Linking with migrants: The potential of digitally mediated connections to build social capital during crisis

Intersections between social capital and digital technologies

Social capital theory is principally applied in social sciences research as a lens to analyse social trust, norms, and networks (Bourdieu, 1980; Coleman, 1988; Field, 2008; Putnam, 1995a; Williams, 2019). Social capital, as a concept, has a long history and is heralded as essential for community life (Jacobs, 1961). Bourdieu (1980, p. 2) defined social capital as ‘the sum of actual or potential resources related to the possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of acquaintance and recognition’. For scholars like Coleman (1988) and Putnam (1995b), social networks had two functions – to bond or to bridge. Bonding and bridging ties that overwhelm much of the social capital literature recognises that while it is a resource, social capital simultaneously offers access and opportunities to form a social network (Ryan, 2011). According to Putnam (1995b), bonding capital refers to dense social ties that are responsible for facilitating in-group loyalty, mobilising solidarity, and creating norms of specific reciprocity. This form of social capital is good for ‘getting by’ (Putnam, 1995b) while bridging capital is good for ‘getting ahead’. Bridging social capital does not require strong ties but, instead, is associated with the diffusion of information and opportunities as well as linkage to external assets. Bridging ties have access to different resources than bonding ties.

Social ties that have received limited attention in scholarship are linking ties. Unlike bonding and bridging ties, which are informal ties, linking ties are largely of a vertical nature involving relationships between organisations and individuals that either work within organisations or are connected to them (Kianto & Waajakoski, 2010). Kianto and Waajakoski (2010) discussed linking ties to better understand the social capital of organisations. They analysed intra-organisational and inter-organisational relationships related to organisational growth. Intra-organisational ties are social structures and relationships formed within organisations while inter-organisational ties address ‘relational qualities of collaborative arrangements among several organizations’ (Kianto & Waajakoski, 2010, p. 7). Our analysis demonstrates that inter-organisational ties exist between organisations and community members. Research reveals that organisations with strong client relationships can improve their organisational performance (Kianto & Waajakoski, 2010; Yli-Renko et al., 2002). There is scope then, to further examine the role of organisations as central to generating linking social capital with migrants. We seek to better understand how their linking ties with migrants can develop bridging ties down the track. We position this article within the remit of linking ties and the roles of organisations to service migrants’ needs. In particular, we are interested in how a crisis implicates the formation, maintenance, and enhancement of these ties when they become digitally mediated.

Our motivation for this article stems from intersections between social capital and the digital realm. Increasingly, scholars are paying attention to the role of digital technologies in daily life and these effects on social ties (Calderon Gomez, 2021; Wellman et al., 2003). There is now even a sub-category of research on ‘digital social capital’ that captures such interconnections. Existing research demonstrates that digital technologies can provide ‘social affordances’ and connectedness that mitigate loneliness and social isolation (Wellman et al., 2003). Social affordances, that are digitally mediated, provide both synchronous and asynchronous opportunities to create different ties between family members and close-knit friends to communities of practices, which allow interactions to be negotiated differently yet simultaneously.

There is a dearth of scholarship analysing how organisations transition to digital technologies, the challenges associated with this transition, and whether this transition during crises limits or encourages connections that benefit communities they service. While Putnam (2001) argued that social capital was decreasing, he called for further research to examine whether digital technologies played a critical part in this decline. Considerable scholarship now exists on the role of digital technologies in building social capital and enhancing ties (Keles, 2016; Parker & Song, 2006; Poortinga, 2012). However, this work is often directed at individual relationships (such as bonding or bridging ties) formed and/or maintained on the internet, with scholars arguing that ‘technologies remediate social practices [since] online and offline worlds [are now so] entangled’ (Calderon Gomez, 2021, p. 2536; see also Helsper, 2012; Ragnedda, 2017). Our article is uniquely positioned to contribute to debates on linking social capital and the digital field, particularly focusing on transitions of migrant-focused organisations from face-to-face exchanges to digital engagements during crisis.

