NEWS
Drawing on her fieldwork in Switzerland, Dr Kathrin Ottovay (Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Zürich) points to an emergent imaginary that envisions ‘sharing beyond borders’.
Who is in the position to give, maybe even morally obliged to do so? Who deserves to receive? What is the state expected to provide – for its citizens, but also for newcomers who have left home seeking safe refuge or a better life? What is the bottom line of welfare – not going hungry and having a roof over one’s head, or the ability to participate in socio-cultural life? If human rights are enshrined in the constitution – as they are in Switzerland – who ensures that every human being can count on them?
These are not rhetorical nor scholastic questions; rather, they are negotiated on an everyday basis within civil society initiatives dedicated to supporting those who find themselves outside or at the margins of the welfare system.
Autumn is the time of year when these questions are answered in a specific way in Switzerland. Autumn is for running. More specifically, it is time for running ‘in solidarity’, ‘against borders’, or ‘against racism’. These are some names of annual charity runs held in five Swiss cities, organized by volunteers. They are playful events featuring bands, food stalls, and children’s programs – although many of the runners undoubtedly pursue serious athletic goals. In 2024, around 1,000 people took part in the five runs. Together, they raised approximately CHF 400,000, with each runner asking sponsors for donations per lap completed.
To manage the entire redistributive process – from online registration of runners and sponsors to receiving money flows (facilitated by QR codes provided by a FinTech-for-good supplier that dominates the Swiss digital donation market) – the local organizing committees use a customized application developed by a tech-savvy fellow activist.
Our fieldwork with fundraisers in Switzerland’s refugee support landscape not only gave us insight into the challenges faced by the volunteers and (under)paid staff who uphold these structures. Notably, we learned that these solidarity events represent an important channel for acquiring individual donations: the funds raised are crucial for offering legal counselling and assistance with medical emergencies or social hardships. They supplement resources obtained through donation mailings, crowdfunding, collections, legacy fundraising, as well as funding from philanthropic foundations, sometimes local government departments, and often church bodies.
Against the backdrop of deterrence-oriented migration policy and a deteriorating world, the financial basis of this human-rights-framed work must be understood as a complex, volatile, and highly fragile patchwork. A fundraiser at a drop-in centre for undocumented migrants warns that without support from the churches, ‘we would have to close down’, while holding on to the notion of ‘human dignity’ that is endangered when funding dries up: ‘Our mission is simply to improve the health, legal and social situation of undocumented migrants. We do this within the limits of what is feasible, because our hands are tied by this article, which states that we must not encourage illegal residence. That is why we simply uphold fundamental rights … that are enshrined in the constitution.’
Another interlocutor confronts a situation in which a concept of solidarity has come to substitute social rights: ‘Otherwise, solidarity would not be necessary. In absence of state structures that should or could actually be there, that are missing – then you say, now only solidarity can help. Legally you have no chance, politically you don’t […], so at least we are still showing solidarity. But perhaps then it seems enough to show solidarity instead of questioning why there is a situation in which solidarity is needed in the first place. That’s why I sometimes have a bit of trouble with this term.’
In this quote, ‘being in solidarity’ as a pro-social act becomes the last resort when fair distribution – of resources or opportunities – seems hopeless to achieve through legal proceedings or electoral processes. However, for this interview participant, the notion of solidarity ‘also conveys that people should be aware of how structural injustices are at play in our world. And how privileges are distributed in a grossly unfair manner.’ They conclude: ‘In this sense, I am a huge fan of the term.’
This reflection points toward an emergent redistributive imaginary we have called welfare transnationalism. However marginal, its idea of ‘sharing beyond borders’ recurs in many accounts of redistributive practices in the civil society initiatives we explored in our research.