Search

Begin New Search Topic Resettlement

1. Durable Solutions for Syrian Refugees in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq

Author:
Abdullah Yassen
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Middle East Research Institute (MERI)
Abstract:
Forced displacement from Syria has resulted in one of the largest refugee populations worldwide, and the most protracted displacement in the Middle East. In the presence of the complex security dynamics in the region, durable solutions are difficult and require careful considerations. Using a multi-site qualitative and participatory methods, this research examines: (a) the feasibility of voluntary repatriation, local integration, and resettlement in a third country for Syrian refugees. (b) the ‘State’ practice of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq (KRI) in terms of refugee protection and its response to their entitlement to education, health care, employment, and residency. The report highlights certain flaws in the Syrian refugees’ predicament which the KRI government, international organisations and the international community urgently need to address to implement an effective solution to the crisis. The findings also show that the preferred durable solution for the majority of the Syrian refugees is onward migration and resettlement in third countries. Both local integration and voluntary repatriation were viewed as largely unworkable, since the KRI, as part of Iraq, is not signatory to the Refugee Convention, and current local legislations are inadequate to regulate asylum. Importantly, voluntary return to Syria is still impeded by security concerns and the lack of development in their regions of origin.
Topic:
Migration, United Nations, Refugees, Displacement, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria

2. Slipping Through the Cracks: The Demolition of a Government Homeless Shelter in an Informal Settlement: The Case of Amir Khusro Park

Author:
Ashwin Parulkar, Manish, and Sunil Kumar
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
In May 2017, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) demolished a Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) shelter located in an informal settlement in South Delhi’s Amir Khusro Park. DUSIB had built the shelter in response to a 2014 Delhi High Court Order. DDA demolished the same structure in cognizance of a 2015 Delhi High Court Order, issued in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a private citizen urging the state to remove illegal encroachments in the area. The demolition of the shelter led to the eviction of various groups of people in Khusro Park: families in self-constructed ‘jhuggis’; women in the DUSIB shelter managed by a local NGO; and various people in a temporary shelter not authorized by government agencies. Field visits revealed connections between these settlements. Women and children of some jhuggi families, for instance, lived in the shelter where food, nutrition, documentation, education and health services were provided by the managing NGO for shelter residents and joint and nuclear jhuggi families. In this context, the report raises and responds to two salient questions. What makes homeless shelters in Delhi vulnerable to government sanctioned demolition and eviction? What is the implication of the particular case of Amir Khusro Park on the fate of shelters in Delhi’s other numerous informal geographies? The authors examine events that preceded and unfolded during and after the demolition through ethnographic research in Khusro Park, interviews with government officials and NGO social workers, and legal analysis of both Supreme and High Court Orders and policies that assign powers to various federal, state and municipal land owning agencies. The report finds that Khusro Park residents’ Court-substantiated, though broadly defined, rights to live in shelters and urban informal settlements were violated by government agencies, such as DDA. Such government agencies are permitted to undermine general rights urban poor people have to city spaces and resettlement through the existence of specific provisions that categorize jhuggi and shelter residents on government land ‘encroachers’. The authors conclude that due process measures of DUSIB’s current resettlement policy – land surveys, provision of notice and rehousing – should be based on a thorough understanding of (a) types and nature of settlements along the informal urban housing continuum (b) infrastructure and services used by residents and (c) the nature of contracts between (i) state and federal agencies and (ii) government agencies and NGOs that authorize land use and service provision.
Topic:
Government, Poverty, Public Policy, Resettlement, Urban, Informal Settlement, and Homelessness
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

3. Empowerment and compassion in refugee crisis response: A conversation with UNHCR MENA Director Amin Awad

Author:
Kelsey Wise and Amin Awad
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
Institution:
The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Abstract:
The series of refugee crises in the Middle East and North Africa has created urgent need for coordinated international responses and advocacy. To learn more about the complexities of meeting the needs of diverse refugee populations across the region, and addressing their root causes, JMEPP Levant Regional Editor Kelsey Wise sat down with Amin Awad in advance of his appearance at the Harvard Arab Conference. Mr. Awad currently serves as the Director for the Middle East and North Africa with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and has extensive experience working on refugee issues and in humanitarian relief in the MENA region. He is also the Regional Refugee Coordinator for Syria and Iraq.
Topic:
Nationalism, Refugee Crisis, Displacement, Syrian War, Resettlement, and Child Marriage
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Yemen, United Nations, North Africa, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan

