This study delves into the complex dynamics of waiting for resettlement faced by refugees in Kenyan refugee camps, specifically focusing on the strategies individuals and communities develop as they navigate uncertain futures. By examining the psychological, social, and economic dimensions of waiting, the publication sheds light on the resilience and adaptability of refugees in the face of prolonged displacement and uncertainty of resettlement.

Abstract

For many refugees, going home is not possible because of continued instability and local integration is unavailable due to host country policies, so resettlement becomes the only possible “durable solution” to displacement. In Kenya, despite long-standing resettlement programmes, there remain over 588,000 refugees and asylum seekers living in the country. While most studies of resettlement focus on those who resettle, this paper sheds light on the perspectives of those who are still waiting in Kenyan camps for resettlement: those who have “not yet” and perhaps will “never” be resettled. Through focus groups and interviews with 75 refugees in the Dadaab refugee camps, Kakuma Refugee Camp, and Kalobeyei settlement, we find that camp residents experience waiting for resettlement individually and communally. Individually, camp residents assess options, place life plans on hold, and face the mental health consequences of prolonged uncertainty. Communally, camp residents interpret policy changes, share information, and exchange remittances.

This research was co-produced with equal participation of researchers with lived experiences of displacement, currently residing in Kakuma and Dadaab, Kenya. This work is essential for scholars, policymakers, and practitioners working in refugee studies, migration, and humanitarian aid.

We hope this research sparks meaningful conversations and contributes to advancing our understanding of displacement, waiting for resettlement, and resilience in refugee communities.

Related Publications

Policy Brief: Waiting for Resettlement Increasing Transparency in the Resettlement Process in Kenya

By Parin Mistry, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University

Executive Summary

Although 80% of the world’s refugees are hosted in the global South, the majority of research in forced migration studies is produced and disseminated by researchers and institutions in the global North. The asymmetry of power in knowledge production is not limited to the North-South divide, but it also occurs between researchers and their research subjects (refugees). This type of hegemonic scholarship plagues all aspects of the research process, from the choice of methodology and research questions to the publication and dissemination of findings, and reflects the privileged position of global North scholars. Given the geopolitical context within which refugees find themselves situated, addressing these challenges is especially urgent as refugees, impacted by both displacement and immobility, are the most impacted by the consequences of policy decisions, yet are furthest removed from the processes of policy creation.

This paper attempts to demonstrate how understandings of the temporal, spatial, and embodied aspects of displacement and forced migration may be enhanced through a renewed approach to research that excavates hidden agency and power hierarchies, as well as the challenges and limitations of pursuing such diverse methods to knowledge production. It conducts an interdisciplinary analysis of knowledge production, drawing on the theoretical insights of development studies, feminist studies, and Indigenous studies to make visible structures of power and oppressive practices within forced migration research. It examines what sorts of best practices are available and makes recommendations for how they can be wielded to navigate and dismantle the dominant structures of knowledge production in forced migration research.

Read the full Working Paper here:

Salma Essam El Refaei, PhD Student, Department of Political Science, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University

Executive Summary

In the recent years, collaborative partnerships between research centres in the Global North and the Global South became one of the central spaces for producing knowledge on refugee issues.

In this literature review, Salma Essam El Refaei, a PhD student at �Ӱ�ԭ�� University, analyzed the Forced Migration field to study how these partnerships evolve, as well as their findings and impact to locate possible solutions to the challenges that research partnerships and networks face.

Research shows that partnerships can be effectively transformative, if research partners approach the collaboration as a means towards producing knowledge. It is also important for research partners to engage self-critically in an evaluation of what they are contributing to the partnership and simultaneously assess how they might be compromising the equality of the research collaboration, given the power asymmetries between the Global North and the Global South.

This entails being transparent, inclusive and reflective. It means that both partners need to be aware of the dangers of ‘empowerment’ and how power inequalities are subliminally reproduced through language, culture and logistics. It also is imperative to avoid framing and engaging with the southern partner as the gate keeper to subversive knowledge or the spokesperson to refugees in the Global South.

Transformative research partnerships need to constantly assess the extent to which they are ethical, mindful, and aware of the power inequalities they are reproducing. They need to reflect on the extent to which they are contributing to the betterment of living conditions for the refugee populations they are studying or working with. Finally, it is important that research partnerships remain flexible, creative and refugee oriented.

View the full LERRN Working Paper Series here:

DOI��

Citation��

El Refaei, S.E. (2020). Global Rsearch Partnerships: Beyond the North-South Divide? A Literature Review. Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN). .