Migrants using digital technologies

Digital technologies are valuable for enhancing engagement and maintaining contact (Cabalquinto, 2022). Strong ties online can enrich face-to-face, in-person communication (Habito et al., 2022; Wellman et al., 2001). In Australia, and elsewhere, maintaining social relationships during Covid-19 relied on access to technology and people's abilities to use a diverse repertoire of digital tools. According to the Australian Digital Inclusion Index, Australia's digital inclusion is improving; the Index simultaneously identifies that ‘Australians who speak a language other than English at home are in general more digitally included than others’ (i.e. the general population). While digital access and ability propel a growing desire to maintain connections through digital means, affordability is a key concern, as well as those in the population who remain excluded (Thomas et al., 2021).

Globally, increasing digital connectivity has revealed that some groups and organisations remain ‘digitally excluded’. Digital exclusion is the inability to use digital technologies due to limited access, affordability, and/or proficiency (Borg et al., 2019; Helsper, 2012). These components of digital exclusion exist across individual and organisational levels, and may cluster among certain groups (e.g. recently arrived migrants or organisations within a particular sector) (Holcombe-James, 2022). Ongoing research related to terminologies give preference to the term ‘digital inclusion/exclusion’ over ‘digital divide’ (Ragnedda & Muschert, 2018; van Dijk, 2006). ‘Digital inclusion’ acknowledges that ‘the simple binary description of a divide fails to do justice to the complex reality of various people's differing access and usage of digital technology’ (Warschauer, 2003, p. 44). Holcombe-James (2022) revealed that distinctions between digital inclusion and exclusion exemplified the unevenness of Covid-19's digital pivot across institutions in the cultural sector (Holcombe-James, 2022). Similarly, Kennedy et al. (2021) reflected on the digital pivot during Covid-19 in relation to participation, highlighting barriers low-income households faced when partaking in online activities. They argued that shifting to digital methods is not entirely inclusive and that face-to-face activities may still be essential to mitigate barriers to participation. Our analysis similarly demonstrates that some organisations and/or end users were digitally excluded and faced challenges in maintaining social ties during Covid-19.

Alongside the corpus of literature on digital inclusion and exclusion, scholars focus on the role of digital technologies in migrants’ lives (Felton, 2015). While some research points to barriers migrants face related to access, affordability, and ability (Alam & Imran, 2015), significant scholarship examines migrants’ digital practices, including ways that technologies shape personal, social, and family lives (Baldassar, 2007; Baldassar et al., 2020; Cabalquinto, 2022, 2018; Zhao, 2019). Migrants maintain social ties with friends and family in home countries by using messaging applications, especially with visual interaction, such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Viber, and WeChat.

While there is growing evidence of digital ability among migrants, the extent to which this ability exists within organisations that work closely with them is unclear. From Covid-19 we are yet to see the success or failure of linkers who transitioned to using technologies to connect with communities – there could be multiple limits regarding reach and technological capacities that resulted in digital exclusion amplified by Covid-19. Research reveals increased uptake of digital technologies among migrant groups, suggesting that during crises many migrants would be well-placed to maintain local and distant connections digitally (Cabalquinto, 2022). Yet, crises are challenging for individuals and organisations. There are migrants who face digital challenges; indeed, navigating the digital realm in Australia can be difficult due to variable English proficiency. Covid-19 amplified digital challenges that migrants and organisations faced in different respects; while there was a push to maintain social relationships during isolation, migrants felt pressure to access vital services offered by organisations due to such challenges.

Reciprocal engagement with end users

In the context of Covid-19, organisations can have a fundamental role as linkers to provide digitally mediated connections and/or reciprocal engagement to and with migrant communities (Gigliotti et al., 2019; Winschiers-Theophilus et al., 2019). Existing modes of engagement rely on top-down/one-way communication models. Thus, we contend that organisations would benefit by developing skills that encourage reciprocal engagement with end users. ‘Reciprocal engagement’ – like ‘participatory’ and ‘inclusive’ engagement – refers to two-way interactions between an organisation and end users. This type of engagement enables end users to communicate with organisations, and vice versa. For organisations to benefit from implementing digital technologies and reciprocal engagement, Winschiers-Theophilus et al. (2019) called for a collaborative process, working closely with community members when transferring services, programs, or knowledges to online platforms. However, organisations may still face difficulties, particularly as it pertains to their resources and abilities to reach individuals who are not already digitally connected (Anthias, 2021). As such, our research advocates for a more robust and community-focused approach that neatly weds needs of end users with those of organisations. Such collaborations guarantee that when digital technologies are implemented, they can be aligned with end users' technological ability, knowledge, and access.

