published_or_final_version / Comparative Asian Studies / Master / Master of Arts

published_or_final_version / abstract / Asian Studies / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Investment in addressing structural stigma and discrimination against refugees in resource-poor urban areas is both needed, and possible. The large population of refugees residing in resource-poor urban areas is likely to grow, and tensions in a number of settings are now documented. Without interventions to adequately address such tensions, both the protection needs of refugee populations and the stability of hosting countries could be affected. Through qualitative analysis of an urban refugee dataset in Uganda, this dissertation identified community-level drivers of structural stigma and discrimination as safeguarding one’s body and property, defending status, and perpetuating exploitation. The designs of potentially successful programs to address these drivers were then identified though systematic review, and included one or more of the following: 1) the utilization of multiple intervention components; 2) direct information provision (e.g., lecture, role-play, other active engagement) or direct contact with stigmatized groups; 3) cooperative work between community members and stigmatized groups to better livelihoods; 4) popular opinion leaders who have authority to make change, and 5) traditional ceremonies valued by the communities for cleansing and healing. One such design involving an agricultural livelihood program in a resource-poor urban area of the Northeast United States was costed, utilizing a primarily bottom-up approach and a societal perspective in the collection of both financial and economic costs. The unit cost per participating family was significantly lower than government services that provide comparable nutritional support, but did not include components of working with the community to reduce stigma and discrimination. Thus, the studied program provided more services for a lower cost. In addition, it empowered stigmatized refugees to advocate for and support themselves, and engendered goodwill in the community by involving community members to work alongside refugee participants, improving upon a neglected piece of land, and providing fresh produce. Further research is needed to better measure the social and financial dividends of programs to address structural stigma and discrimination, particularly against urban refugees. Such research can only come in tandem with further investment, the imperative and potential of which are compellingly clear.

Includes bibliography.

The situation of Somali Bantu refugees has been studied in the USA and, to a lesser degree, in the refugee camps of Kakuma and Dadaab, but not in self-settled urban contexts in East Africa. This qualitative study, a needs assessment of the Somali Bantu refugee community in Nairobi, Kenya, contributes towards filling that gap in the literature. Participant observation and semi-structured interviews with both Somali Bantu refugees and staff of refugee-serving NGOs in Nairobi provided rich ethnographic data. Research questions focused on perceived needs and assets of refugees, community support structures, and NGO services available to Somali Bantu refugees. The results of the study showed how systems of marginalization and oppression found within Somalia are reproduced within the urban refugee environment of Nairobi. It also revealed how this marginalization was exacerbated through the systems set up by refugee-serving NGOs. However, the study also demonstrated refugee agency and aspirations, revealing strategies employed by individual refugees to improve their situation as well as multi-local and transnational kinship networks of mutual support.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Michigan State University. School of Social Work, 2008. / "This study used a mixed methods research design that employed both qualitative and quantitative research methods to explore the impacts of social and demographic characteristics on acculturative stress and psychological distress in 27 adult female Liberian refugees living in Lansing, Michigan." Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Aug. 19, 2009) Includes bibliographical references (p. 169-179). Also issued in print.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Edinburgh, 2005. / Includes bibliography (p. 323-332). Also available in print format.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University, 2008. Graduate Programme in Women's Studies. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 274-288). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:pqdiss&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:NR39005

Resettlement is one of three durable solutions, which the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) uses to achieve refugee rotection. Refugees are assumed to locally integrate, voluntarily repatriate or resettle. Too many of the world's refugees, however, are left to linger in non-durable conditions in countries of first asylum that are often only minimally safer than the countries they have fled. Where neither local integration nor repatriation is possible, resettlement is the only option. Resettlement requires a third country to be willing to accept refugees into its territory. While signatory states to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention) are obliged not to refoule asylum seekers at their borders, they have not committed to accept refugees for resettlement. By geographic distance, presumptions of safety, and a lack of legal obligations, those refugees who fail to make it to the frontiers of safe states are simply not seen. These refugees remain so far removed in a vague, far-off realm that they are rendered invisible. Their invisibility is reflected in the 1951 Convention's silence on obligations to them, the dearth of academic examination of resettlement, and media and government attention only in the celebratory act of making a small number of such refugees visible and legal, through the act of bringing them within a protective state's borders. Despite their invisibility, the protection needs of those refugees left outside the borders of safe states remains. The goals of this thesis are therefore to create visibility and increase resettlement. Resettlement is examined from its theoretical motivations, historical origins, current manipulations, and future possibilities - both generally and through an examination of the Canadian scheme. The thesis closes with recommendations for resettlement reform. They are targeted at UNHCR, the international community, national governments, and Canada in particular. For resettlement to offer a fair mode of protection a comprehensive and global model of resettlement must be designed and, ultimately, implemented. / Law, Peter A. Allard School of / Graduate

