Navigating Informal Arrangements in Migration Governance in Urban Areas

By Joshua Soriano Fernández, Master’s Student in Democracies, Nationalism, Federalism, and Multiculturalism, Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain

Introduction
Migration governance in cities presents a significant challenge. National policies often fail to address the
specific needs of urban migrant populations, forcing local governments to navigate the complexities of
migration without formal mechanisms in place. In response, many cities rely on informal governance
strategies—temporary agreements with NGOs, ad hoc collaborations, or flexible legal adjustments. While
these informal arrangements offer immediate solutions, they are fragile and often lack long-term stability.
Their effectiveness is contingent upon political conditions, the cooperation of key actors, and the broader
governance landscape, all of which can shift unexpectedly.

The complexity of managing migration in urban environments is intensified by the increasing diversity of
migrant populations. In cities like Istanbul, where refugees from Syria have sought asylum in large
numbers, local authorities are under pressure to manage a range of integration challenges—housing,
education, healthcare, and employment. The lack of robust national policies forces cities to rely on
informal governance arrangements, which, while necessary, present their own set of challenges. These
informal strategies can quickly become inadequate when the scale of migration outpaces their capacity or
when political priorities shift.

This post explores the fragility of informal governance in urban migration systems, how these strategies
can evolve into formal policies, and what makes these arrangements sustainable over time. By examining
how these practices can be formalized, this post also highlights how cities can learn from these
experiences to create more adaptive, resilient systems capable of managing migration flows effectively.

The Fragility of Informal Arrangements
When formal migration policies are absent or insufficient, local governments often turn to informal
governance strategies to bridge the gap. These strategies may include temporary partnerships with NGOs, legal exemptions, or case-by-case accommodations for migrants. While these approaches are vital for addressing urgent migration needs, their fragility lies in their dependence on specific political conditions and the engagement of key actors, which can change without warning. As Natter (2021) observes, states often employ ad-hocratic strategies, using intentional ambiguity to manage migration without committing to formal policy changes. Informal arrangements thrive on this flexibility, allowing local authorities to take quick action without the constraints of formal procedures. However, these arrangements depend on cooperation between a range of actors—government officials, local authorities, civil society organizations, and international partners. When these relationships are disrupted by shifts in government priorities, changes in the political landscape, or shifts in the international resources available, informal strategies are at risk of being undermined.

The fragility of these strategies becomes especially apparent in cities facing rapid and unpredictable
migration patterns. For example, in response to the Syrian refugee crisis, Turkish cities like Istanbul had to
adapt quickly to the arrival of hundreds of thousands of refugees. Local authorities relied heavily on
informal arrangements with NGOs and other civil society organizations to provide immediate assistance.
However, these informal strategies were always vulnerable to changes in local politics, national policies,
or fluctuations in the availability of international aid. Moreover, the lack of legal backing meant that these
informal arrangements were not guaranteed to last in the long term. European agreements with third
countries often rely on informal understandings that are not legally binding, making them highly
susceptible to policy shifts at the national or international level.

The lack of legal backing makes informal strategies even more fragile. For instance, European agreements
with third countries, although seemingly formal, are often viewed as “formally informal” because they lack
the legal structures needed for long-term sustainability. These agreements are based on tacit
understandings, which can be easily altered or abandoned when political climates change.

Institutionalizing Informal Strategies
Despite the challenges posed by their fragility, informal strategies can evolve into more formalized
governance structures over time. This process occurs when successful informal practices, such as
temporary agreements with civil society organizations, prove effective and become recognized as essential to local governance.

The concept of society as a human product, introduced by Peter Ludwig Berger, is particularly relevant
here. According to Berger, institutions are continuously constructed through repeated actions and shared
understandings. Informal governance practices become institutionalized when they are consistently used
and integrated into the routines of local governance. Once these practices are recognized as essential for
managing migration, they no longer appear as temporary fixes but as integral components of formal policy.

For example, in Istanbul, local authorities and NGOs developed informal strategies to manage housing,
healthcare, and education for refugees in the early years of the Syrian refugee crisis. These strategies
included ad-hoc housing arrangements in existing neighborhoods, temporary healthcare solutions, and
makeshift educational programs that allowed refugees to access essential services. National systems were
either not yet equipped or unwilling to fully intervene. What began as emergency, one-off measures,
however, became more structured as they were repeatedly implemented.