4. Mining Policy and Socio-Cultural and Sustainable Integration of the Resettled in Cateme-Mozambique: 2009-2017

Author:
Cremildo de Abreu Coutinho
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brazilian Journal of African Studies
Institution:
Brazilian Journal of African Studies
Abstract:
The government of Mozambique has been developing various actions aimed at poverty reduction and the consequent shift towards development. One of the actions taken has been the permission of foreign investment in the country, which, in turn, contributes to gathering foreign currencies which, if used correctly, can contribute to the increase of development. It is in this context that, in 2007, the government signed a contract with Vale Moçambique to start the extraction of coal in the coal basin of Moatize district. Due to the fact that the object in question is located underground in several villages in the aforementioned district, it was essential to move the population from its usual place of residence and consequent resettlement in other locations, including the village of Cateme. However, during and after the resettlement process, there have been several conflicts between the affected population and the mining company Vale Moçambique, in which there is a resistance to leave the places where they previously lived, the reluctance to receive houses built by the company Vale Moçambique, by the potential resettled people, and later the occurrence of demonstrations that culminated in the blockade by the resettled population of access routes frequently used by the company. These issues gravitate to the following starting question: What are the reasons behind the resettlement conflicts in Cateme?
Topic:
Development, Poverty, Resettlement, and Mining
Political Geography:
Africa and Mozambique

5. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the challenges faced by Central American migrants who returned home after failing to gain asylum or other international protection in the United States or Mexico. Cristosal interviewed individuals who fled from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras under threats of violence and persecution and had been deported back to their country of origin to determine why they fled their homelands, why they could not secure asylum, and on their situations post-return. In the context of mass migration from these countries, the study used in- depth interviews to understand the different ways in which people experienced the violence and fear that forced them to flee and how their responses upon “voluntary return” or deportation back to their country of origin were shaped by that same violence. While there are many studies on the flight of persons from the Northern Triangle of Central America (NTCA), little is known about the experience of refugees who cannot secure protection in another country and are deported to their home country, from which they originally fled. What are the psychosocial, security, and human rights consequences for people who migrated out of fear for their lives and were then forced to return to the situation that forced them to flee?

Author:
Donald Kerwin
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The US refugee resettlement program should be a source of immense national pride. The program has saved countless lives, put millions of impoverished persons on a path to work, self-sufficiency, and integration, and advanced US standing in the world. Its beneficiaries have included US leaders in science, medicine, business, the law, government, education, and the arts, as well as countless others who have strengthened the nation’s social fabric through their work, family, faith, and community commitments. Refugees embody the ideals of freedom, endurance, and self-sacrifice, and their presence closes the gap between US ideals and its practices. For these reasons, the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) has enjoyed strong, bipartisan support for nearly 40 years. Yet the current administration has taken aim at this program as part of a broader attack on legal immigration programs. It has treated refugees as a burden and a potential threat to our nation, rather than as a source of strength, renewal, and inspiration. In September 2017, it set an extremely low refugee admissions ceiling (45,000) for 2018, which it had no intention of meeting: the United States is on pace to resettle less than one-half of that number. It has also tightened special clearance procedures for refugees from mostly Muslim-majority states so that virtually none can enter; cynically slow-walked the interview, screening, and admissions processes; and decimated the community-based resettlement infrastructure built up over many decades (Miliband 2018). At a time of record levels of forced displacement in the world, the United States should model solidarity with refugees and exercise leadership in global refugee protection efforts (Francis 2018a, 102). Instead, the administration has put the United States on pace to resettle the lowest number of refugees in USRAP’s 38-year history, with possible further cuts in fiscal year (FY) 2019.
Topic:
Refugees, Domestic politics, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
United States, Washington, and D.C.