The South African Refugees Act1 makes a distinction between an asylum seeker and a refugee. The Act defines an asylum seeker as “a person who is seeking recognition as a refugee in the Republic”. A refugee on the other hand, is a person “who has been granted asylum” in the Republic.2 The legal position in South Africa is that before a person is recognized as a refugee, he or she is protected by the Bill of Rights to a certain extent. In the case of Lawyers for Human Rights v Minister of Home Affairs the Constitutional court confirmed that the protection afforded by the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, including illegal foreigners and asylum seekers.3 This means that asylum seekers and refugees are entitled to most of the rights in the Constitution except those specifically reserved for citizens. Practically though, a refugee enjoys more rights than an asylum seeker. It is therefore in the interest of asylum seekers to have their status as refugees determined. The process of applying for refugee status can be a challenge for those seeking refuge in the Republic of South Africa. For applicants coming from non-English speaking countries, language barrier can also present its own challenges. In terms of the Refugees Act, the first application is to the Refugee Reception Officer at the refugee reception office. The application must be made in person.4 When an asylum seeker is deemed fit to qualify for asylum, he or she will be issued with a permit in terms of section 22 of the Refugees Act. The permit allows the asylum seeker to temporarily reside in South Africa until the finalisation of the asylum claim. This permit does not mean that the asylum seeker is already recognised as a refugee. The permit is an indication that the asylum seeker’s application as a refugee is not yet finalised. The application is considered finalised when it has gone through the hearing before the Status Determination Officer and any review or appeal following from that decision. It is the Refugee Status Determination Officer who will grant asylum or reject the application.5 For people applying for refugee status, the determination by the Status Determination Officer may in itself mark the beginning of the process to be repatriated back to the country they were running away from in the first place. An aggrieved applicant can also apply to have the adverse decision reviewed or even lodge an appeal in accordance with the provisions of the Refugees Act.6 For as long as the application is still pending, the government cannot deport any asylum seeker. An asylum seeker who enters the Republic of South Africa, either through a port of entry or illegally faces many challenges before he or she could reach a refugee reception office. Those who come in through a port of entry face being turned away by Immigration Officers due to lack of documentation. Often, asylum seekers find it hard to reach the refugee reception offices as there is no co-operation between the Immigration Officers, the South African Police Service and the functionaries in the refugee reception offices. To make things worse, the Immigration Amendment Act has reduced the days from fourteen to five, for asylum seekers without valid documentations to reach any refugee reception office. Since refugee reception offices are located only in five cities in the country, these have conditioned asylum seekers and refugees to stay and make their living in those cities as they are required to make frequent renewal of their permit. The closure of some of the refugee reception offices like the Johannesburg refugee reception office has caused a major concern to asylum seekers and refugees. This persistent closure of refugee reception offices may be seen as a further persecution in the eyes of asylum seekers and refugees. The inability of the different functionaries to differentiate between asylum seekers and economic migrants adds to the problem concerning the process of refugee status determination. Instead of seeking to identify people in need of protection from persecution or events seriously disturbing public order, the process is used as an immigration control and this causes more people to be turned away or returned to countries where their lives may be at risk. The communication between the asylum seeker and all the functionaries of the Department of Home Affairs is very important. The lack of professional interpretation functionaries to help asylum seekers who need interpretation contributes to the problems asylum seekers face. Often, asylum seekers have to provide their own interpreters if the Department is unable to do so. The purpose of the study is to investigate the status determination process from a South African perspective and to make recommendations which will try to resolve the problem(s) identified. / Public, Constitutional, & International / LLM