Responding to migrants with precarious residence status in Vienna: Frameworks, strategies and innovative practices

This report describes and analyses local support services for migrants in precarious residency situations in the city of Vienna. 

The case study of Vienna was conducted as part of an 18-month comparative research project, Local Responses to Precarious Migrants: Frames, Strategies and Evolving Practices in Europe (LoReMi), which examined Vienna, Frankfurt am Main and Cardiff. The aim of the project was to investigate how local authorities produce access to and exclusion of migrants with precarious status in municipal services, as well as how cooperation between municipal and civil society organisations works in relation to service provision. Special focus was placed on the situation of women. 

The study undertaken for this report aimed to show how local authorities understand and formulate their approaches in the context of the city's general mission. It also aimed to identify the actual practices that enable the inclusion of precarious migrants in key services such as healthcare, education and accommodation. In addition, the legal, political and practical challenges that exist for providing services to this precarious part of the urban population were highlighted, and the forms of communication, cooperation and responsibility sharing between local authorities and civil society actors and NGOs were examined.

In summary, the report states that the City of Vienna offers a wide range of support services, some of which are transparent and accessible to people with precarious residency requirements. In addition to some progressive administrative practices, this is thanks in particular to a committed and innovative civil society and NGOs. The relationship between the city authorities and civil society is based on mutual appreciation and recognition. 

Dependency on the city as a funding provider was also addressed, and it is noted in the report that this dependency can make it difficult to voice relevant criticism. In addition, gaps in services and grievances are highlighted by the report, particularly for those groups that are classified as vulnerable and require access to support services.