This conference brought together refugees living in Kenya and in other countries to speak about inclusion and what it looks like from their perspective. The conference was a good example of “Nothing �Ӱ�ԭ�� us Without Us” since it gave refugees a platform in discussions and offered recommendations on how best to include refugees in discussions about policies and programs going forward. It engaged participants from Africa, Europe, and North America in the fields of academia, implementing agencies providing services to refugees, and funders (EUTF), to understand how migration has changed due to COVID. The conference also showcased art produced by refugees in partnership with local artists and supported by UNHCR. It was a very successful event that highlighted striking differences between Kakuma/Kalobeyi and Dadaab which relate to the framing of Dadaab as a security risk and a space about to disappear, and the framing of Kakuma/Kalobeyi as a space of self-reliance.

Event details and recordings available here.

On 9 June 2021, the Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN) and the (IDRC) hosted the sixth of their Webinar Series on Forced Displacement to focus on localized knowledge ecosystems. The goal of the webinar was to showcase early results of their project on Localized Knowledge Ecosystem in East Africa and the Middle East. Drawing on findings from Kenya, Ethiopia, Lebanon, and Jordan, panelists shed light on how localized knowledge ecosystems collaborate to produce, translate, and mobilize knowledge to influence forced displacement policy and practice. The webinar also considered the impact these ecosystems have had in shaping protection and assistance for refugees in camps and urban contexts.

The concept of ‘knowledge ecosystem’ emerges from technology studies and strategic management to refer to networks that form around specific technological, scientific, or societal challenges, or among geographically co-located organizations in complementary fields (Bray, 2007; Järvi et al., 2018). As the concept has not yet been applied to the field of forced migration, LERRN researchers developed a definition of ‘localized knowledge ecosystems’ based on preliminary discussions and research. James Milner, Project Director of LERRN, provided this working definition:

“In the context of forced migration, localized knowledge ecosystems include actors with lived experience, research actors, practitioners who produce and use knowledge on forced migration (including, but not limited to, NGOs/INGOs, research centers, institutes, networks and universities and academics) who coordinate with each other to advance new knowledge production within this system and translate and mobilize this knowledge to influence policy, practice, action and discourses, and narratives to advance the well-being of refugees.”

Panelists were careful to distinguish between ‘local’ and ‘localized’ and knowledge ecosystems. Whereas ‘local’ simply refers to research and knowledge production taking place within a particular jurisdiction, ‘localized’ refers to activities that are driven by local agendas and where local actors had power and decision-making over agendas and resources.

These issues are far from new in the field of refugee and forced migration studies. Over 20 years ago B. S. Chimni (1998) argued that the expansion of refugee studies in the 1980s was intimately tied to the rise of a ‘new approach’ in the global refugee regime. Driven by the interests of Northern researchers and policy makers, this approach entailed a shift away from the politics of rights and state responsibility, toward policies intended to contain refugees in the Global South. Chimni called on scholars to develop a ‘new new approach’ to knowledge creation which would be sensitive to the “distorted international division of intellectual labour” in order to construct more humane and effective policies to improve the lives of those affected by forced displacement. Since Chimni, calls for the decolonization of forced migration studies have grown louder.

The webinar illustrated how Chimni’s concerns are as relevant as ever. Nasser Yassin, Professor of Policy and Planning at the American University of Beirut, argued that reliance on external donors, IOs, and INGOs drastically impacts the character of knowledge ecosystems in the Lebanese context. It is donors and a handful of large international actors which define the research agenda and set the priorities, and who use their resources to disproportionately support outside researchers and organizations. This not only limits the ability of more localized networks to grow and advance their own priorities, but it can also lead to ‘research waste’ (duplication or irrelevant research) and ‘research fatigue’ (a general malaise or annoyance toward research). There is also a risk that, despite the protracted nature of most contemporary forced displacement crises, external actors will lose interest in a particular country or initiative. While, local actors take long-term view of displacement, with research that continues after international interest in displacement research in a particular context starts to fade. Emphasizing this central role that localized knowledge ecosystem play, Yasin concluded that “we need to nurture such ecosystems that exist in places like Lebanon, Jordan or in East Africa or even in East Asia.”

