UNDERSTANDING THE PRACTICALITIES
Outsourcing Refugee Assistance on the Rise!
- Atilla Tiriyaki
- Average Reading Time: 15 minutes
- Community, Refugees
- articles, atillat
Outsourcing has been going on in the business world since the 1950s. The concept and benefit involve engaging with a third party, someone not directly associated or linked with your business, that performs services or tasks on behalf of a company in return for an agreed payment. Often seen as a cost-cutting exercise, it is more about accountability and usually offers tax benefits due to the change in accounting practices. Though still popular in many business sectors, it is becoming a viable option for many countries looking to handle the processing of refugee applications and their ongoing obligations concerning those granted asylum. So, in 2025, what would outsourcing mean to immigration, and how realistic are the perceived benefits?
DISCLAIMER
All published articles are intended for an audience aged 18 years and over and have been written by members of the general public. Many will likely not be journalists nor be affiliated with any professional bodies associated with members of the media. The articles will likely be based on the authors' own opinions, views, and experiences...more
Throughout my 30-plus years in Financial Services, I have, on numerous occasions, directly managed outsourced suppliers, overseen the transfer of services to outsourced arrangements and worked on drafting contracts and service-level agreements. Many of the outsourced suppliers I have dealt with have been professional, delivered on what was documented and agreed and been very commercially focused. When you take the time to scope out and run through various possible scenarios and how they might be handled, you can often help mitigate problems down the road. Nothing is worse in managing outsourcing supply chains when the expectations, contracts and interpretations are not aligned. Not only will you not get what you were expecting, but it will likely cost you more as it will be seen as a change to the scope of work.
I outline and highlight these factors because outsourcing is primarily suitable for businesses holding a third party accountable for a service or task, a contract that can be enforced, and penalties for any failure in the delivery. Outsourcing arrangements are often costly, but within the business, the cost can provide tax advantages and reduce long-term liabilities, all offset against the increased costs. It is a process that has been tried and tested within the business sector; however, will it work with refugees?
I outline and highlight these factors because outsourcing is primarily suitable for businesses holding a third party accountable for a service or task, a contract that can be enforced, and penalties for any failure in the delivery. Outsourcing arrangements are often costly, but within the business, the cost can provide tax advantages and reduce long-term liabilities, all offset against the increased costs. It is a process that has been tried and tested within the business sector; however, will it work with refugees?
In 2024, according to the UN Refugee Agency, it is estimated that there are over 43 million people classified as global refugees, with 31.6 million in refugee-like situations, 5.8 million in need of international protection and 6 million Palestinian refugees. Based on the 2023 figures, Asia hosted the most significant number of refugees at around 13.2 million (or 34%), followed by Europe, which hosted 10.8 million refugees (or 28%). To provide context and for comparison, in 2024, it is estimated that Canada will have a population of 39.1 million, similar to the current total number of refugees worldwide. In terms of the countries host to the most significant number of refugees, they are Iran, Turkey, and the United States of America; each is home to over 3 million refugees, with Germany and Pakistan home to around 2 million people.
Before we explore the outsourcing arrangements and those countries that have implemented, attempted to implement, or publicised their desire for outsourced arrangements, let us look at the size and scale of the impact of outsourcing on refugees. For those countries that have indicated an interest or involvement in outsourcing, the levels they saw in 2023 were:
The number of refugees in scope for the outsourced services would represent a quarter of the world’s refugees. When you average the number of refugees for those countries compared to their total population, it represents 0.7%, effectively less than 1% of the total population. When you compare all 27 member countries, Germany has the most significant number of refugees in the EU at 3 million or 7.7%, the total number of refugees against the total number of EU citizens, equates to 1.8%. Finally, it is important to note that the worldwide population rises each year on average by 1.1% (or 88 million people) and reviewing the rate of growth, the number of refugees over six years has seen an average increase of around 3% year on year; however, it jumped by 34.4% in 2022 due to the Russian-Ukraine conflict and 10.4% in 2023 with the Israel-Hamas conflict.
