Digital innovation for resilience : the VolEver model as a catalyst for transforming the integration of Ukrainian refugees in Europe

This article was prepared by Clémence Betton, Intern Advocacy Officer at the Refugee Council of Lithuania (RCL), as part of the "Volunteers Everywhere" (VolEver) project.

I. A historic turning point: Europe grapples with the scale of the Ukrainian exodus

In February 2022, Europe is facing the largest migration crisis of the 21st century. As the war between Ukraine and Russia unfolds, between 5 and 7 million1 Ukrainian nationals are fleeing westward. The scale of displacement is such that it is described as unprecedented on the continent since 1945. More than a year after the conflict began, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) counts 6.4 million displaced persons.

By way of comparison, when the European Union faced the “refugee crisis” of 2015, only 1.5 million people attempted to seek refuge in Europe by arriving in Greece and Italy. Starting in the summer of 2015, the terms “migration crisis” and “migrant crisis” became central to all political and media debates.

At the time, political leaders highlighted the scale of these new arrivals and spoke of the limits of the European Union’s capacity to receive them. The distribution of refugees—most of whom came from Afghanistan, Syria, and Eritrea—sparked intense political tensions among member states. The priority was clear: to put an end, as quickly as possible, to this migratory flow, which was then viewed as an “overwhelming wave.” Europe is barricading itself and erecting barbed-wire fences to stem this phenomenon.

II. From “fortress” to solidarity: a paradigm shift

Seven years on, the story is very different. In the space of just two months, Europe has demonstrated an exceptional capacity to take in refugees, allowing more than twice as many asylum seekers to settle within the Union. Europe is tearing down its walls and an undeniable political solidarity is emerging. Welcoming Ukrainian refugees is becoming a moral and legal imperative.

Wix image

III. Temporary protection: a legal framework for immediate integration

This solidarity was not merely symbolic but was embodied in an unprecedented legal decision. Indeed, on 4 March 2022, the European Council unanimously agreed on the implementation of the Temporary Protection mechanism. Although this legal instrument was adopted in 2001, it took 21 years for the ministers of the Member States to make use of it.

This mechanism has acted as a genuine “integration accelerator”, representing a complete break from standard asylum procedures. Indeed, Temporary Protection allows for the granting of harmonised rights within the European Union to its beneficiaries, albeit for a limited period.

Thus, unlike the refugees of 2015, who were forced to endure long and uncertain asylum procedures, displaced Ukrainians have been able to benefit from privileged access to a number of fundamental rights: residence, freedom of movement, family unity, access to healthcare and education, and above all direct access to the labour market. It is precisely this immediacy of rights that creates a framework of opportunities.

By removing administrative delays, Europe has created a space in which integration can take place from the very first days.

IV. The blind spots of reception: from the legal framework to the realities on the ground

In this context, whilst the legal framework for temporary protection has opened the borders, the history of reception teaches us that a more nuanced reality prevails: having a right does not always mean being able to exercise it.

Although the public administration is responsible for granting status, it faces a structural glass ceiling: it guarantees the legal framework, but cannot produce or administer the social ties necessary for integration.

If we consider the integration of asylum seekers and refugees to be a “multidimensional process aimed at personal autonomy, the ‘conditions of possibility’ for which are material and relational”, then it must be acknowledged that the state meets the material conditions (basic needs) but is unable to establish social reciprocity. This lack of relational support is now exacerbated by a decline in civic engagement within European host societies. This phenomenon can be illustrated by the concept of “compassion fatigue” theorised by C. Figley, which describes the exhaustion of spontaneous solidarity in the face of a protracted conflict.

This observation is directly echoed in the analyses of the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) Europe9: whilst the outpouring of support for Ukrainians has been unprecedented, the report notes that this resource remains inherently fragile. In fact, solidarity is not a permanent gift, but a force that wanes as uncertainty about the duration of the reception grows.

This view is shared by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), which identify this loss of momentum as a major challenge to social cohesion in Europe.

Thus, in the absence of a structure capable of building on the initial emotional response and sustaining the momentum of solidarity, transitional social capital collapses, leaving refugees in a state of isolation that can hinder their empowerment. The risk is that ‘bridging social capital’ – the essential links between communities – will collapse.

In Lithuania, for example, the lack of mediation prevents Ukrainians from overcoming language and, at times, administrative barriers, turning their potential into a path of dependency. In fact, “brain waste” (the squandering of skills) is a direct result of this breakdown in ties with the host society: without local networks to validate their career paths or open doors to the labour market, skilled talent finds itself permanently excluded from the economic and social fabric.

This dual exclusion not only undermines the individual; it jeopardises overall cohesion by depriving the host society of an essential source of contribution. To break this cycle, it is imperative that host societies move beyond passive assistance to commit to revitalising the support they provide.

Integration can only be sustainable if it is based on a model of reciprocity where social ties become the lever for activating skills, transforming reception into active and mutually beneficial collaboration.

It is precisely to operationalise this transition and institutionalise social reciprocity that the Volunteer Everywhere project has been launched.

V. The Volunteer Everywhere (VolEver) project: a digital and transnational response to empower communities and sustain social cohesion

The Volunteer Everywhere (VolEver) project is part of a vision of digital innovation as a driver of post-conflict resilience. Funded by the European Social Fund (ESF+) to the tune of €388,483 as part of the Social Innovation+ initiative, this transnational project exemplifies the European Union’s Digital Strategy for 2030. Here, technology does not replace people but acts as a facilitator of solidarity and a guarantor of social cohesion.

