Underorganized Interorganizational Domains: The Case of Refugee Systems

This article uses the example of refugee systems-the government, nongovernment, and refugee organizations that are involved in the reception of asylum seekers; the determination of refugee status; and the settlement of refugees-to further our understanding of under organized interorganizational domains. The comparison of Canada, the United Kingdom, and Denmark demonstrates that there are different forms of under organization. Domains may be underdeveloped due to a lack of convergence around key values, the exclusion of relevant stakeholders, or both. The nature of under organization has implications for the political processes that occur in them. Accordingly, the example of refugee systems alerts us to a potential irony: Domains that seem to be relatively organized and that display a higher degree of collaboration may have excluded key stakeholders who threaten existing domain definitions; whereas domains that display high levels of conflict and disorganization may do so precisely because all the relevant stakeholders have secured equal access to the domain and are able to influence its definition. These findings have been drawn from a comparative study of refugee systems in the three countries. This study used in-depth interviews and archival data to compare the structure, values, and relations of stakeholder groups in Canada, the United Kingdom, and Denmark. Interviews were carried out with 81 civil servants, politicians, nongovernmental organization (NGO) officials, and refugees. Documentary and archival evidence was drawn from a wide variety of sources.