In reality, often, the number of refugees is combined with the more significant number of economic migrants, which is presented as a more substantial issue and is frequently used as a political tool designed to polarise. Though increased, the current numbers or levels of refugees still only represent a small proportion of the population for those countries in question; however, with the growing number of conflicts, economic uncertainty and extreme weather conditions, the likelihood of larger refugee numbers is unfortunately likely so, though there is a real issue, not fake news but the numbers are often exaggerated to grab headlines and fuel political narratives.
Before we explore the outsourcing arrangements and those countries that have implemented, attempted to implement, or publicised their desire for outsourced arrangements, let us look at the size and scale of the impact of outsourcing on refugees. For those countries that have indicated an interest or involvement in outsourcing, the levels they saw in 2023 were:
- The United Kingdom (586.8 thousand or 1.5%)
- Italy (445.2 thousand or 1.2%)
- Australia (117 thousand or 0.3%)
- Denmark (71.3 thousand or 0.2%)
- Israel (26.7 thousand or 0.1%)
- European Union (8.4 million or 22%)
- Those countries total 9.2 million (or 24%) of all refugees worldwide or 1.25 million or 3.2%, excluding the European Union.
The number of refugees in scope for the outsourced services would represent a quarter of the world’s refugees. When you average the number of refugees for those countries compared to their total population, it represents 0.7%, effectively less than 1% of the total population. When you compare all 27 member countries, Germany has the most significant number of refugees in the EU at 3 million or 7.7%, the total number of refugees against the total number of EU citizens, equates to 1.8%. Finally, it is important to note that the worldwide population rises each year on average by 1.1% (or 88 million people) and reviewing the rate of growth, the number of refugees over six years has seen an average increase of around 3% year on year; however, it jumped by 34.4% in 2022 due to the Russian-Ukraine conflict and 10.4% in 2023 with the Israel-Hamas conflict.
In reality, often, the number of refugees is combined with the more significant number of economic migrants, which is presented as a more substantial issue and is frequently used as a political tool designed to polarise. Though increased, the current numbers or levels of refugees still only represent a small proportion of the population for those countries in question; however, with the growing number of conflicts, economic uncertainty and extreme weather conditions, the likelihood of larger refugee numbers is unfortunately likely so, though there is a real issue, not fake news but the numbers are often exaggerated to grab headlines and fuel political narratives.
Though the volumes regarding refugees are often inflated or combined with economic migrants, it still does not change the fact that the numbers are growing and is a cost to a country and its citizens. The reality is that when it comes to refugees, regardless of our thoughts and feelings, there is an unwritten and moral obligation to help those in need when the worst happens. Not those seeking a new life or opportunities, but those in situations for no fault of their own, that remaining in their country would mean persecution, loss of freedom or death. An obligation on safer countries that should the worse happen, they too might be offered the opportunity of freedom and a safer existence.
When it comes to border control, refugees and immigration, reading through articles and posts, it is clear that the large numbers often overwhelm resources, resulting in people falling through the cracks. Immigrants who move countries for work opportunities will typically follow processes that start in their own country and, once their application is successful, will move to their chosen destination. For economic migrants and refugees, the process is not as organised. However, a few people fortunate enough to travel at the right time might be able to obtain a visa to travel and, once in a safer country, apply for asylum. Most visas that allow them to leave the country are not available. The only way most can see any chance or hope is to travel long distances, employing human traffickers to help them get to their chosen destination. Upon arrival, regardless of where they are from or eligibility, many will claim asylum in the hope that it will be granted, even if they do not qualify.
Receiving countries are required to assess thousands of cases each year to ensure that asylum is only granted to those eligible; however, it often strains the resources within those countries, which is why many are looking to outsourced arrangements. The concept is that the receiving country arranges transport of inbound migrants and refugees to a different country that will handle the assessment of asylum claims. Some successful applicants might be able to return to the receiving country or remain in the processing country with financial support and aid from the receiving country. The benefit to the processing country is that they will receive regular revenue for processing, housing, and the general well-being of qualifying applicants.