Panelists also highlighted the multi-scalar operations of dynamic knowledge ecosystems in East Africa and the Middle East. Linda Oucho, Executive Director of the African Migration Development Policy Center in Nairobi, demonstrated that in the case of Kenya and Ethiopia, there are different knowledge ecosystems at the macro, meso, and micro scales (Figure 1). The macro scale refers to the national level, which includes well-resourced actors like the national governments and large international organizations who (to varying degrees) use evidence and research to generate policy. The meso scale refers to the decentralized level that includes local governments, INGOs, and other actors who implement policies and programs, interact with displaced and local communities, and generate information, evidence, and feedback on their activities. Finally, the micro scale refers to smaller organizations at the local level who have limited resources and generally conduct activities in their own interest. It is at this level, among the communities most affected by forced displacement, that we find informal actors and networks that could and should play a greater role in knowledge creation.

Figure 1. Macro, meso, and micro localized knowledge ecosystem in Kenya. (Click to enlarge)

Kiya Gezahegne, Lecturer at Addis Ababa University, highlighted the example of Dagu – a traditional knowing and information sharing system used by the Afar People of Ethiopia. While this system has been used historically to spread news relevant to pastoral livelihoods, it is locally meaningful and holds promise for addressing issues of forced displacement.

Panelists also discussed how national political dynamics can impact the function of knowledge ecosystems. Zein Soufan, Social-Economic Development Specialist in Jordan, argued that while the Jordanian government has done well to influence the country’s refugee response plans and research agenda, there are jurisdictional dynamics which limit the full participation of municipalities. Specifically, the hierarchical nature of political authority leaves most of the country’s municipalities almost completely dependent on the national government for funding and policy guidance. This is not necessarily an insurmountable obstacle, but a factor that shapes the degree to which knowledge can be ‘localized’ to the ground level.

Soufan’s concerns touch on another important structural challenge that localized knowledge ecosystems in Lebanon, Jordan, Kenya, and Ethiopia face in influencing policy. Across the board panelists emphasized the disconnect between knowledge creation (at every scale) and the relatively insular practice of policy making. While Dulo Nyaoro, Senior Lecturer and Researcher at Moi University, highlighted that this can be improved through greater support to grassroots actors and increased collaboration among universities and other networks, which could create greater access to national and global policy making networks. How, when, and why forced migration policy networks interact with knowledge ecosystems was highlighted as a key opportunity for future research. Linda Oucho suggested that it is useful to study how evidence and research is ‘filtered’ as it moves from local, meso, to national scales. Still, as co-moderator Frederico Burone, Regional Director of Latin America and the Caribbean at IDRC, highlighted, the disconnect between research and policy may be the norm in the field of forced migration research that needs to be challenged.

When considering what lessons can be brought to scale, the primary recommendations echoed Chimni’s call for a ‘new new approach.’ Panelists underscored the prevalence of localized knowledge producers, mobilisers and users who are willing to take on greater control of knowledge ecosystems in forced displacement, and would benefit from greater support�� to ensure their substantive involvement in national and global policymaking. This will likely require changes in funding models and coordination mechanisms to create space, but also an appetite for different approaches. As Nasser Yassin emphasized, there is a need for more non-traditional research which could include more resources for citizen science, evaluations, pilots, and experimentation. Whether or not these inclusive shifts translate to concrete policy changes at national or global levels is another matter, but they possibly hold the key to the development of a decolonized discipline of forced migration.

This report was prepared by Tyler Foley, PhD Student, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University.

The LERRN-IDRC Webinar Series on Forced Displacement is coordinated by Jennifer Kandjii, LERRN Research Officer. For further information or ideas please contact us here.

The conference is a collaboration between the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The conference will bring-together researchers and policymakers from across the region to discuss “Human Mobility in the Context of COVID-19.”

The IGAD region includes Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda. The region hosts 4.2 million refugees and around 8.1 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), along with other forms of migration such as labor migration and displacement as a result of slow and rapid on-set climate change.

IGAD Members have been advocating for several examples of progressive refugee policy in recent years, such as the 2017 Djibouti Declaration on refugee education. on refugee education.

LERRN wishes Dulo every success at the conference. We look forward to reading his paper on this important topic.

As I am writing this piece, 201 people have tested positive for COVID-19 in Kenya. Nine have died while 25 have fully recovered. While it is too early to confidently conclude that it is the strict measures that the Kenya government has instituted that has suppressed the spread of Coronavirus, the numbers remain low and manageable. When the first case was reported on 14^th March 2020, the government quickly closed all schools, colleges and universities which together host about 15 million students and staff, this almost a third of Kenya’s total population of 47 million. Medical advice such as washing hands, using sanitizers, social distancing and wearing masks became a daily routine amplified by almost every media house and on social media. A week later the government banned public gatherings of more than ten people, imposed a dawn-dusk curfew and moved to limit public travel. The final move was to ban movement into and out of Nairobi, Mombasa, Kilifi and Kwale counties which together have the highest number of cases reported.

