{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017953321364452424, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.1602209944751385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Talking across Borders: Successful Re‐entry in Different Strands of Re‐entry Literature

The processes of re-entering a society after an international move have been studied in several 
fields. In this article, we argue that the existing differences in conceptualizations of a “successful 
re-entry” for different returning groups are created by particular social, political or theoretical 
ideas about mobility, which lead to biases in the understanding of re-entry processes and 
influence support practices for returning groups. A critical analysis of the conceptualization of 
successful re-entry of two extreme cases of returning people who both play to the interests of 
institutions that seek successful re-entry, namely returned refugees and asylum seekers on the 
one hand and repatriates on the other, enables us to bring these assumptions to the fore. Our 
analysis reveals how the permeation of economic and spatial understanding and the absence of 
temporal and relational understanding distorts insights into re-entry processes and creates blind 
spots in support practices for returning populations.