Australia was one of the first adopters of an outsourcing arrangement when they saw large numbers of economic migrants and refugees travelling in small boats to the country. In 2001, Australia brokered a deal with Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and the South Pacific Island nation of Nauru to process asylum claims. Courts in Papua New Guinea eventually ruled that the Manus Island centres were unconstitutional and were subsequently closed, making Nauru the only country with processing centres for Australia. Australia continues its offshoring policy as it believes that doing so will prevent deaths at sea, and the government estimates it will spend A$260 million ($173 million US dollars) on offshore processing. In March 2024, a three-year deal was announced for 450 refugees to be sent from Australia to resettlement centres in New Zealand.
Israel adopted a different approach when it comes to claims processing. From as early as 2014, the country started offering migrants a choice: return home or accept 3,500 US dollars to leave the country, with a flight arranged to an East African nation, Rwanda or Uganda and a payment of 5,000 US dollars to those countries for each migrant or refugee received. During 2013 and 2019, it is believed that around 4,000 refugees and immigrants took part in the scheme. When the news broke about the deal in 2017, the full details and arrangement became known to the general public. It is believed that those who accepted the offer likely left Rwanda or Uganda to make their way to Europe in the hope of claiming asylum.
In June 2021, Denmark passed a bill allowing the sending of asylum seekers to Rwanda. The deal focussed on processing 1,000 asylum seekers each year. Rwanda was set to receive about €120 million ($135 million US dollars) annually for this deal. Before going live, the arrangement was taken to court, and it is currently on hold. The Conservative Party in the United Kingdom sought a similar deal with Rwanda in response to rising media coverage of illegal migrant crossings and increasing frustration within the population concerning the migrant situation, as well as in a bid to honour its campaign promise during the 2019 election. The plan was to transport specific categories of applicants to Rwanda to process and, if granted asylum status, handle their long-term needs funded by the UK. The scheme was estimated to pay up-front fixed costs of £370 million ($468 million US dollars), followed by a further £120 million ($152 million US dollars) once 300 people are relocated to Rwanda, as well as additional costs per person of around £180 thousand ($228 thousand US dollars) to cover processing, integration and healthcare. Though approved by parliament and the UK government, transfers were put on hold until after the General Election on July 4, 2024. With the Conservative Party losing the majority, the newly elected Labour Party immediately announced that the Rwanda scheme was to be scrapped.
Italy completed a deal with Albania in November 2023 to handle up to 36,000 migrants annually. Migrants will arrive at the port of Shëngjin, and their cases will be processed at a centre in Gjadër, which can hold up to 3,000 people. The scheme will cost Italy at least 670 million euros ($720 million) for the initial five-year period.
Based on a deal brokered between Italy and Albania, the European Union has publicised its intention to look into outsourcing arrangements at the request of many member states. The European Union has an ongoing arrangement with Tunisia to help reduce illegal immigration from Africa to Europe; the European Commission signed an agreement with Tunisia worth EUR 150 million. The objective is to stop migrants, especially those coming from Libya, from travelling from Tunisia to Europe. The deal is comprised of two parts: one part to help Tunisia build capacity within the country to tackle human trafficking and tighten border controls, and the other part to act as a budget for costs and expenses. The EU had a similar arrangement with Niger; however, it came to an end following the military junta takeover of the country.
The refugee outsourcing propositions offer two distinct opportunities: the first is that the receiving country continues to meet its responsibilities and obligations regarding asylum applications, and the second is that the processing country can create a revenue stream from more affluent countries and boost its economy. The main pitfalls or downsides of the proposition relate more to the selection of the processing centre. All are typically independent UN states with leadership, governments, and political agendas and independently devise their plans for the future.
A country with a pro-immigrant policy today might see a change of government, a shift in political spectrums and bring about an anti-immigration stance and policies. A recent example is that of Niger. The European Union worked with Niger to help process applications from those refugees travelling from Libya. A coup in July 2023 saw a military takeover and the end of the arrangement.
Another consideration is how a processing country treats its own citizens, including their rights, freedoms, and equality. Of the five countries that are currently processing applications or in the process of offering refugee outsourcing services:
When it comes to border control, refugees and immigration, reading through articles and posts, it is clear that the large numbers often overwhelm resources, resulting in people falling through the cracks. Immigrants who move countries for work opportunities will typically follow processes that start in their own country and, once their application is successful, will move to their chosen destination. For economic migrants and refugees, the process is not as organised. However, a few people fortunate enough to travel at the right time might be able to obtain a visa to travel and, once in a safer country, apply for asylum. Most visas that allow them to leave the country are not available. The only way most can see any chance or hope is to travel long distances, employing human traffickers to help them get to their chosen destination. Upon arrival, regardless of where they are from or eligibility, many will claim asylum in the hope that it will be granted, even if they do not qualify.