During Covid-19, organisations swiftly transitioned their linking practices to the digital realm. Acting in haste, it was not necessarily viable to draw on an informed collaborative framework, but we believe this can be implemented readily post-crisis. Our research with organisations highlights that shifts to the digital realm can cultivate bridging and bonding relationships – among the migrants themselves and between the linkers and migrants – both in future crises and periods of dormancy. We draw on two research questions to guide our subsequent discussions. First, we ask whether organisations were able to create opportunities to connect with migrants during Covid-19 and what their experiences of doing so were. Second, we seek to understand whether digitally mediated connections maintained and/or enhanced the linking ties between organisations and migrants and whether these could lead to bridging ties.

Pre-crisis activities

Prior to Covid-19, organisations relied mostly on in-person connections with migrants in Victoria. Many organisations delivered services that were ‘place-based‘ (Organisation A) – their local (i.e. suburb- or municipal-level) engagements included social gatherings, cooking classes, sewing programs, and mothers’ groups to promote diasporic or community connectedness. Organisations provided in-person services such as mental health care, case management support, and access to essential services. One health-focused not-for-profit organisation employed Rohingya bicultural workers ⁵ as part of a partnership project with the Rohingya community that relied on in-person activities. One bicultural worker discussed their role:

I [was] helping the community and learning what services are available [in] different locations, finding suitable training [sessions], helping [as a] language interpreter where I filled out forms and helped write their resumes, [and] I engaged with the other communities. (Organisation D)

Here, linking ties between organisations and migrants involved the in-person nature of connecting, building trust, and sharing knowledges (Coleman, 1988; Putnam, 1995a). Significant to Covid-19, however, was the transition to the digital realm, which removed in-person, place-based means of connecting. Pre-crisis, some organisations already used digital media, but in limited ways; all of the organisations we interviewed maintained a website and some even went a little further, integrating Facebook groups and social media pages and digital newsletters into their end user communication strategies. Yet, the way the crisis unfolded meant that some organisations faced challenges as they attempted to create conditions for an effective uptake of digital technologies by migrants.

Becoming digital linkers? Approaches and challenges

As the crisis unfolded, organisations had two key roles: to deliver health messages and maintain connections. In return, migrants engaged with organisations, providing opportunities for migrants to connect with each other and build bridging and bonding ties beyond linking ties. This had the potential not only to strengthen social capital but also to expand their broader social networks during a period of isolation. We see the social network in this crisis as comprising digitally mediated connections between organisations and migrants. However, such digitally mediated connections and maintenance of linking and social ties came with struggles as both migrants and organisations adapted and attempted to transition to the digital realm.

Many organisations had to consider their reach and identify digitally included and excluded migrants they engaged with. Some organisations could not promptly shift to the digital realm due to their own digital barriers (Holcombe-James, 2022). Simultaneously, there were shifts in processes of linking to migrants too. A suite of challenges emerged, including access and ability to use technology. For the most part, organisations turned to existing digital infrastructures, such as websites, social media platforms, and digital databases. We observed how linkers attempted to create opportunities for synchronous and asynchronous connectivity that were tailored for migrants (Wellman et al., 2001). However, some organisations reverted to conventional modes of communication to share important health information with migrants who did not have access to technology:

One of the reasons why you may be finding that people are resorting back to some of the more traditional, ethnic media or radio, is that not everyone has access to the internet and it's becoming more and more on our radar. (Organisation C)

Another organisation collaborated with other organisations and local schools to contact migrants and organise essential goods deliveries:

Because schools were closed … their workers and teachers and welfare staff all switched to calling families about twice a week. Families they were really worried about, they [called] more regularly. They were connecting people to services for material aids and getting packages of groceries delivered. So making sure people eat … and then there was also getting people connected to the internet to things we were worried about [such as]: [people] not having enough credit on their phones to stay on the phone to Centrelink for many hours. (Organisation D) ⁶

Despite challenges, most organisations were aware of the importance of regular communication, either through local radio or phone calling. This conventional communication was prioritised to reach certain groups, particularly the digitally excluded, given Victoria's unique context where face-to-face engagement completely stopped. Few organisations opted for such communication as an interim measure as they developed or updated digital components of their engagements.