In the midst of all these, the Kenya government has acknowledged that the disease will affect groups and individuals differently depending on their vulnerability. The government has mapped out vulnerable groups who will need immediate assistance including the urban poor, the elderly and people with existing chronic conditions.

However, since the daily briefings started on the 16^th March 2020, no government official has mentioned or acknowledged the existence of almost one million refugees in Kenya, whether in the refugee camps or in urban centres. Yet the control measures put in place will probably affect them more than others. Several arguments can be made to verify this position.

First, refugee protection and humanitarian assistance in the entire East and Horn of Africa is coordinated largely from Nairobi. Stopping all movement into and out of Nairobi cuts off a crucial link between Nairobi and the refugee camps in Kenya and also activities in Somalia and ��South Sudan. Personnel in the UN related organizations, civil society groups and NGOs who work with refugees and asylum seekers are unlikely to move and reach their clients. While the movement of essential services such as food items and medical supplies remain open, the coordination becomes a nightmare when the concerned personnel cannot move. When I enquired from a government official, I was informed that food rations in the camp was to be increased as well as medical supplies, however a refugee contact denied receiving increased rations.

Second, refugees in camps in Kenya have to endure restricted movement most of the time. Further restrictions only worsen their situation. Refugees who had travelled to Nairobi cannot go back to the camps and those in the camps who planned to travel to Nairobi cannot. Often such travels are either for medical conditions, processing documents, security reasons or conducting interviews for resettlement. Refugees also travel to access remittances, a critical survival mechanism, in nearby towns. Since refugees have to supplement what they are given by purchasing food items from nearby towns, they are unable to do so now.

Third, urban refugees often live in precarious settings and constitute a large number of the urban poor. Yet some of them do not have proper identification documents that may help them access assistance from the government. Some prefer to remain anonymous. Many of them are in the informal economy living from hand to mouth. Some of the markets are closed, many informal businesses have been shut and government officials are paying particular attention to the informal settlements in Nairobi and other urban areas curtailing most of activities considered non-essential. Refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants therefore face grim choices due to the outbreak of Coronavirus. Due to these difficulties a refugee committed suicide near the UNHCR compound in Nairobi on 13^th April 2020.

However not all is doom and gloom. Some organizations and governments are offering support. For example, the government of South Sudan has offered to support their nationals who are students in universities and tertiary colleges by giving an allowance of USD 250 to pay for accommodation and subsistence during this period of lockdown. Kenya Red Cross is also reaching out to some of these vulnerable urban refugees. Yet, the Kenya government must appreciate the fundamental lesson that COVID 19 has spread across the globe; a threat to humanity anywhere is a threat to humanity everywhere regardless of nationality, social status, religious conviction or gender.

Dulo Nyaoro is the Director of the Peace and Reconciliation Institute at in Eldoret, Kenya and the lead of the LERRN Kenya Geographic Working Group.��

Loren Landau, Richa Shivakoti, Susan McGrath, Roula El-Rifai, and James Milner, at IDRC Offices, 5 September 2019��

The goal of the initiative is to work with partners in major refugee-hosting regions of the global South, which hosts 80% of the world’s refugees, to develop a plan to support sustainable, localized research capacity to better influence discussions on refugee issues in local, national, regional and global contexts.

Phase one of the project (September 2019 to January 2020) will map regions in the global South most affected by recurring and protracted instances of large-scale forced migration and the research ecosystems in these regions. Supported by a global advisory network of actors active in different regions of the global South, this phase will include research on models for sustainable research ecosystems and the challenges faced by researchers in the global South.

Phase two of the project (January 2020 to July 2020) will include field visits to priority regions identified in the mapping phase. These field visits will examine models for sustainability and impact in specific local and regional contexts.

Discussion with partners, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University, 5 September 2019

The project responds to four recent trends:

• The broad realization of the importance of localized research in developing new responses to enduring challenges relating to refugees and forced migration in the global South;
• The emerging recognition of the complex links between fragility and forced migration, the nexus between humanitarian responses, development and peace, and the need for holistic and people-centered approaches that respond to the complex nuances of local contexts;
• The critical importance of an inter-disciplinary and multi-sectoral approach to thinking about solutions, including analysis of the local political and economic environment in which refugee self-reliance, solutions, and programming with host communities will be pursued;
• The recognized value of a design that connects all stages of the research process to policy and practice in an organic way by fostering and sustaining dialogue between the research, policy and practitioner communities, in local, regional and global contexts.

