San Diego and founder of the Critical Refugee Studies Collective, elaborated
that to her being a refugee herself, the phrase “you have to give us some time” has stuck out most.
She identified and stressed the importance for refugees to have some space to deal with the many
things they have gone through. She continued to say that the only approach to refugee resettlement
is by starting from the refugees themselves by listening; what do they need and what do they want?
There is no need to think for them, they have gotten themselves here.
Finally, Abel Valenzuela, partner in Los Angeles, who has been working with VU students through the
exchange program in UCLA, shared his thoughts on the meeting. Even though he very much values the
local, he challenged the other attendees by encouraging them to start thinking beyond the local, for
instance, by critically evaluating the role of the university, its positionality, and its impact. Universities,
according to Abel, should look for more connections, for ways of using more creatively the capacities
and ambitions of students and people from civil society, and providing them a stage where they can
teach us.
Halleh concluded the meeting by stressing that with the Learning Crossroads Project, the Refugee
Academy aims to go beyond the local and to also connect internationally, with the aim of making the
initiatives more visible.

7. 7
We would like to thank all (international) partners of the Learning Crossroads projects, participants in
the panels, keynote speakers, presenters and attendees for their contributions to this inspiring
meeting. More than 80 people were present from all over the world (the USA, South Africa, the
Netherlands and more), working in various fields:
- civil society initiatives (i.a. Boost, Edu4u, Forward Incubator, Newbees, Newest Art Organization, de
Meevaart, Open Embassy, Refugee Company, Refugee Talent Hub, SNTR; Stichting Nieuw Thuis
Rotterdam, Social Centre of the Syrian Community, Startblok)
- municipalities (i.a. Amsterdam)
- educational institutions (i.a. Nelson Mandela University, University of Johannesburg, UCLA, UCSD
Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Tilburg University, UU, UvA, HvA, TU, VUmc and VU)
- research institutes (i.a. Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, SCP, NIDI; national demographic institute
of the Netherlands)
- corporate organizations (i.a. White Horse Investment, Capgemini)
- NGO’s (i.a. Cordaid, Vluchtelingenwerk, WE organization, NIDOS)
Sources:
Vandevoordt, R., & Verschraegen, G. (2019). The European Refugee Controversy: Civil Solidarity,
Cultural Imaginaries and Political Change. Social Inclusion, 7(2), 48-52.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/si.v7i2.2260