Diverse modes of digital technologies were important for the success of organisations in developing linking ties. Only a few organisations built resource and infrastructure bases when and as the pandemic unfolded:

When Covid happened, we sort of dialled up the digital platform just because we had to get out there so quickly and we developed [a] website. We did it in English first and then it was getting some popularity, [so] we decided to assess our organisation [and] speak to our program managers on our top 10 languages. (Organisation C)

We note that sizes, ecological structures of organisations, and amounts of funding they receive were vital considerations as they transitioned services and activities online. This, in part, influenced support they could offer to migrants they had ties with, and ways in which they could develop new linking ties (or not). The success of digitally mediated connections required an active deployment of resources to connect with migrants depending on digital access, affordability, and ability. Some organisations reported that migrants they had ties with did not have smartphones or internet access. Organisation A demonstrated ways some organisations facilitated connection during crisis:

We were really lucky that we had the resource[s] to buy all of [our clients] a tablet, because the schools aren‘t [providing them]. There is a real problem with community members not having access to technology … and access to internet as well. I think for women, being able to connect [is important]. Isolation is so deadly and it is really expensive to fix isolation. The cost of a tablet and a bit of internet is not expensive compared with the cost of isolation. (Organisation A)

Our findings show that maintaining linking ties with migrant communities was most successful when organisations were well-resourced. Once some migrants had resources, they faced challenges in maintaining linking and social ties.

Another challenge for migrants was related to building skills to use digital devices and technologies. One organisation we connected with indicated that bicultural workers were critical conduits and a trusted access point. They had mutual trust with their communities and fostered an environment for reciprocal engagement. Gigliotti et al. (2019) cautioned that organisations must ensure safety, mutual practices, and appropriate communication between end users to pursue successful reciprocal engagement. In the case of Organisation D, Rohingya bicultural workers supported their community to develop digital skills:

Rohingya people, they don't know how to use computers and so we held one event through the internet. At that time, I talked with the community [about how] to join to this event. So we try to help people, send them messages, and [speak] on the phone, [guiding them to] download this app, and [telling them] the [Zoom] ID … [to] click this one, click that, click that. We [took] two weeks to grow to this session. So, we did work very hard. Now Rohingya people are learning. (Organisation D)

Bicultural workers in this example had significant reach into their communities. There was evidence that they were a type of linker embedded in organisations and had created conditions to form meaningful bonds (i.e. bonding/bridging ties) with communities, highlighting ways that these relationships can evolve. These strong bonds allowed the bicultural workers to enhance their relationships with migrants and develop digital skills that could be sustained even beyond the lockdowns. The role of bicultural workers reinforces Winschiers-Theophilus et al.'s (2019) argument that reciprocal engagement relies on close relationships with the community and feelings of trust and safety when it comes to connecting or transferring knowledges to the digital realm.

Creating digitally mediated connections

Throughout the pandemic, many organisations transformed services offered to migrants and actions they took to maintain linking and social ties. Despite their core business strategies/activities, organisations disseminated public health information in ways they may not have previously pursued. From our analysis, we identify three ways that organisations engaged with migrants: responding to crisis, maintaining links/ties, and creating new approaches for digital and reciprocal engagement.