Receiving countries are required to assess thousands of cases each year to ensure that asylum is only granted to those eligible; however, it often strains the resources within those countries, which is why many are looking to outsourced arrangements. The concept is that the receiving country arranges transport of inbound migrants and refugees to a different country that will handle the assessment of asylum claims. Some successful applicants might be able to return to the receiving country or remain in the processing country with financial support and aid from the receiving country. The benefit to the processing country is that they will receive regular revenue for processing, housing, and the general well-being of qualifying applicants.
Australia was one of the first adopters of an outsourcing arrangement when they saw large numbers of economic migrants and refugees travelling in small boats to the country. In 2001, Australia brokered a deal with Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island and the South Pacific Island nation of Nauru to process asylum claims. Courts in Papua New Guinea eventually ruled that the Manus Island centres were unconstitutional and were subsequently closed, making Nauru the only country with processing centres for Australia. Australia continues its offshoring policy as it believes that doing so will prevent deaths at sea, and the government estimates it will spend A$260 million ($173 million US dollars) on offshore processing. In March 2024, a three-year deal was announced for 450 refugees to be sent from Australia to resettlement centres in New Zealand.
Israel adopted a different approach when it comes to claims processing. From as early as 2014, the country started offering migrants a choice: return home or accept 3,500 US dollars to leave the country, with a flight arranged to an East African nation, Rwanda or Uganda and a payment of 5,000 US dollars to those countries for each migrant or refugee received. During 2013 and 2019, it is believed that around 4,000 refugees and immigrants took part in the scheme. When the news broke about the deal in 2017, the full details and arrangement became known to the general public. It is believed that those who accepted the offer likely left Rwanda or Uganda to make their way to Europe in the hope of claiming asylum.
In June 2021, Denmark passed a bill allowing the sending of asylum seekers to Rwanda. The deal focussed on processing 1,000 asylum seekers each year. Rwanda was set to receive about €120 million ($135 million US dollars) annually for this deal. Before going live, the arrangement was taken to court, and it is currently on hold. The Conservative Party in the United Kingdom sought a similar deal with Rwanda in response to rising media coverage of illegal migrant crossings and increasing frustration within the population concerning the migrant situation, as well as in a bid to honour its campaign promise during the 2019 election. The plan was to transport specific categories of applicants to Rwanda to process and, if granted asylum status, handle their long-term needs funded by the UK. The scheme was estimated to pay up-front fixed costs of £370 million ($468 million US dollars), followed by a further £120 million ($152 million US dollars) once 300 people are relocated to Rwanda, as well as additional costs per person of around £180 thousand ($228 thousand US dollars) to cover processing, integration and healthcare. Though approved by parliament and the UK government, transfers were put on hold until after the General Election on July 4, 2024. With the Conservative Party losing the majority, the newly elected Labour Party immediately announced that the Rwanda scheme was to be scrapped.
Italy completed a deal with Albania in November 2023 to handle up to 36,000 migrants annually. Migrants will arrive at the port of Shëngjin, and their cases will be processed at a centre in Gjadër, which can hold up to 3,000 people. The scheme will cost Italy at least 670 million euros ($720 million) for the initial five-year period.
Based on a deal brokered between Italy and Albania, the European Union has publicised its intention to look into outsourcing arrangements at the request of many member states. The European Union has an ongoing arrangement with Tunisia to help reduce illegal immigration from Africa to Europe; the European Commission signed an agreement with Tunisia worth EUR 150 million. The objective is to stop migrants, especially those coming from Libya, from travelling from Tunisia to Europe. The deal is comprised of two parts: one part to help Tunisia build capacity within the country to tackle human trafficking and tighten border controls, and the other part to act as a budget for costs and expenses. The EU had a similar arrangement with Niger; however, it came to an end following the military junta takeover of the country.
