Assisted Voluntary Return (AVR) programmes offer UK-government and EU-funded support and resettlement packages to asylum seekers and undocumented migrants to aid return to their countries of origin. These programmes have attracted criticism: in particular, a questioning of the return as ‘voluntary’. This study investigates how social inequality is discursively maintained and challenged within AVR, particularly in relation to two of its central aspects: the voluntariness of the programmes and clients’ opportunities to make informed decisions about return. I combine a discursive analysis of institutional written texts and ethnographic interviews with staff, with observations from the two organisations involved – the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and Refugee Action. Through an analysis of rhetorical-discursive devices, I show how power relationships are maintained and challenged, providing the institutional context for the client caseworker relationship. However, by exploring caseworkers’ positioning regarding ideological motivations for return and the gatekeeping relationship, I show how institutional, caseworker, and client power is negotiated and challenged by caseworkers. Addressing multilingualism, I show how caseworkers’ negotiation of top-down multilingualism and clients’ superdiversity may shape the environment in which clients are able to make informed decisions about return. I evidence how caseworkers are resourceful in challenging linguistic inequality, considering communicative strategies to increase clients’ opportunities to access information. The findings in this research provide detailed discursive evidence of how AVR occupies an ideologically contested space, but how caseworkers are able to effectively negotiate this space to offer impartial advice for people returning. This research considers how this client-institution relationship, and the voluntariness of return, is complicated both by the mixed motivations underpinning AVR programmes, and the superdiversity of clients. I consider what this may mean regarding problems of trust within the AVR programmes,and the difficulties the Home Office may face in its decision to bring the programmes inhouse from January 2016.

This thesis investigates asylum seekers/refugees’ orientations to belonging and identity. It is based on in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted among asylum seekers/refugees residing in Scotland between 2006 and 2008 and on a media monitoring of a number of UK newspapers. The interviews were analysed for interviewees’ orientations to feelings of belonging and identity with the UK, Scotland and homelands. They were also analysed for interviewees’ perceptions (beliefs and understandings) of newspapers’ reporting of asylum and importance to their sense of national belonging and national identity forming. The monitoring provided the context of newspapers’ reporting of asylum at the time of interviews. It enabled a small-scale examination of media content with reference to interviewees’ perceptions. The thesis explores two assumptions. Firstly, asylum seekers/refugees’ national belonging and national identity formations are complex and contingent upon their everyday ‘lived’ experiences. Secondly, asylum seekers/refugees’ belonging and identity formations, as social processes of citizenship, cannot be understood in isolation from the high visibility of the asylum issue in UK media. As an empirical study, therefore, its findings are deployed to critique policymaking, theoretical and media accounts of non-British citizens’ forms of belonging to, and identification with the British ‘nation’. It is suggested that, in addition to policymaking, there are other social circumstances that would facilitate ethnic minority migrants’ national belonging and national identity formations. These factors do not only account for the prioritising of Scottishness over Britishness, but also migrants’ ‘hyphenated’ identities. This thesis will therefore provide evidence suggesting that non-citizens (ethnic minorities), have their own meanings and agency of orientating to a feeling of national belonging and national identity that is nuanced and contingent on their experiences. The thesis does not aim to establish media causality. However, it highlights the fact that newspaper coverage can evoke responses from marginalised groups and provide the context from which identities are narrated and mobilised. The thesis will improve our understanding of the practices, meanings and contestations of belonging and identity that is grounded in the ‘lived’ experiences of noncitizens. This sociological dimension to ethnic minorities’ citizenship forming is not only poorly understood, but has been dominated by theoretical and policymaking accounts in the contemporary state.

In line with dominant Western discourses regarding mental health, research concerning the wellbeing of forced migrants has tended to take an individualistic, symptom-focused approach. Although not without value and utility, it is argued that this narrow focus has the potential to obscure other important experiences, processes and perspectives relating to forced migration, such as considering how refugees make sense of and respond to their experiences at individual and familial levels. For example, there is no known qualitative research within the UK - and little internationally - which explores how the experience of forced migration impacts upon individual and family wellbeing, from the perspective of parents. Hence the aim of this study was to widen the narrow focus regarding refugee wellbeing. A qualitative approach was adopted, with semi-structured interviews exploring the experience of fleeing home and its impact upon family life in the UK for six refugee mothers. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was selected as a suitable approach to data analysis. Three master themes emerged across participant data, namely: Loss as a constant companion to parenting; A shifting view of the self as a mother, and Taking the good with the bad in family life. A rich account of these master themes and corresponding subthemes is provided. Findings are discussed in relation to existing literature, alongside implications for clinical psychological research and practice, methodological considerations and suggestions for future research.