One of the strengths of this project lies in a consortium of experts led by the Organisation for Refugee Assistance (OPU) in the Czech Republic, in partnership with the Refugee Council of Lithuania for Lithuania and the Halina Niec Legal Aid Centre for Poland.

The project addresses a gap identified following the emergency phase: whilst aid was concentrated in the capital cities, a geographical shift has led many Ukrainian families to move to the outskirts and rural areas in search of a long-term housing solution. Thus, by using geolocation, the VolEver mobile app (available on iOS and Android) enables solidarity to be decentralised. It connects refugees directly with local volunteers in their immediate neighbourhood. This helps to rebuild local social capital where traditional institutions are less present.

The fundamental aim of this digital initiative is to restore the agency - empowerment- of displaced people. VolEver creates the conditions for a contributory ecosystem:

• By facilitating tutoring, language conversation and mentoring, the app goes beyond mere assistance. It provides a framework where refugees can draw on their own skills to become active members of the community.

  
  

The project aims to recruit and rigorously train at least 400 volunteers to support 400 Ukrainian users. This cohort of volunteers transforms spontaneous solidarity into a stable and secure resource.

Consequently, by automating secure ‘matching’ and providing a professional framework for training and supervision, VolEver streamlines civic engagement. This system is essential for managing the mental workload of volunteers and preventing compassion fatigue, as previously identified.

Digital technology thus acts as a resilience infrastructure that stabilises support in the long term, aligning local initiatives with the ambitions of European social cohesion.

VI. Conclusion : towards a European infrastructure for solidarity

The reception of displaced Ukrainians marked a historic turning point for the EU, revealing an unprecedented capacity for political and legal mobilisation. However, the transition from Temporary Protection to successful integration cannot rely solely on administrative guarantees. As we have analysed, the real challenge of inclusion lies in this ‘blind spot’ where the state steps back in favour of social bonds.

The Volunteer Everywhere (VolEver) project provides a structural response to this limitation. By transforming technology into a lever for community engagement, it enables us to move beyond top-down assistance to establish horizontal reciprocity. The app does more than simply compensate for the decline in spontaneous solidarity; it institutionalises a model in which refugees regain their empowerment and become a contributing force for the host society.

At a time when Europe is redefining its digital sovereignty and social cohesion, VolEver demonstrates that innovation can be the guarantor of sustainable solidarity. By making social bonds scalable and resilient, this model offers a roadmap for future crises: that of a Europe which equips itself with the technological and human resources to transform exile into an opportunity for shared revitalisation.

*The views and opinions expressed on this text are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Social Fund Agency. Neither the European Union nor the grant provider can be held responsible for them.

---

sources

1. Ukraine Refugee Situation, Operational Data Portal UNHCR https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine

2. Tardis, M. (2023). L’accueil en Europe des déplacés ukrainiens Quels enseignements pour l’Union européenne Dans Sous la direction de T. De Montbrial, . I.F.R.I. et D. David Ramses 2024 (p.284-287). Dunod. https://doi.org/10.3917/dunod.montb.2023.01.0284

3. Blanchard, E. et Rodier, C. (2016). « Crise migratoire » : ce que cachent les mots. Plein droit,111(4), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.3917/pld.111.0003

4. Gemenne, F. et Thiollet, H. (2022). L’accueil des réfugiés ukrainiens et l’universalité du droit d’asile. Hommes & Migrations, 1337(2), 180-184. https://doi.org/10.4000/hommesmigrations.14062

5. Princicpaux résultats du Conseil “Justice et affaires intérieures” des 3 et 4 mars 2022 du Conseil européen https://www.consilium.europa.eu/fr/meetings/jha/2022/03/03-04/

6. Directive 2001/55/CE du Conseil du 20 juillet 2001

7. Giacometti, C. (2021). IntégrationS. La société civile à l’épreuve de l’accueil et de l’inclusion de demandeurs d’asile et réfugiés. Une analyse qualitative à Milan. Thèse soutenue le 7 juin 2021 en ligne. e-Migrinter, (22).

8. Figley, C. R. (1995). Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. Routledge.

9. Banulescu-Bogdan, N., Erdoğan, M. M., & Salgado, L. (2023). Confronting compassion fatigue: Understanding the arc of public support for displaced populations in Turkey, Colombia and Europe. Migration Policy Institute Europe.

   https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/compassion-fatigue-displaced-populations

10. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). (2023). Ukraine crisis: Analysis of the

    humanitarian situation and social cohesion challenges. ICRC. https://www.icrc.org

11. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). (2023). Europe: Ukraine and impacted countries crisis - Emergency Appeal revision. IFRC. https://www.ifrc.org

12. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of the American community. Simon & Schuster.

13. OECD. (2017). Making integration work: Assessment and recognition of foreign qualifications. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264278271-en

14. Organization for Aid to Refugees (OPU). (2025). Volunteer Everywhere (VolEver): Project Summary and Social Innovation Match.

    https://european-social-fund-plus.ec.europa.eu/en/social-innovation-match/case-study/volunteers-ever

15. European Commission. (2021). 2030 Digital Compass: The European way for the Digital Decade.

16. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology.

​The project is co-financed by the European Union.