Multilevel governance in trouble: the implementation of asylum seekers’ reception in Italy as a battleground

• Published in: Comparative migration studies Vol. 8; no. 1; pp. 1 - 19
• Main Authors: Campomori, Francesca, Ambrosini, Maurizio
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 26.06.2020; Springer Nature B.V; SpringerOpen
• Subjects: Activism; Asylum seekers and refugees; Battleground; Civil society; Cooperation; Governance; Immigrants; Immigration; Implementation; Imposition; Migration; Multilevel-governance; Original Article; Political asylum; Population Economics; Refugees; Social Sciences; Sociology; Tolerance; Italy; Multilevel-governance; Asylum seekers and refugees; Battleground
• ISSN: 2214-594X; 2214-594X
• DOI: 10.1186/s40878-020-00178-1

The reception of asylum seekers in Italy has become an increasingly contentious issue: many actors, public and private, are involved at various levels of government, and cooperative behaviour cannot be taken for granted. The multi-level governance approach sheds light on the possible patterns in vertical relations, while it does not effectively explore the horizontal relations, which are however crucial, especially at the local level. Moreover, we argue that the definition of multilevel governance as negotiated order among public and non-public actors is too rigid and normative. Local policies of reception are instead a playing field where different actors come together with different interests, values and frames. This paper discusses the implementation of asylum seekers’ reception in Italy, looking at both the multilevel and the horizontal dynamics, and it uses the concept of ‘battleground’ in order better to grasp the complexities of the interaction between actors. The article discloses conflicting and competing frames between different tiers of governance, since municipalities try to resist government imposition related to asylum seekers’ reception in their areas. As for the horizontal dynamics, this paper argues that four possible patterns emerge in the relation between state and state actors: a) closure vs. civil society activism; b) tolerance; c) institutional activism vs. anti-immigrant mobilizations; d) cooperation. Overall, the paper aims at addressing the limits of the MLG approach by means of a conceptual tool (the “battleground”) which yields a more vivid understanding of implementation dynamics.