Nonprofit Organizations and Public Policy in Refugee and Other Migrant Crises: Concepts and Frameworks

1 Introduction

Many parts of the world are experiencing crises of migration. Nonprofits, NGOs, and other civil society actors-referred to as third sector organizations in this paper-play active roles in these situations, both participating in and being affected by migration crises in a variety of ways. These groups often interact with the state and other policy participants as they navigate the migration scene in myriad ways that are yet under-identified (Garkisch, Heidingsfelder, and Beckmann 2017). Nonprofits may advocate for and against public policy related to migration at national, international, and local levels. NGOs may participate in collaborative policymaking and cooperative service provision for migrants, or they may provide services for migrants without the support of, or even against the wishes of, the state. We often observe the third sector working in solidarity with migrant communities, but we must be mindful of civil society actors that do not support migration and may actively work to prevent migration, even taking on state-like tasks to do so (see for example Angulo-Pasel’s 2023 examination of border vigilante and militia groups). This special issue of Nonprofit Policy Forum explores the relationship between nonprofit organizations (conceptualized broadly to include NGOs, civil society actors, and other third sector actors), public policy actors, and migration crises.

Our introductory article has three overarching goals. One goal is to analyze the migration crisis through the lens of the third sector, better illuminating how the nonprofit sector intervenes in and interacts with migration crises. We consider this at the individual/family, community, and regional/national levels, and also attempt to distinguish between real (empirical) crises and manufactured or constructed migration “crises”; for example, those exaggerated for political gains. Our second goal is to present a framework categorizing third sector-state relationships in contexts of migration, with an eye toward broadening the field’s focus beyond interactions we commonly observe in the global North. We achieve this by classifying types of government-nonprofit relationships based on their position along two intersecting continua of state capacity and relationship quality. Finally, we present a framework of ideal types of state-third sector interactions during migration crises, offering a case-based application for each category. We hope that scholars may adopt this framework for assessing state capacity and third-sector relationships in migration crises.

This paper is divided into three parts, each corresponding to our overarching goals. The first section explores migration crises and the third sector, examining its role and involvement at various levels while distinguishing between genuine and constructed crises. The second section introduces a framework for categorizing third sector-state relationships in migration contexts, expanding the field’s focus beyond the global North by assessing these relationships along two key dimensions: state capacity and relationship quality. Finally, the third section presents a typology of state-third sector interactions during migration crises, applying this framework through case-based examples. We illustrate our concepts and framework with examples from the articles in this special issue of Nonprofit Policy Forum, as well as other extant research and practical examples. With each goal, we aim to tie our concepts and frameworks to real-world scenarios, and ultimately hope to move toward practical applications that are of use to future researchers, practitioners, and culminate in benefiting the lives of migrants themselves.

2 Nonprofits and Migration Crises

In many locales, the term “migration crisis” has become overwrought, and this concept is academically underexplored in relation to the nonprofit sector. Individuals and families making choices about migrating often do so due to crises of climate and environment (Ghosh and Orchiston 2022), government stability and quality, poverty, war, or other violence (Aslany et al. 2021). Migrant sending communities can experience crises as they navigate loss of population and migrant return, and migrant hosting communities can face crises during efforts with reception and integration. When thousands or even millions of migrants enter a country with little migrant-hosting infrastructure, as we saw in the countries of East Africa with the Sudanese civil war in 2023 (UNHCR 2025), in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe with the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 (UNHCR 2024a), and the countries of the Middle East at the onset of the Syrian civil war in 2011 (UNHCR 2024b), true national-level crises are possible. Yet, we are acutely aware that in many countries around the world migration has become a controversial political issue, and hyperbole around “migration crises” is a rallying point for anti-immigrant political movements. For our purposes, we use the term to capture situations of migration whereby migrants, which may include refugees, internally displaced persons, and other individuals, are migrating at risk and in vulnerable circumstances.^[1]

3 Nonprofits and States in Migration Crises

Garkisch, Heidingsfelder, and Beckmann (2017) well-cited systematic literature review provides a conceptual model that describes migrant-oriented third sector organizations as “embedded in a dynamic environment of third actors (such as governmental bodies…”(p.1862). They then continue to specifically mention a surprising lack of research on relationships between migrant-oriented third sector organizations and other sectors such as government. Our goal is to begin to address this gap by presenting a framework explicitly analyzing third sector – state relationships in the context of migration, with an eye toward broadening our conceptualizations beyond relationships most often observed in the global North. We do this by developing a framework that plots types of state-nonprofit interactions along two continua: state capacity and the quality of the relationship between the state and the third sector. We then give examples of these interactions from empirical studies and practical cases (see Figure 1).

Figure 1:

Categories of nonprofit-state interactions in migration contexts.

4 Practical Applications of Concepts and Frameworks

A goal of policy-related research is to make concepts and frameworks applicable to real-world situations. In addition to illustrating the concepts we discuss with empirical examples from the special issue and other extant research, we attempt to make our framework presented in Figure 1 operational by introducing measurable indicators for each axis and proposing ideal type scenarios and real-world examples for each quadrant in Figure 2.

Figure 2:

Ideal type framework of state-third sector interactions in migration crises.