6. The US Refugee Resettlement Program — A Return to First Principles: How Refugees Help to Define, Strengthen, and Revitalize the United States

Author:
Donald Kerwin
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The US refugee resettlement program should be a source of immense national pride. The program has saved countless lives, put millions of impoverished persons on a path to work, self-sufficiency, and integration, and advanced US standing in the world. Its beneficiaries have included US leaders in science, medicine, business, the law, government, education, and the arts, as well as countless others who have strengthened the nation’s social fabric through their work, family, faith, and community commitments. Refugees embody the ideals of freedom, endurance, and self-sacrifice, and their presence closes the gap between US ideals and its practices. For these reasons, the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) has enjoyed strong, bipartisan support for nearly 40 years. Yet the current administration has taken aim at this program as part of a broader attack on legal immigration programs. It has treated refugees as a burden and a potential threat to our nation, rather than as a source of strength, renewal, and inspiration. In September 2017, it set an extremely low refugee admissions ceiling (45,000) for 2018, which it had no intention of meeting: the United States is on pace to resettle less than one-half of that number. It has also tightened special clearance procedures for refugees from mostly Muslim-majority states so that virtually none can enter; cynically slow-walked the interview, screening, and admissions processes; and decimated the community-based resettlement infrastructure built up over many decades (Miliband 2018). At a time of record levels of forced displacement in the world, the United States should model solidarity with refugees and exercise leadership in global refugee protection efforts (Francis 2018a, 102). Instead, the administration has put the United States on pace to resettle the lowest number of refugees in USRAP’s 38-year history, with possible further cuts in fiscal year (FY) 2019. This report describes the myriad ways in which this program serves US interests and values. The program: saves the lives of the world’s most vulnerable persons; continues “America’s tradition as a land that welcomes peoples from other countries” and shares the “responsibility of welcoming and resettling those who flee oppression” (Reagan 1981); promotes a “stable and moral world” (Helton 2002, 120); reduces spontaneous, unregulated arrivals and encourages developing nations to remain engaged in refugee protection (Gammeltoft-Hansen and Tan 2017, 42-43); and promotes cooperation from individuals, communities, and nations that are central to US military and counter-terrorism strategies.[1] In that vein, the report describes the achievements, contributions, and integration outcomes of 1.1 million refugees who arrived in the United States between 1987 and 2016. It finds that: the median household income of these refugees is $43,000;[2] 35 percent of refugee households have mortgages; 63 percent of refugees have US-born children; 40 percent are married to US citizens; and 67 percent have naturalized. Comparing the 1.1 million refugees who arrived between 1987 and 2016 with non-refugees,[3] the foreign born, and the total US population, the report finds: Refugees’ labor force participation (68 percent) and employment rates (64 percent) exceed those of the total US population (63 and 60 percent respectively).[4] Large numbers of refugees (10 percent) are self-employed and, in this and other ways, job creators, compared to 9 percent for the total US population. Refugees’ median personal income ($20,000) equals that of non-refugees and exceeds the income of the foreign born overall ($18,700). Refugees are more likely to be skilled workers (38 percent) than non-refugees (33 percent) or the foreign born (35 percent). Refugees are less likely to work in jobs that new immigrants fill at high rates, such as construction, restaurants and food service, landscaping, services to buildings and dwellings, crop production, and private households. Refugees use food stamps and Medicaid at higher rates than non-refugees, the foreign born, and the total US population. However, their public benefit usage significantly declines over time and their integration, well-being, and US family ties increase. Comparing refugee characteristics by time present in the United States — from the most recent arrivals (2007 to 2016), to arrivals between 1997 to 2006, to those with the longest tenure (1987 to 1996) — the report finds: Refugees with the longest residence have integrated more fully than recent arrivals, as measured by households with mortgages (41 to 19 percent); English language proficiency (75 to 55 percent); naturalization rates (89 to 24 percent); college education (66 to 32 percent); labor force participation (68 to 61 percent); and employment (66 to 55 percent) and self-employment (14 to 4 percent). Refugees who arrived from 1997 to 2006 have higher labor force participation and employment rates than refugees who arrived from 1987 to 1996.[5] Refugees who arrived between 1987 and 1996 exceed the total US population, which consists mostly of the native-born, in median personal income ($28,000 to $23,000), homeownership (41 to 37 percent with a mortgage), percent above the poverty line (86 to 84 percent), access to a computer and the internet (82 to 75 percent), and health insurance (93 to 91 percent). Comparing nationals — in 2000 and again in 2016 — from states formerly in the Soviet Union, who entered from 1987 to 1999, the report finds that: median household income increased from $31,000 to $53,000; median personal income nearly tripled, from $10,700 to $31,000; the percent of households with a mortgage increased from 30 to 40 percent; public benefit usage fell; English language proficiency rose; the percent with a college degree or some college increased (68 to 80 percent); naturalization rates nearly doubled, from 47 to 89 percent; marriage to US citizens rose from 33 to 51 percent; and labor force participation rate (59 to 69 percent), employment (57 to 66 percent), self-employment (11 to 15 percent), and the rate of skilled workers (33 to 38 percent) all grew. The report also finds that refugees bring linguistic diversity to the United States and, in this and other ways, increase the nation’s economic competitiveness and security. In short, refugees become US citizens, homeowners, English speakers, workers, business owners, college educated, insured, and computer literate at high rates. These findings cover a large population of refugees comprised of all nationalities, not just particularly successful national groups. Section I of the report describes the nation’s historic commitment to refugees and critiques the administration’s rationale for dismantling the resettlement program. Section II sets forth the Center for Migration Studies (CMS) methodology for selecting the refugee data used in this report. Section III discusses the resettlement, national origins, and years of arrival of the refugees in CMS’s sample. Section IV details the report’s main findings on the achievements, contributions, and integration of refugees over time. It compares the characteristics of refugees, non-refugees, the foreign born, and the total US population; and examines the progress of refugees — measured in 2000 and 2016 — that arrived from the former Soviet Union between 1987 and 1999. This section also references the growing literature on the US refugee program and on the economic and fiscal impacts of refugees. Section V discusses the important role of voluntary agencies in the resettlement process, focusing on the work of Catholic agencies in building community support for refugees and promoting their entrepreneurial initiatives. Section VI identifies the national interests served by the refugee program, recommends ways to address several of the program’s longstanding challenges, and urges the president, Congress, Americans with refugee roots, and other stakeholders to work to strengthen and expand the program.
Topic:
Nationalism, Refugees, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
United States

