Researchers, policymakers and practitioners met in Geneva on 8–9 October 2026 to reflect on evidence from three and a half years of FAiR research.
The final conference of the EU-funded Finding Agreement in Return (FAiR) project took place at the Geneva Graduate Institute in Switzerland. Under the theme “Return Policy at a Crossroads – Perspectives from the FAiR Research Project,” the two-day event reflected on three and a half years of FAiR research and its implications.
Three overarching messages emerged from the discussions. First, respect for human dignity must remain an objective in its own right, particularly in the European context. Second, effective return governance also requires legitimacy in the eyes of migrants and countries of origin and transit, whose perspectives and interests need to be taken seriously. Third, governments must also be realistic about the limits of return policies and adopt a broader understanding of effectiveness, which includes addressing persistent non-return and preventing prolonged situations of legal uncertainty.
Against the backdrop of the implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum and the adoption of the new EU Return Regulation, the conference brought together representatives of governments, European institutions and agencies, international organisations, civil society and academia. Presentations and moderated panels covered five interconnected areas: intergovernmental return frameworks, everyday return dynamics, fundamental rights monitoring and accountability, alternatives to return, and the future of European return policy.
Discussions on return diplomacy highlighted the need to balance competing priorities between governments and within their institutions. FAiR research indicated that a whole-of-government approach can support more successful cooperation by enabling countries to respond flexibly to their partners’ priorities, provided that the authorities involved coordinate closely. Speakers stressed the value of trust, continued dialogue and a shared understanding of priorities, rather than a disproportionate focus on negotiating return and readmission agreements. As one panellist emphasised, “effective return diplomacy requires trust and shared understanding of priorities and can only be achieved through dialogue.” Participants also underlined that humane and dignified returns and adequate reintegration support are essential for sustainable outcomes.
The experiences of returnees and practitioners were central to the second panel. Discussions highlighted the gap between expectations before return and the realities people may face afterwards. Participants called for returnees and partner countries to be more closely involved in designing return and reintegration programmes. They also emphasised that assistance should respond to individual circumstances rather than rely on predefined packages. Reliable information and counselling, genuinely voluntary decisions free from coercion, attention to the needs of children and families, and links between pre-departure counselling and referrals after return were identified as important to safeguarding dignity.
Reflecting on the first day, FAiR coordinator Arjen Leerkes from the Erasmus University Rotterdam reiterated the importance of perceived legitimacy and realistic expectations. He warned that promising levels of control over return that governments cannot deliver may fuel demands for increasingly far-reaching measures and lead to proposals that are difficult to reconcile with European legal frameworks.
On the second day, participants considered how fundamental rights monitoring could be strengthened across the return continuum. Monitoring is in place for Frontex-supported forced return operations, but national operations and pre-return phases, including detention, are covered less consistently. Post-return monitoring also remains a widespread gap. Thanks to the independent observation of individual operations, monitoring serves a preventive function, supporting accountability mechanisms, access to complaints and remedies, and systemic improvements, thereby strengthening the legitimacy of return systems.
The conference also examined responses for people who cannot be returned and the need to avoid prolonged legal uncertainty. A panel on alternatives to return focused particularly on regularisation. FAiR survey research showed that public support for forced return, detention and regularisation varies considerably, and that the design of regularisation programmes shapes public opinion. Panellists stressed the need to adapt policies to national and local circumstances and to cooperate with civil society, including trade unions.
The concluding panel considered the new Return Regulation and whether a growing emphasis on enforcement reflects the practical realities of return and readmission cooperation. Participants discussed its potential effects on cooperation with partner countries and on migrants’ willingness to engage in return procedures. Contributions from countries of origin illustrated the challenges of receiving returnees and the long-term nature of reintegration. Participants encouraged genuine partnerships with countries of origin, sustainable reintegration support, comprehensive fundamental rights monitoring and acknowledgement of non-return as priorities, while raising questions about the gap between political expectations and what return policies can realistically deliver.
As FAiR concludes, attention is turning to how its findings can inform future policy and practice. The project’s forthcoming policy handbook, Return Policy at a Crossroads: Evidence from the FAiR Research Project, will synthesise key results and recommendations for policymakers and practitioners to inform decision-making and practice. The consortium is also preparing a special issue of the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies to publish FAiR’s scientific findings.