Though well researched by others (see for example Peeters and Campos 2023, Vaccaro 2023), some base-level measurable indicators of state capacity regarding migration include financial resources allocated to migration responses, institutional strength and capacity (e.g., migration agencies, refugee management), migration policy frameworks and implementation capacity, and historical success in managing crises. Relationship quality can also be measured through indicators of trust in government and levels of trust between state and third-sector actors, degree of cooperation (e.g., joint programs, funding partnerships), conflict indicators (e.g., policy disputes, exclusion of nonprofits), and outcomes such as improved refugee conditions and efficient crisis response. We expect a wide array of interactions between states and third sector organizations, as illustrated in Figure 1. However, one might expect certain ideal type relationships to emerge from each quadrant as we observe particular patterns of interactions between actors. These are illustrated in Figure 2, with practical examples offered.

As a first example, in the upper left quadrant, we highlight an ideal type where low state capacity but collaborative relationships predominate. States have low capacity and rely on third sector actors to compensate for those capacity gaps. While the strengths of these scenarios are an espoused collaborative spirit, drawbacks include heavy reliance on NGOs that may exceed their capacity, an overall environment of resource scarcity, and challenges in bringing solutions to scale in the case of larger scale crises like sudden influxes of migrants. A practical example of such a case is the Lebanese state’s cooperation with NGOs in responding to the Syrian refugee crisis (Haddad 2017, Saade 2020). In such cases the state may not be getting in the way of NGO activity, per se, but humanitarian needs may exceed the capacity of the third sector and the state is not in much position to provide active support.

Directly across in the upper right-hand quadrant of Figure 2, we have the ideal type of high state capacity and collaborative interactions among state and third sector actors. In such situations, states benefit from strong capacity and can provide effective policy frameworks for migrants, designing sustainable solutions. The state is able to partner with NGOs effectively based on the third sector’s strengths and relative contributions to the service environment. A practical example of a situation that begins to approach this ideal type, which is not to suggest it was without any challenges, is the German response to the 2015 migrant crisis (Funk 2016). In such a situation, both sectors bring their strengths to the table and complement one another.

In the lower right quadrant of Figure 2 we highlight the ideal type relationship of high capacity states with conflictual relationships with migrant service providers. In these situations, states have high capacity, but relationships with migrant service providers can be negative, perhaps due to the heightened political rhetoric around migration or due to politically manufactured aspects of migration crises. In these situations, political polarization may result in the exclusion of or mistrust of NGOs from partnership arrangements. Migrants may underutilize state and/or NGO resources, and states may take little advantage of the possible benefits of partnership with NGOs, resulting in an overemphasis on state-centric solutions. Due to the potentially manufactured aspects of the crisis, the empirical impacts can be variable. If there is indeed a massive influx of migrants, NGOs may be overburdened. If the number of migrants has been exaggerated, NGOs may not be overburdened by needs, but fear among the migrant community will be heightened. A practical example of this situation is the migration response on the United States’ southern border. Here, a wealthy state has high capacity, while the threat posed by migrants has been a subject of extraordinary hyperbole (Romero and Hill 2025). The result is that many immigrants have gone into hiding and avoided seeking services due to fear of President Trump’s early 2025 threats of mass deportation (Garsd 2025).

Finally, in the lower left quadrant of Figure 2, we have the ideal type of low-capacity states and conflictual relationships. These scenarios represent perhaps the most challenging and intractable situations for migrants and other communities in crisis situations. In these locales, residents and migrants alike cope with institutional weaknesses and state failures. Support for the work of NGOs is weak due to mutual mistrust between NGOs and the state, and crises are exacerbated by a lack of state capacity and political inaction. A practical example of such a situation would be the ongoing migration crisis in Sudan (UNHCR 2023), exacerbated by the war in neighboring Sudan (UNHCR 2025). In such cases, much available aid may come in from outside organizations without direction from local actors, and those external aid providers may often have difficulty accessing the most vulnerable in local communities.

Our hope is that by identifying ideal types and engaging in case-based applications within these categories, scholars can move toward a robust analytical framework for assessing state capacity and third-sector relationships in migration crises by identifying challenges and solutions for improving governance and partnerships. Through the use of empirical indicators, quadrant analysis, and case-based applications, the framework can become a tool for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners to craft targeted, evidence-based solutions to migration crises.

5 Conclusions

Research on the role of nonprofit organizations in the migration milieu is growing, but still importantly under under-researched. In their seminal systematic literature review focused on Europe, Garkisch, Heidingsfelder, and Beckmann (2017) note a lack of research on interactions beyond those directly between migrants and third sector organizations, including a distinct need for more research on the role of government in these relationships. We hope this special issue makes an important contribution by bringing scholars together to think about third sector organizations, migration, and public policy. We encourage further research at the intersection of nonprofit organizations, migration, public policy and governance, especially outside the most studied contexts of the global North. While we are excited to see articles in this special issue examining contexts in the Caribbean, Central and Eastern Europe, and South America in addition to North America and Western Europe, our field is in deep need of more research on nonprofit organizations, migration, public policy and governance from Africa, Asia, Oceania, and additional work from Central and South America.

In conclusion, this paper examines the role of the third sector in migration crises, providing a nuanced understanding of its involvement across different levels and distinguishing between authentic and constructed crises. By introducing a framework for categorizing third sector-state relationships and presenting a typology of their interactions during migration crises, we aim to broaden the field’s perspective beyond conventional global North contexts. While our discussion of concepts and frameworks around crises and nonprofit-government relationships focus on migration for purposes of this special issue, inherent within is flexibility for broader applications. Many of these ideas can be adapted to analyze other forms of crises, such as humanitarian emergencies (e.g., natural disasters), global health crises (e.g., pandemics), or economic crises (e.g., unemployment, food insecurity). We would argue that many crises share much in common, particularly human vulnerability, and we welcome future work that tests the applicability of these concepts and relationships to a variety of concepts.