Building Reciprocity: How Community Sponsorship Shapes Social Integration in the UK

Written by Eunice Chan

When I first joined the Edinburgh Refugee Sponsorship Circle (ERSC) as part of my Master’s placement-based dissertation research, I thought I would be looking mainly at how volunteers support newly arrived refugee families with practical needs for integration, such as finding a GP, navigating the job training, or learning the local transportation system. These things are vital, but what I soon realised through research is that integration is about much more than checklists and paperwork. 

My dissertation focused on the UK’s Community Sponsorship Scheme (CSS), a government-designed programme that allows local community groups to directly support refugee families. Since its launch in 2016, CSS has offered an alternative other than purely state-led resettlement. Everyone in civil society, whether you are neighbours, teachers, students, or retirees, is welcome to take an active role in refugee integration.

Over eight weeks of placement with ERSC, I conducted interviews with both CSS volunteers and refugee families, and I also took part in ERSC’s activities as a participant observer. What emerged was a story not just of “helping hands”, but of genuine human connection that constitutes reciprocity that, in turn, drives two-way integration between the local and newcomers.  

From obligation to community bonds

At the beginning, relationships between volunteers and refugees tend to be formal, bound by the volunteering obligation within the CSS design. Volunteers often describe themselves as supporters, mentors, or simply “the ones who know how things work.” Refugees, meanwhile, sometimes assume volunteers are staff assigned to help them. Most early interactions centre on the necessity of meeting immediate resettlement and integration needs, including the intensive demands of official documents and public service access.

But as one refugee told me,

“When the volunteers come, we do everything. We are like friends.” 

The shift in the volunteer-refugee relationship matters. The structured, one-year volunteering period of CSS ensures there is time and space for trust and intimacy to grow. Small acts of reciprocity, like a refugee family cooking a meal for volunteers, or joining a fundraising activity, signal the start of a deeper bond. What begins as an obligation evolves into reciprocal relationships. 

Emotional connections and belonging

If obligation is the starting point, emotions are the glue that holds integration together. Refugees often arrive carrying loss and uncertainty. Volunteers become not only supporters, but companions. One refugee described how reassuring he/she felt simply to have someone say, “Don’t worry, it’s all going to be sorted, we’re gonna take care of it.”

Over time, some of these emotional supports develop into friendship or even feel like family. Refugees and volunteers talked about being able to share their worries openly with each other. They also admitted that they did draw strength and joy from these relationships and daily interactions. One volunteer said, 

“I am very surprised at myself that I am able to do these things for other people, that I can have an effect on other people’s lives.”

This emotional reciprocity sustains integration. Refugees feel safer and more welcomed; volunteers feel fulfilled and motivated to stay engaged in the CSS community. The sense of belonging works both ways.

Learning from each other 

Integration is also a process of knowledge and cultural exchange. Volunteers introduce refugees to local customs, from reading a UK electricity smart meter to joining a community event. Refugees, in turn, share food, traditions, and perspectives with volunteers. 

Mutual learning fosters two-way accommodation, where both negotiate and adjust their cultural expectations for others. Refugees gain confidence in adapting to life in new communities through learning local know-how and cultures from volunteers. Conversely, volunteers deepen their understanding of refugees’ cultural backgrounds. 

I was impressed by how often volunteers spoke about learning resilience from refugees. Seeing families rebuild their lives inspired volunteers to rethink their own challenges. As one reflected, “To see that someone’s so resilient, it’s like you can only admire that.” Volunteers and refugees transform into a relationship of shared learning by perceiving one another as the person to learn from. 

The ripple effect of reciprocity

What struck me most is that reciprocity in CSS does not stop at the dyadic level between a volunteer and a refugee. 

Shared learning reshapes attitudes. Volunteers told me they became more critical of the UK’s refugee policies after witnessing systemic barriers first-hand. Many also became informal advocates, sharing stories with friends and colleagues to challenge stereotypes towards refugees and migration. This ripple effect extends integration beyond the sponsorship group into wider society.  

As trust deepens, some refugees begin to support new arrivals, acting as translators, mentors, or companions, to pass on the help they once received from the community. Volunteers, too, often invite their own families and friends to join activities, sharing positive volunteering experiences and gradually expanding the circle of integration. In this way, reciprocal acts ripple outward: they sustain the volunteer-refugee relationships, but also extend CSS into wider networks of neighbours and societies. 

Integration becomes a collective effort, reinforced not only by the direct participants of the CSS but also by the broader community around it. 

Power and protection

Of course, no relationship is free from power tension, including the CSS volunteer-refugee relationships. Volunteers usually hold advantages in language and familiarity with local systems, which can create dependency. Some volunteers spoke openly about moments when they felt they had to take the lead in the decision-making process in some difficult situations. While often well-intentioned, this can slip into inadvertent paternalism if it develops into a long-term practice, which may undermine refugee autonomy to navigate future integration challenges independently. 

However, I also saw conscious efforts to counterbalance this. Volunteers encouraged refugees to make their own choices, even when communication was difficult. For instance, they clearly set boundaries with refugees, stepping back from most decision-making and supporting them to make informed choices by providing sufficient information and suggestions. One volunteer said, 

“Being flexible, I think, is the key to having a proper, balanced relationship where no one is above the other, it’s equal. The idea is to make sure that they (refugees) understand that at any point, they can express their feelings.”

Mutual respect is not always easy, but it’s essential for building confidence and independence. Conscious boundary-setting empowers refugees to exercise autonomy and foster the development of independence over the integration journey. 

Challenges that remain

CSS is not a perfect resettlement and integration programme. Language barriers often make communication slow and frustrating, limiting both practical support and deeper emotional exchange. Volunteers sometimes struggle with the emotional labour of always putting on a supportive face, risking burnout. And despite best intentions, potential dependence and power imbalance are hard to fully erase. 

These challenges do not mean CSS is failing. Rather, they demonstrate the need for ongoing support and expansion of the programme. Integration is not achieved overnight. It requires resources, learning, and improvements. 

Everyday acts of integration

Social integration is often discussed in abstract terms, such as numbers, policies, and costs. What I saw in CSS is that integration is embedded in everyday interactions: a volunteer sitting beside a refugee at a GP appointment; a refugee translating for a newly arrived family; joy and laughter shared over a barbecue gathering. 

These small acts add up, turning separate persons into a community. They transform strangers into neighbours, and neighbours into friends. CSS supports refugees not only in being resettled but also in belonging. And it reminds volunteers, and people in society more broadly, that integration is not just charity, but truly human bonding: love and solidarity.

Final thoughts

Integration cannot be imposed merely from the top down. It is built from the ground up, through reciprocity, trust, and mutual care. The CSS, though still small in scale, shows how grassroots action can create ripple effects that extend far beyond one family or one group.

As global displacement continues to rise and hostility towards migration remains strong, models like CSS are more important than ever. They demonstrate that integration is not a one-way process of refugees adapting, but a two-way process of communities opening their arms.

This placement research and dissertation writing were not just an academic exercise. It was a lesson in the power of small acts of community endeavour, and a reminder that belonging is something we create together.