Many organisations responded to Covid-19 by providing emergency food, communicating critical public health information to migrants, and ensuring migrants had access to digital technologies for engagement. Organisation C created a ‘hub’ on their website with Covid-19 information in multiple languages:

We basically have a very small digital team and I tasked them with spending a couple of hours a day just doing as much research as they could and pulling all the information together. So, I guess that Covid site is more like a hub. We bring people [to the site] and then we link them to relevant information. (Organisation C)

While the digital hub collated and translated essential information, diverse digital engagements were required for rapid communication. For example, another organisation sent text messages to their end users:

Most of the women, if English is not their first language … prefer to use SMS to communicate. I’ve been doing a lot of SMS messages to them … I input in the SMS so that they can have [it] as a reference, so they can use the Google translator to translate [the SMS] to their own language. (Organisation E).

These two responses kept migrants informed and connected, emphasising the critical role of organisations given their existing ties and trust built (D‘Angelo, 2015). The crisis relied on connections that organisations have to migrants, including those with lower English proficiency, to procure information and services. Tailored and translated messages – many community leaders translated, audio or video recorded, and broadcast messages via WhatsApp and YouTube (Organisations H and T) – held potential to strengthen trust and ties with migrants.

While transitions to the digital realm were made, in part, to continue offering services and programs to end users, they were also about maintaining links to the community and preventing isolation. One organisation based in regional Victoria held their playgroup online:

Our playgroup is now being delivered into homes online by our playgroup coordinator [who] runs it from her lounge room, basically, and has all her props and her guitar and everything. She spent a good week or so teaching parents on how to get online using Zoom. (Organisation H)

Before Covid-19, local events and gatherings were regularly attended and had the potential to establish geographically proximate bridging and bonding connections. Organisation H's playgroup and Organisation I's online festival (described below), demonstrate possibilities for local ties to develop beyond the crisis. Organisation I discussed an online festival they organised for new migrants in a local suburb they serviced:

we thought ‘Well, why don't we do an online festival that's live, full of live events, where people can actually interact?’ But we [would] still keep that place-based focus … we got 10 expressions of interest from people wanting to host something. So we … hosted a couple of dance classes. We got a yoga studio that wanted to host a yoga class, a girl who has worked in a Chinese holistic health clinic who wanted to run an acupressure workshop. We had a celloist as well. (Organisation I)

In these cases, digital technologies were a mediating tool that connected linkers with migrants in local areas. While community events were promising for developing future bridging and bonding ties with migrants, there was also discussion from organisations related to the extensive reach of their events to interstate and international audiences. Digitally connecting with these larger audiences meant that more migrants were engaged in activities during lockdowns. One participant discussed the intensity of their efforts to ensure digital connectedness:

[We’ve had] double [the engagement], if not more, [compared to] what we were doing before and what we have planned…. Maybe it's because of [the] isolation situation and people wanting to connect in some way, but the levels of attendance – the conversations, the questions, and issues raised [on] the whole – [meant that] people are sharing how fantastic it has been to connect, how emotional they felt [connecting], and how great it was to be able to have that opportunity. (Organisation J).

Organisations played varying roles during Covid-19 based on the connections they sought to maintain with migrants and services they were able to offer. Rarely were organisations able to resource their target groups/clients. In other circumstances, organisations maintained links with migrants that were either geographically proximate or more universal. Many organisations transitioned their activities online and took on additional responsibilities to ensure the health, well-being, and safety of migrants.

Linkers were critical during Covid-19 despite challenges associated with transitions to the digital realm. Our findings demonstrated a strong uptake of social media and messaging platforms for communication. One participant said: ‘WhatsApp is where we find a lot of culturally and linguistically diverse communities are engaging’ (Organisation P) with family, friends, and community leaders. Several organisations used WhatsApp, Viber, and Facebook groups to maintain contact while others ran public events on Instagram: ‘We decided to do this [event] on Instagram Live because we identified that most of our members are interacting in lockdown on Instagram’ (Organisation S). A flurry of recent scholarship has uncovered the capacity of migrants to use social media and messaging platforms (for a comprehensive review, see Alencar, 2020); while organisations may not have moved that far into the digital realm without Covid-19, the emergence of digital linkers in our research meant that they engaged on social media and messaging platforms, suggesting potential for bridging ties to form if they continue digital and reciprocal engagements post-crisis.