From “Beneficiaries” to “Members”: How Solidarity Models Are Redefining, Challenging and Deconstructing “Refugee Labelling” in the Field.

This paper considers the way in which the term “beneficiary” is employed by state and non-state field actors, at two key reception sites on the European border. Firstly, the use of “refugee labelling” and categorisation is defined, with a specific focus on the term beneficiary, as an exercise with symbolic charge, that can both dehumanise (Sajjad, T., 2018. p. 42) and have tangible impacts on individuals' rights and access to vital services, for example healthcare (Brettell, C. B., 2023. p. 198). The paper uses qualitative methodology, drawing on 18 interviews with employees and volunteers of self-described humanitarian and solidarity organisations working on the ground in Nicosia, Cyprus and Lesvos, Greece, as well as displaced people who access or use the services and activities offered. The results describe the term beneficiary and its utilisation as well as the perceptions and impact of this label and type of categorisation. Whilst often favoured as a neutral term by Intergovernmental Organisations (IGOs) and International NGOs (INGOs) – in contrast to politically and legally charged terms such as refugee or asylum seeker – this paper contends that it in fact has a two-fold illusory, and even paradoxical effect. The term “beneficiary” implies an inherent “benefit” or gain on the part of the person accessing or receiving the service whilst simultaneously supposing that workers and volunteers perform selfless acts, without benefit. However, this paper argues that the use of the term beneficiary in fact recreates the power dynamics in the humanitarian space of reception facilities, whilst hiding the real “beneficiaries” who are set to gain either financially, through employment or socially, through perceived altruism. By reflecting on how so-called solidarity actors deconstruct these labels and employ less othering terms, like “residents”, “students” and “members” this paper makes tangible recommendations for an alternative, (re)humanising response to displacement.