Dina Taha, PhD Candidate, York University

Executive Summary

This literature review highlights migration and refugee research engaged with intersectionality as a critical framework that challenges homogenizing experiences and categories in the global refugee context. Intersectionality seeks to enable the analysis of multiple experiences, recognize multiple and fluid identities that are context dependent, and demonstrate how such identities intersect to create disadvantages as well as privileges for different individuals. An intersectionality framework has the potential reveal the systematic discrimination in refugee and migration policies and systems, point to disparities in accessing durable solutions, highlight oppression as well as emancipation due to refugee-ness, and challenge rigid labels and categories. After recognizing the gender blindness in the 1951 Refugee Convention, a growing number of international and domestic policies began paying more attention to refugee women and gender-based violence. One prominent example is the UNHCR’s Age, Gender and Diversity policy, which aims to consider the implications of policies and programs for male and female refugees of different ages and from different social groups. Feminist scholarship has offered important insights into the lived experiences of refugee women. Critical literature within refugee studies has questioned the ability of the “refugee” label and other categories to capture the complex social realities of the people on the move, instead engaging with how refugees self-identify and define their own situations. Decolonial approaches explore new methodologies (such as community-based participatory research) and the power dynamics inherent in North-South research partnerships that often reproduce hierarchies. Overall, an intersectional approach highlights that “refugees” are a diverse group and refugee experiences are shaped by multiple identities such as gender, race, national origin, class, age, (dis)ability and sexual orientation. Refugee policies and programs must be flexible to take into account this diversity of experiences instead of applying a singular universal approach for all refugees.

View the full LERRN Working Paper Series here:

DOI

Recommended Citation

Taha, D. (2019). Intersectionality and Other Critical Approaches in Refugee Research: An Annotated Bibliography. Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN).

Merve Erdilmen, PhD Student, Department of Political Science, McGill University

Executive Summary

This paper provides a brief review of the literature on the link between humanitarian and development approaches to durable solutions for refugees. By shedding light on the meaning, scope, and timing of durable solutions; strengths and shortcomings of traditional durable solutions; the emergence of alternative solutions; intersectional approaches to durable solutions; and the roles of international organizations, non-governmental organizations, as well as refugees themselves in the pursuit of durable solutions as they relate to the humanitarian-development nexus, the paper aims at examining the gaps in the literature and avenues for future studies and policies. The paper has three main findings. First, while the literature on the humanitarian-development nexus as it relates to durable solutions has received remarkable interest from scholars and policymakers, the links between the humanitarian approach to emergencies, durable solutions for refugees, and development lenses on the solutions are not always clearly examined in the literature. Second, the extensive literature on the durable solutions to displacement appears to focus mostly on experiences of flight and displacement and remains limited in exploring the struggle for solutions. Finally, most of the work on durable solutions studies solutions in the Global North, which is the destination only for a small proportion of refugee populations, rendering the focus on the pursuit of solutions within the Global South limited. There is a need for a deeper understanding of which “solutions” work in which contexts, recognizing the difficulty of reaching general conclusions about processes that are shaped by context-specific histories, cultures, socioeconomic conditions and experiences. It is also important to articulate the gap between refugees’ everyday practices and the policies of international organizations that contribute to solutions, the meaning of achieving a solution, and the perspectives that guide the conversation on the humanitarian-development nexus as it relates to durable solutions for refugees. The fundamental questions like solutions for who, by whom, how, and when deserve more attention, especially within the context of the Global South.

View the full LERRN Working Paper Series here:

DOI

Citation

Erdilmen, M. (2019). Durable Solutions and the Humanitarian-Development Nexus: A Literature Review. Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN).

Midori Kaga, PhD Candidate, School of International Development and Global Studies, University of Ottawa

Delphine Nakache, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa

Executive Summary

Attempts to bridge the Humanitarian-Development (HD) nexus are not new, but in recent years this idea has received renewed interest in light of the failure of traditional approaches to adequately respond to and manage complex, protracted crises. While these major policy shifts take place at the global and national levels (for example, see the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit, the Grand Bargain, the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees, or the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP)), few studies have considered the implications that an HD approach could have on one of the core mandates of humanitarian assistance: protection. This literature review therefore examines the potential protection implications of an HD approach to complex, emergency situations. It discusses current gaps and areas for future research that were identified in our review of the literature. Highlighting both the risks and benefits that this approach could have towards the protection outcomes for affected persons, we find that these outcomes largely depend on who is involved and whose interests are prioritized in decision-making processes in an HD approach. Consequently, this approach raises additional questions that lead us to an unresolved and ongoing debate within the humanitarian sector around its role in non-traditional humanitarian situations. This debate centres around whether the humanitarian sector should maintain a needs-based approach or shift towards a rights-based approach, which in turn raises important questions about when (and which of) the humanitarian principles are relevant and what protection really means, particularly when the perspectives of other stakeholders – such as affected persons – are taken into consideration. These issues remain unresolved and become complicated by the addition of multiple actors (humanitarian, development, civilian, private, affected persons etc.) with different roles, interests and mandates in an HD approach. We therefore propose that both the humanitarian and development sectors engage with the concepts, objectives and principles behind this debate head-on, in order to strengthen our understanding of what they mean practically. As HD approaches are likely to become the new way of addressing complex crises, finding clarity on how humanitarian and development actors can work together through shared principles and objectives is critical to ensure that affected persons are adequately protected.

View the full LERRN Working Paper Series here:

DOI

Citation

Kada, M., Nakache, D. (2019).Protection and the Humanitarian-Development Nexus: A Literature Review. Local Engagement Refugee Research Network (LERRN).