Local NGOs provided health services where official programs were lacking. Meanwhile, the Turkish
government slowly expanded its refugee policy, and municipal authorities in Istanbul partnered with NGOs to set up local health centers and educational programs. Over time, these informal arrangements became formalized. Local authorities and international NGOs established coordinated refugee support systems, which included formal protocols for providing education and healthcare. These arrangements eventually moved beyond the emergency phase, establishing long-term plans for refugee integration. What once seemed temporary evolved into a structural element of the city’s migration governance.
As a result, these practices became integrated into municipal policies, helping to shape more consistent
approaches to managing migration. The coordination between local authorities and NGOs became
increasingly institutionalized, with formalized roles and responsibilities accepted as part of the city’s
governance system. Istanbul now provides a strong example of how informal strategies, even in the face
of a crisis, can gradually shift into more permanent solutions, becoming an integral part of the city’s urban management structures.

However, institutionalizing informal strategies requires political will and navigating complex power
dynamics. In Istanbul, for example, local authorities had to align their refugee policies with broader, often
more restrictive national policies. Tensions between local autonomy and national policy created challenges in formalizing these strategies. Yet, Istanbul’s experience shows that, over time, repeated, pragmatic solutions to refugee challenges can shift from ad-hoc emergency responses to routine elements of governance. As Berger argues, institutions emerge from repeated social practices. These informal governance strategies became institutionalized because they were tested and validated over time. They were no longer viewed as temporary fixes but as integral to Istanbul’s migration governance framework. In the face of changing political climates, these institutionalized strategies allowed local authorities to continue managing migration effectively, even as national policies evolved.

Crystallizing Informal Practices into Formal Policy
The transition from informal strategies to formal policy is critical for ensuring long-term sustainability in
migration governance. While informal practices often provide immediate solutions, their long-term
effectiveness depends on their integration into the formal policy framework. Crystallization occurs when informal arrangements gain recognition and become formalized within official policy. Sahin-Mencutek et al. (2022) observe that crises, such as the 2015 refugee crisis, expose the weaknesses of existing formal policies and create opportunities for more flexible, informal solutions. These informal practices, once proven effective, can be incorporated into formal law and policy, ensuring they remain functional over the long term. However, the transition is not always smooth. In Turkey, informal practices must first prove their effectiveness before they can be formalized. During migration crises, such as the Syrian refugee surge, political crises and migration pressures forced the Turkish government to adopt more flexible governance solutions. These solutions, initially informal, were tested on the ground and, over time, were formalized into long-term policies. The flexibility of informal governance solutions, especially in terms of responding quickly to migration surges, becomes clear when formal systems struggle to adapt fast enough. In Turkey, the rapid arrival of refugees necessitated the implementation of temporary, ad-hoc solutions, including partnerships between local governments and NGOs and temporary legal exemptions. Once these informal solutions demonstrated their value, they were formalized into long-term policies. Once these strategies proved effective, the next step was integrating them into the formal policy framework, providing legal backing and stability to ensure these strategies continue to function in the long term. The role of informal arrangements in migration governance emphasizes the need for adaptive
governance systems that can respond to urgent needs while evolving to meet future challenges.

Specific Policy Recommendations
To ensure a smooth transition from informal to formal migration governance, cities should prioritize the
development of monitoring and evaluation systems. Establishing comprehensive frameworks to assess the effectiveness of informal strategies is essential. By collecting detailed data on refugee outcomes—such as access to housing, education, healthcare, and employment—local governments can assess the
effectiveness of informal practices and identify gaps in services. In Istanbul, data collection systems could
help track refugee progress and evaluate the impact of partnerships between local authorities and NGOs.
In addition, fostering policy dialogue and knowledge sharing among diverse stakeholders is essential. Local governments, NGOs, international organizations, and refugees themselves should be brought together to share insights and develop innovative solutions. Istanbul could host regular stakeholder roundtables, drawing on the experiences of local NGOs and international partners to refine best practices in refugee integration and migration governance. By promoting these exchanges of knowledge, cities can refine their strategies and ensure that the policies they implement are responsive to the real needs of refugees. This collaborative approach strengthens the viability of informal practices as they evolve into formal policies and enhances the adaptability of migration governance systems.

Conclusion
Informal governance provides an essential, albeit fragile, response to migration challenges in cities. While
these strategies offer flexibility and immediate solutions, their sustainability depends on political
conditions and key relationships. The real opportunity lies in transforming these informal practices into
formal policies that can offer long-term stability and resilience.

Cities like Istanbul demonstrate that, under the right conditions, informal arrangements can evolve into
essential components of urban governance. To ensure the sustainability of these transitions, cities must
prioritize the development of robust monitoring systems and foster policy dialogues that engage relevant
stakeholders. By doing so, they can create governance systems that are not only more efficient but also
more inclusive, adaptive, and responsive to the evolving needs of both migrants and host communities