Navigating Social Protection: EU Migrants’ Strategies to Accessing and Using Benefits

Alexandra Voivozeanu’s work in the MiTSoPro project examines: a) how EU migrants overcome barriers to accessing social protection, particularly with the assistance of welfare brokers, and b) how EU migrants strategically use social benefits to secure better opportunities in their host countries.

Her first case study, focusing on Romanians working in Germany, sheds light on how European Union citizens, who exercise their right to the freedom of movement to work in another Member State, navigate numerous challenges in accessing social protection. The article presenting the study’s findings, Welfare Brokers and EU Migrants’ Access to Social Protection— shows that in order to access social benefits, migrants rely on welfare brokers. It discusses their role in mediating and facilitating access to social benefits in detail and demonstrates that welfare brokers also play a critical role in reshaping the norms, bureaucratic practices and representations that condition access to these entitlements. 

In more detail, drawing on ethnographic data collected with both migrants and welfare brokers, the paper applies the concept of brokerage following the crossing of border and initial settlement in the host country. It introduces a typology of welfare brokers, classifying them into transnational companies, civil society organizations, and ethnic intermediaries.

At the same time, it highlights the inequalities that arise between different profiles of EU migrants based on their ability to navigate cross-border social protection systems. On one hand, high-skilled workers with higher income levels often feel confident in their ability to access benefits autonomously. On the other hand, more precarious migrants often face the dilemma of either using brokerage services or foregoing benefits altogether. For these individuals, autonomy can only be achieved through repeated interactions with brokers who are willing to invest the time and resources needed to impart essential skills and knowledge. However, the articles shows that some actors conducting brokerages activities may have an interest in maintaining their clients in a situation of dependence of their services because of the economic or symbolic capital they gain from representing them.

Looking at the broader context, the key strength of the article is that it highlights that existing barriers to social protection and the importance of the brokerage industry in cross-border welfare raise important questions about the ability of EU citizens to fully exercise their right to freedom of movement.

Alexandra Voivozeanu’s second study in the MiTSoPro project, which draws on the experiences of Romanians in Denmark, examines their strategies for accessing unemployment benefits in the host country. The case of Denmark, where unemployment insurance is optional, provides a clear example of how EU migrants make strategic decisions about engaging with social protection systems. One of the findings of the study is that, when deciding whether to join an unemployment fund, migrants consider various factors, including their intended duration of stay in the host country and their plans to apply for citizenship. Additionally, the study shows that migrants use their time on benefits to improve their position in the labor market and enhance their overall prospects in Denmark.