With so many actors and varying motivations involved, one aspect of the ongoing development of complementary pathways that requires greater attention is the question of whether the pathways are best seen as a top-down or a bottom-up endeavour. Linked to this is the issue of the roles of various actors (i.e., communities, national authorities, the national protection regime and the refugees themselves) in practically creating pathways, and embedding them in an overall refugee protection regime, and how to keep a balance of inputs and expectations among all these different players. The key enquiry of this article is thus whether the bottom-up aspect of complementary pathways lend them any greater chance of success? Can community action be inspired, even requested ‘from above’ by governments or the international organizations? Or does it have to be organic, and start from below? And if complementary pathways are for refugees, how are refugees included?

由于涉及的参与者和动机各不相同，因此需要更多关注的补充途径的持续发展的一个方面是，这些途径最好被视为自上而下还是自下而上的努力。与此相关的是不同行为者（即社区、国家当局、国家保护制度和难民本身）在实际创造途径并将其纳入整体难民保护制度方面的作用问题，以及如何保持平衡所有这些不同参与者之间的投入和期望。因此，本文的关键问题是互补途径的自下而上的方面是否会给他们带来更大的成功机会？能否激发社区行动，甚至政府或国际组织“从上面”提出要求？或者它必须是有机的，从下面开始？如果互补途径是对于难民，如何包括难民？