Ukrainian Refugees in Switzerland 3 Years On: A First Look

The objective of this paper is to present initial findings from an ongoing empirical study of Ukrainian refugees in Switzerland, living under temporary protection Status S, notably their socio-economic integration, interaction with public services, and future aspirations. Data are drawn from an ad-hoc online survey started in March 2025, which includes N=1470 participants to date and demonstrates reasonable levels of representativeness across demographic and labour indicators. Findings indicate that despite the persistent uncertainty and structural limitations imposed by the temporary legal framework, many Ukrainian refugees are actively seeking employment, learning local languages and participating in education. These trajectories reflect not only functional participation in host society government structures, but also strategic forms of adaptation under conditions of legal ambiguity. The absence of a clear path to permanent residence does not stop integration efforts, but it influences their form, embedding them within a framework of temporariness and limited planning horizons. At the same time a lack of accessible and consistent information, particularly regarding administrative procedures and about support services, continues to be a significant barrier. In practice, however, Ukrainian refugees tend to compensate for institutional complexity through informal networks and self-navigation strategies. While more respondents express a desire to remain in Switzerland, their capacity to plan for the future is fundamentally shaped by the temporary and conditional nature of their legal status. Although Swiss institutional resources are generally perceived as more trustworthy than Ukrainian ones when it comes to accessing support, many refugees face barriers in reaching these sources, including linguistic and administrative complexity. The inability to access stable, long-term institutional frameworks reinforces a mode of existence defined by limited predictability and fragmented engagement with the state. These preliminary findings contribute to understanding how temporary protection operates not only as a legal category, but also a socio-political condition that determines access, restricts belonging and structures the temporal and institutional aspects of movement.