The refugee outsourcing propositions offer two distinct opportunities: the first is that the receiving country continues to meet its responsibilities and obligations regarding asylum applications, and the second is that the processing country can create a revenue stream from more affluent countries and boost its economy. The main pitfalls or downsides of the proposition relate more to the selection of the processing centre. All are typically independent UN states with leadership, governments, and political agendas and independently devise their plans for the future.
A country with a pro-immigrant policy today might see a change of government, a shift in political spectrums and bring about an anti-immigration stance and policies. A recent example is that of Niger. The European Union worked with Niger to help process applications from those refugees travelling from Libya. A coup in July 2023 saw a military takeover and the end of the arrangement.
Another consideration is how a processing country treats its own citizens, including their rights, freedoms, and equality. Of the five countries that are currently processing applications or in the process of offering refugee outsourcing services:
- Two (Tunisia and Uganda) have laws criminalising same-sex relationships
- Two (Albania and Nauru) are considered Green in terms of safe countries
- Three (Tunisia, Uganda and Rwanda) are considered Amber in terms of safe countries
- Two (Tunisia and Uganda) are subject to active terrorist attacks in parts of the country
- All five countries have signed both the UN Refugee Convention and Protocol
- Albania scores Medium-High on the Gayther LGBTQIA+ Equality Index
- Two (Rwanda and Nauru) score Medium-Low on the Gayther LGBTQIA+ Equality Index
- Tunisia scores Low on the Gayther LGBTQIA+ Equality Index
- Uganda scores Very Low on the Gayther LGBTQIA+ Equality Index
Many outsourcing arrangements have faced legal challenges and opposition from countries looking to outsource their refugee and asylum applications. There are still many questions about how the outsourcing arrangements might work in real-time and likely oversight adopted by the receiving country, which is ultimately responsible for the refugees. Is it a case of out of sight, out of mind or more a working solution for a complex and emotive problem?
One significant missed opportunity and frequently overlooked regarding the refugee population is the range of people from different backgrounds and skills, from professionals like doctors and lawyers to highly skilled and experienced labourers and farmers. Refugees are looking for freedom and safety, with the ability to work and contribute back to the countries that allow them to live freely.
Should those countries looking to outsource and develop processing centres in overseas territories they control or have some influence within, somewhere that is sparsely populated and would be classified as a developing economy and finally with a good track record regarding human rights? If they were, they would likely have a greater chance for success in the long term and less pushback and resistance.
An example relates to the Falkland Islands, an overseas territory of the United Kingdom, albeit disputed, located in South America in the Atlantic Ocean. The islands are 12,173 square kilometres (4,700 square miles), have an estimated population of 3,800 in 2024, and a GDP of 133 million US dollars. The islands would need to be onboard and happy to process the applications; however, it could present them with many opportunities. The island would get a larger budget and ongoing financial commitment from the United Kingdom, worth millions each year. The money could improve the country’s infrastructure by building more schools, hospitals, and better transportation links and boosting its population numbers. The new residents would bring a wealth of experience, which could transform the landscape and local economy.
French Guiana could be a good candidate for the European Union. The country is a French overseas territory in South America. It is 83,846 square kilometres (32,373 square miles) in size. It has an estimated population of 319,796 and an estimated GDP of €4.58 billion ($4.9 billion US dollars). Given that the country is part of France, a member of the European Union, there would be greater control and oversight. Other countries that score well in safety and equity and are sparsely populated include Mongolia, Suriname, Kazakhstan, Belize, Paraguay, Botswana and the Pitcairn Islands. These countries could benefit from a new and regular revenue stream and increased population numbers.
The outsourcing arrangements are not the issue; the problem is more about the execution and long-term benefits. A country seen as good today could be a problem in the future, creating a whole new situation and stream of refugees. Any outsourced arrangements that are scoped correctly and contain specific details concerning the processing, handling and treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, as well as proper monitoring and oversight in place, should achieve the aims set out by many countries looking to outsource the processing of refugees.
One significant missed opportunity and frequently overlooked regarding the refugee population is the range of people from different backgrounds and skills, from professionals like doctors and lawyers to highly skilled and experienced labourers and farmers. Refugees are looking for freedom and safety, with the ability to work and contribute back to the countries that allow them to live freely.
