Highlights from our September webinar: Moving Back or Moving Forward?
2025 September 12
The latest PREMIUM_EU digital webinar brought together researchers, policymakers, and regional practitioners from across Europe to unpack one of migration policy’s most persistent blind spots: why some people return, and why so many don’t.
We challenged deep-seated assumptions about return migration, highlighting that returnees are not simply people “coming home,” but agents of renewal, bringing skills, networks, and perspectives that can reshape regional futures.
Broadcast live from Nordregio’s studio in Stockholm, the session was moderated by Anne Katrine Ebbesen, featuring insights from our PREMIUM_EU Research Team, Dr. Michal Wanke (Cracow University of Economics), Dr. Hilal Arslan (Hacettepe University), and Dr. Claudius Ströhle (IIASA, Austria).
“Return migration isn’t just about going back. It’s about what people bring back with them,” said moderator Anne Katrine Ebbesen in her opening remarks. “Our goal today is to challenge assumptions and explore what that means for regional policy.”
Migration capital left on the table
The first segment opened in Poland, where Dr. Michal Wanke explored the idea of migration capital: the often invisible skills and experiences that returnees bring home, that local systems frequently fail to recognise.
Drawing on fieldwork from Polish regions with high rates of return migration, Michal illustrated how returning migrants can embody adaptability, linguistic versatility, and cultural awareness, but often find no institutional pathways to use these assets.
Michal called for more agile regional policies capable of matching returnees’ experiences with local labour market needs. He suggested regional intermediaries, such as employment agencies or local development boards, could play a stronger role in translating migration capital into local capacity.
When return isn’t a choice
From Poland, the focus shifted to Turkey, where Dr. Hilal Arslan presented a very different reality: cases in which return is driven by obligation rather than opportunity.
Her ethnographic research showed how gender roles and power imbalances within households can dictate migration decisions particularly in regions where men act as gatekeepers of mobility.
“In many of the families I studied, women weren’t even consulted about whether to migrate or to return,” Hilal said. “Return was a decision made for them, not with them.”
Yet her fieldwork also uncovered stories of resilience. One woman, after being forced to return from Austria, built a small cleaning business that trained and employed other women in her Turkish town. “Her return had economic, social, and symbolic impact,” Hilal noted. “She changed what was possible for others.”
Her conclusion was clear: reintegration policies must address gendered dynamics and household realities if they are to support sustainable returns.
Attraction isn’t retention
In the final presentation, Dr. Claudius Ströhle turned our attention to Austria, where migration policies have focused heavily on attracting international workers but often fail to ensure they stay.
Drawing on case studies of Spanish and Colombian workers in rural Austria, Claudius revealed how well-intentioned recruitment efforts can fall short when social integration lags behind economic incentives.
“Attraction and retention are not the same thing,” he said. “People might come for jobs, but they stay for belonging.”
He highlighted local initiatives that made a difference: language courses, guided nature hikes, and volunteer opportunities, that helped newcomers build local networks. Still, the challenge remains: policies too often measure success by arrivals, not by continuity.
Letting go of old assumptions
After the three case studies, the speakers joined together for a debate, confronting common myths that shape migration policy. Moderated by Ebbesen, the discussion invited the panel and the audience to reflect on what regional policy might need to “let go of.”
Among the provocative statements discussed:
- If migrants don’t stay, maybe they shouldn’t have come.
- We only need to attract talent, not understand them.
- Brain drain is always a loss.
“Ignoring migrants’ lived experience is where policy often fails,” said Hilal. “You can’t design better return strategies without listening to returnees.”. Michal argued that regions should embrace the fluidity of modern mobility rather than viewing it as a failure of retention. “Outmigration doesn’t have to mean loss,” he said. “It can mean connection.”. Claudius added that focusing solely on material conditions overlooks what truly matters. “Housing and jobs are necessary,” he noted, “but without social ties and a sense of belonging, they’re never enough.”
The debate highlighted a recurring message: to make migration work for regional development, policy needs to shift from counting people to understanding people. That means rethinking how success is measured. From retention rates to reintegration outcomes; from demographic numbers to lived experiences. As Anne Katrine summarised in her closing remarks: “Return migration is complex, deeply contextual, and full of untapped potential. Our job now is to turn that insight into tools that help policymakers act.”
PREMIUM_EU’s upcoming Resilient Regions Policy Dashboard will do just that. Offering data-driven, evidence-based insights for designing smarter, locally tailored migration strategies.
Stay connected
The webinar concluded with an invitation to join the Resilient Regions Expert Group, a growing community of policymakers and regional actors co-developing the project’s final outputs.
Missed the session? You can watch the full recording by following the link below:
Subscribe to the PREMIUM_EU newsletter for upcoming event invitations and updates on the Dashboard launch.
