Besserer Rayas et al. Comparative Migration Studies (2024) 12:47 countries of displaced Venezuelans in the region (see Freier & Doña-Reveco, 2022) as well as other countries worldwide facing similar challenges regarding the lack of origincountry documentation. Theoretically, we contribute to the literature by identifying and defining paperwork gaps, which illuminate a previously under-identified policy dilemma for receiving states that arises from the interaction between origin- and residence-state bureaucracies in the context of applying immigration policy tools to manage international displacement. Lacking documentation can arise when origin countries lose the capacity or willingness to provide sufficient paperwork for their nationals, or in cases where conflict or natural disasters hinder displaced people from accessing the necessary documents. This dilemma would be less salient if states responded with more political and legal awareness of the difficulty of obtaining origin-country documentation. Building from the literature on citizenship and immigration regimes and government learning, we conceptualize paperwork gaps and provide empirical examples. We argue that countries can adjust existing laws and procedures (adaptation), create new ones (innovation), or both, to facilitate the regularization and naturalization of newcomers. This is how states can build paper bridges to close paperwork gaps and hence avoid a large undocumented population due to international displacement. Regular migratory status and the prospect of being able to attain nationality are of the utmost importance to the successful inclusion of forced migrants in residence societies. Narrowing paperwork gaps and its resulting positive effects on naturalization and regularization rates also benefit states since they gain knowledge of, and thus administrative and fiscal control over, the population within its territory. Furthermore, it allows them to appropriately adapt public services and to improve their standing regarding fulfilling international commitments in international politics (Palma-Gutiérrez, 2021). Our paper broadly contributes to the literature on government learning and on citizenship, immigration, and refugee policies. Specifically, it addresses the gaps identified in the Latin American immigration policy literature regarding policy implementation, bureaucratic choices, and agents (Acosta & Freier, 2023; Fernández-Rodríguez & Freier, 2024). In the “Concepts and theory: citizenship and immigration regimes” section, we define key concepts whereas the “Background and Data” section covers the context, case justification, and data. In the “Colombia’s paper bridges” section, we outline the ways Colombia changed its citizenship and immigration regimes to cater to large-scale Venezuelan displacement. Then we discuss how government learning occurred in each of these four examples in section “Discussion: changing citizenship and immigration regimes” and conclude by pointing to broader takeaways. Concepts and theory: citizenship and immigration regimes Citizenship regimes are “institutionalized systems of formal and informal norms that define access to membership, as well as rights and duties associated with membership, within a polity” (Vink, 2017, p. 222). We understand citizenship in its thinnest definition as membership in a state. Within the main dimensions of citizenship – that is, status, rights, and identity (Joppke, 2007) – we focus on status, as in the legal status or category of a person, in relation to a particular nation state. States maintain power by categorizing the status of every person within the population. Page 3 of 20