“” has become a central theme in development and humanitarian policy and practice, especially since the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016. The need to engage host communities, refugee communities, and national actors across the humanitarian and development fields is equally central to the (GCR), which was affirmed by the UN General Assembly in December 2018. The GCR is premised on the understanding that responses to refugees are best pursued in partnership with host communities and in response to local conditions, opportunities and interests.

Localized knowledge and sustained research capacity in regions of refugee origin is a vitally important foundation for such localized responses to displacement, yet it is critically under-supported and often lacking in capacity in key refugee-hosting regions. While 80% of the world’s refugees remain in their regions of origin in the global South, well over 80% of research on refugees and forced migration that influences global policy discussions originates from scholars and research centers in the global North. The concentration of research capacity in the global North perpetuates this trend, while support for research centres in refugee-hosting regions in the global South has largely been crisis-driven and unsustainable.

More localized research on refugee and forced migration issues can contribute to more effective policy and practice, especially given the complex dynamics of displacement in fragile contexts and the need to integrate refugee responses into local, national and regional development and peacebuilding strategies.

This question was the focus of an event hosted by IDRC on 26 September 2018, in collaboration with the Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN). Featuring presentations from Dulo Nyaoro (Kenya), Maha Shuayb (Lebanon) and Jeff Crisp (UK), the event highlighted the challenges faced by researchers based in regions of origin and the many benefits that arise from supporting their leadership in discussions on issues relating to policy and practice.

Maha Shuayb, James Milner and Dulo Nyaoro, IDRC event, 26 September 2018

The event highlighted how researchers in key refugee-hosting regions in the global South currently rely on sporadic, project-driven funding and typically play a subservient role to scholars from the global North in the production of knowledge on refugee issues.

In contrast, the event illustrated how vibrant and sustained local knowledge brokers and networks are critical if the goal of localization of refugee policy and practice is to be realized.

The outcomes of the event reinforced the growing concern in the field of refugee and forced migration studies that the lack of sustainable support to research capacity in regions of refugee origins poses ethical and practical challenges to the development of more effective and legitimate responses to protection and solutions for refugees.

In 2012, for example, Loren Landau from the University of the Witwatersrand, argued that the lack of autonomous and reliable support for research capacity in the global South entrenches asymmetrical power relations and inequalities that marginalizes knowledge and perspectives from the global South. In the absence of equitable and sustainable support for research capacity, Landau argued that South-North research networks become “”

A core objective of LERRN and its collaboration with IDRC is to learn from these lessons and help support sustainable research capacity in regions of refugee origin that can, in turn, generate and promote new approaches to protection and solutions with and for refugees.

For more information on this initiative, please contact: LERRN@carleton.ca

Regional Forced Migration Training��participants in Nairobi, Kenya on the first day of the course

Organized by the Peace Institute at , under the seasoned leadership of the Institute’s Director, Dulo Nyaoro, the Regional Forced Migration Training offered a week-long intensive introduction to refugee and forced displacement issues to a select group of scholars, practitioners and policy makers from Kenya and beyond.

Dulo Nyaoro (2nd right) and some of the students that helped organize the week’s program

The training program was developed in cooperation with Kenya’s Refugee Affairs Secretariat, the Africa Migration and Development Policy Centre (), the Refugee Consortium of Kenya () and LERRN, with generous support from Partnership Grant program of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada ().

While the training program was built on a long tradition of offering foundations in refugee and forced migration issues for practitioners, policy-makers and journalists, this year’s program was truly unique and innovative as it included participants not only from Kenya but also from LERRN’s Working Groups in Tanzania, Lebanon and Jordan.

In this way, the course represented an exceptional opportunity for civil society actors from major refugee-hosting states in the global South to share experiences and develop more effective responses.

While more than 80% of the world’s refugee are hosted by states in the global South, most training opportunities on refugee issues are based in the global North. This creates significant barriers to participation for civil society actors so closely involved with responses to refugees as the cost of travel and access to visas for travel can be significant barriers.

The need to host a collaborative and comprehensive training program in the global South was identified by LERRN partners at the launch of the seven-year initiative in September 2018.

Members of LERRN’s Kenya Working Group, Nairobi, October 2018

LERRN is committed to understanding and enhancing the role of civil society to help realize meaningful protection and durable solutions with and for refugees.

For more details on the training program in Kenya, contact: LERRN@carleton.ca

For full story, .