Should those countries looking to outsource and develop processing centres in overseas territories they control or have some influence within, somewhere that is sparsely populated and would be classified as a developing economy and finally with a good track record regarding human rights? If they were, they would likely have a greater chance for success in the long term and less pushback and resistance.
An example relates to the Falkland Islands, an overseas territory of the United Kingdom, albeit disputed, located in South America in the Atlantic Ocean. The islands are 12,173 square kilometres (4,700 square miles), have an estimated population of 3,800 in 2024, and a GDP of 133 million US dollars. The islands would need to be onboard and happy to process the applications; however, it could present them with many opportunities. The island would get a larger budget and ongoing financial commitment from the United Kingdom, worth millions each year. The money could improve the country’s infrastructure by building more schools, hospitals, and better transportation links and boosting its population numbers. The new residents would bring a wealth of experience, which could transform the landscape and local economy.
French Guiana could be a good candidate for the European Union. The country is a French overseas territory in South America. It is 83,846 square kilometres (32,373 square miles) in size. It has an estimated population of 319,796 and an estimated GDP of €4.58 billion ($4.9 billion US dollars). Given that the country is part of France, a member of the European Union, there would be greater control and oversight. Other countries that score well in safety and equity and are sparsely populated include Mongolia, Suriname, Kazakhstan, Belize, Paraguay, Botswana and the Pitcairn Islands. These countries could benefit from a new and regular revenue stream and increased population numbers.
The outsourcing arrangements are not the issue; the problem is more about the execution and long-term benefits. A country seen as good today could be a problem in the future, creating a whole new situation and stream of refugees. Any outsourced arrangements that are scoped correctly and contain specific details concerning the processing, handling and treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, as well as proper monitoring and oversight in place, should achieve the aims set out by many countries looking to outsource the processing of refugees.
Outsourcing refugees may offer potential benefits, but countries mustn’t lose sight of the affected people. Individuals that have come from terrifying situations, known death and destruction and are only seeking out protection and safety. Those being processed should be in a safe environment where they are treated with dignity and offered the proper support and assistance. The refugee and asylum application process should be standardised and streamlined, and the value of the refugees should be understood by all those involved.
In contrast, economic migrants, who are often vilified by the media, should not be penalised for doing something that is within our nature. When things are sparse or limited, it is human nature to seek out areas or lands with more opportunities and where life is not so hard, something we all would do in similar situations. Though economic migrants have different motivations than refugees, the handling and possible solutions and approaches are likely very different.
The refugee and asylum processes around the world are not perfect. Still, without them, the world would be much darker and more dangerous.
In contrast, economic migrants, who are often vilified by the media, should not be penalised for doing something that is within our nature. When things are sparse or limited, it is human nature to seek out areas or lands with more opportunities and where life is not so hard, something we all would do in similar situations. Though economic migrants have different motivations than refugees, the handling and possible solutions and approaches are likely very different.
The refugee and asylum processes around the world are not perfect. Still, without them, the world would be much darker and more dangerous.
Discover all available resources on Gayther relating to refugees and migrants. Resources for people forced to leave their homes due to war, violence or persecution.
Discover refugee and migrant-related information for over two hundred thirty countries worldwide. Guides that help people find the support they need during difficult times.
A valuable tool for any refugee or those in a position of authority to assist in communicating with each other. The online tool enables users to select, point and enter the necessary information in their language and English, choosing those literal translations from over 100 languages.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: All published articles have been written by members of the general public. Many will likely not be journalists nor be affiliated with any professional bodies associated with members of the media. The articles will likely be based on the authors’ own opinions, views, and experiences. Gayther does not endorse or accept any responsibility or liability regarding any materials within the news and media pages. This page may contain external links to third party websites; Gayther provides these links for your convenience and does not endorse, warrant or recommend any particular products or services. By clicking on any external links, you will leave Gayther and be taken to the third-party website, which you do so at your own risk and by accessing the site, you will be required to comply with the external third party’s terms and conditions of use and privacy policies
Discover all of the topical articles written by people from across the community and friends, all sharing their stories, opinions and experiences