7. Matching Systems for Refugees

Author:
Will Jones and Alexander Teytelboym
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Design of matching systems between refugees and states or local areas is emerging as one of the most promising solutions to problems in refugee resettlement. We describe the basics of two-sided matching theory used in a number of allocation problems, such as school choice, where both sides need to agree to the match. We then explain how these insights can be applied to international refugee matching in the context of the European Union and examine how refugee matching might work within the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Refugees, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
United States, United Kingdom, Europe, Canada, and North America

8. Strengthening the Global Refugee Protection System: Recommendations for the Global Compact on Refugees

Author:
Kevin Appleby
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
On September 19, 2016, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. This document launched a two-year process to develop a Global Compact on Responsibility Sharing on Refugees (“Global Compact on Refugees”) and a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration. With a record 65 million displaced persons in the world, the global community must come together to fashion a stronger protection regime for persons on the move. This paper outlines broad themes and specific recommendations that the Global Compact on Refugees should adopt on how to strengthen the global refugee protection system. The recommendations fall into several categories: (1) responsibility sharing for the protection of refugees; (2) filling in protection gaps; (3) balancing and replacing deterrence strategies with protection solutions; (4) refugee resettlement; and (5) building refugee self-sufficiency. Some of the key recommendations include: the development of a responsibility-sharing formula to respond to large movements of refugees; the development of an early warning system to identify and respond to nations in crisis; the adoption of principles included in the Nansen and Migrants in Countries of Crisis initiatives; the use of temporary protection measures to protect populations that flee natural disaster; the adoption of model processes that ensure safe and voluntary return; cooperation between destination and transit countries to expand refugee protections; the provision of asylum and due process protections at borders; the use of development assistance to ensure the self-sufficiency of refugees; the adoption of a goal to resettle 10 percent of the global refugee population each year; the establishment of a refugee matching system between refugees and resettlement countries; and the adoption of coherent strategies, involving all sectors, to address large movements of refugees. This paper draws heavily, albeit not exclusively, from a series of papers published as a special collection in the Journal on Migration and Human Security[1] on strengthening the global system of refugee protection.
Topic:
Migration, United Nations, Refugee Crisis, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Where There's a Will, There's a Way: Safe havens needed for refugees from Syria

Author:
Evelien Van Roemburg, Alexandra Saieh, and Daniel Gorevan
Publication Date:
12-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Oxfam's research shows that less than three percent of the Syrian refugee population have actually arrived in rich countries through resettlement programmes. By analysing resettlement policies and practices in eight key countries, looking at capacity (i.e. investment in staff and facilities), security procedures, resettlement criteria and the general political climate towards refugees, this paper shows why resettling at least 10 percent of the refugee population from Syria is both necessary and possible.
Topic:
Migration, Refugees, Displacement, and Resettlement
Political Geography:
Middle East and Syria