ABSTRACT Assisted Return (AR) programmes have grown in number and size over the past decade and there is an increasing body of evidence on these programmes. However, the existing evidence has not yet been systematically synthesised. Recognising the controversy over the programmes, this article reviews the current evidence regarding the effectiveness and effects of AR programmes that aim to facilitate sustainable reintegration of return migrants. Reviewing 46 sources, the findings highlight the different programme modalities, contextual factors and individual and group factors that influence sustainable reintegration. Overall, the available evidence suggests that despite short‐term relief from AR programmes, there is overall scant and—where it exists—often highly contextual and relatively weak evidence of longer‐term effects on sustainable reintegration. The review is limited by conceptual, methodological and geographic heterogeneity in the available studies. The article concludes by suggesting practical implications and highlighting potential for future research on support for sustainable reintegration.
Kuschminder et al. (Thu,) studied this question.