Member States, social partners and civil society have been experimenting with complementary pathways for people in need of protection: humanitarian visas and private sponsorship, expanded family reunification, protection-sensitive labour migration channels, etc. What are the lessons learned? Are these channels more or less effective for specific protection groups or specific origin, transit or destination country contexts? According to the researchers and practitioners involved, what type of European action and support would have a significant added value? These recommendations could help to shape the Commission's 2020 agenda on protection pathways, such as 'humanitarian corridors' as well as its relations with third countries, notably with its neighbourhood in Africa and the Middle East.