This thesis is concerned with the extent to which hostility towards asylum seekers/refugees frames advocacy talk. Using a dialogical approach, I analyse how the identities of asylum claimants are dealt with by refugee advocates, in order to counter this hostility. My analysis is based on the collection of publicity materials from four refugee organisations, and from Narrative Biographical Interviews conducted with their staff, volunteers and asylum-seeking clients. Using the notion of dialogical network, I demonstrate how hostility enters advocacy talk, how it frames contemporary advocacy representations of refugees, and how it is challenged. In particular, I use Membership Categorisation Analysis to analyse how members of these organisations, the staff, volunteers and campaigners, maintain or challenge the frames provided by the organizations in their publicity materials. I demonstrate how asylum seekers/refugees themselves deal with the hostility and to what extent they are complicit in maintaining or challenging both hostile and advocacy representations of themselves. Hostility routinely enters the publicity materials and is countered through formulations of refugee identities along the lines of biographical contrasts that work to make the hostility irrelevant. These contrasts are socially resourced, and are organised along a set of 'sympathy themes', whereby asylum seekers are represented as having little choice, as naïve, as victims of violence and as having poor mental health. However, advocates, in their interview talk, push the boundaries of these frames of representation. They present new challenges to established practices of refugee representation, and demonstrate that the moments of antagonism called for in the literature already exist within mainstream advocacy organisations. Similarly, the narratives shared by asylum seeker/refugee informants challenge established representations of refugee-hood, in both mainstream and advocacy practices, providing rich and diverse images of themselves which go beyond representations of 'mute victims'. These cracks, these moments of ethical antagonism, suggest new ways forward for refugee advocacy. Importantly, even within mainstream services, these are live issues for their members. The challenge is to make them visible.

Why do refugees in Africa's Great Lakes Region refuse to repatriate? This thesis offers a detailed examination of this question through a comparative study of Rwandan and Congolese refugee communities across three countries: Uganda, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The policies of international agencies and local governments are assessed against the lived experiences, responses, and perceptions of refugees through first-hand research, undertaken in eighteen sites across the region during extensive fieldwork conducted between 2009 and 2013. The pervasiveness and intensity of reactions amongst refugees against repatriation is forceful and striking. Conversely, it is aggressively promoted and implemented by international actors, home, and host states. The thesis examines the interactions that occur as refugees seek to remain 'in exile', whilst international actors and regional states seek to coerce them to repatriate, and investigates the mechanisms that underpin this stalemate. The principal chapters of this thesis address the themes of (i) acculturation, de facto integration, and de jure segregation; (ii) conceptualisations of rights secured through refugee status; (iii) information concerning homelands and its diffusion in exile; and (iv) experiences of return. It is shown that refugee communities are adept at articulating past and present grievances, and are critically aware of their human rights in the context of their exile. The international protection of exile is perceived as a pseudo-citizenship that secures more rights than those accorded citizens in their states of origin. These communities maintain a wealth of information concerning their homelands, the diffusion of this knowledge being determined by connections between sites of exile, shaping it into accepted and collective communal narratives. This collective consciousness of status selectively reinforces refugees' resolve against repatriation. When repatriation is forced or frustrated, its experience is integrated into communal narratives of persecution, generating further grievance and reifying resistance to return.

This thesis makes a historically grounded theoretical contribution to an emerging “critical” approach to refugee studies. Utilising the insights of Michel Foucault and Hannah Arendt, it seeks to reconceptualise academic and policy understandings of what has come to be known as “the refugee problem" through an examination and critique of its (implicit) conceptual foundations. The thesis proceeds through a series of historically-informed moves oriented by the relationship between power, subjectivity, and agency, and argues that the key to reconceptualising the refugee problem lies in understanding how these three concepts rely upon and reinforce one another in a particular historically contingent configuration. The objectives of this thesis are threefold and connected. First, it unpacks a deceptively unproblematic term, “the refugee problem” to reveal the complicity of understanding the “refugee (as) problem” in perpetuating the plight of increasing numbers of the world's population, despite the alleviation of the difficulties these people face being the professed goal of the refugee regime. Second, in so doing it contributes to a growing body of literature seeking to counter the voicelessness and abjection into which refugees and asylum seekers are cast. And third, on the basis of this, to begin a conversation about rethinking the nature of the “solutions” we seek to a reframed “refugee problem.” Engaging in a (Foucaultian) genealogical analysis of “the refugee problem”, the first half of the thesis charts the historically-contingent development of a distinct “refugee problem discourse”, revealing that the construction of refugees as passive victims of political forces is the effect both of such discourse and of the international refugee regime as a classificatory regime of truth and subjectivity, rather than an expression of any essential nature of “the refugee.” The thesis then turns to Hannah Arendt's work as a theoretical lens through which to reframe our understanding of the “refugee problem” and to investigate how to identify and open up creative forces for re-subjectification processes and “solutions” not tied to the classificatory and subjectivising logic of the refugee regime or sovereign state system.  Practices of rights claiming, and the City of Sanctuary movement in the UK are examined as two such processes, with the potential of posing “counter-narratives” of problems and solutions which challenge the technocratic, or population-management, approach of the refugee regime.

No description available.

Globally, twenty-seven countries have resettlement programs associated with UNHCR - representing commitments to the international refugee framework and domestic commitments to those refugees resettled. Since 1975, the US has resettled over three million refugees, including over 75,000 Bhutanese refugees since 2008 - more than all other countries combined on both accounts. The US Office of Refugee Resettlement has the mandate to 'make available sufficient resources for employment training and placement in order to achieve economic self-sufficiency among refugees as quickly as possible' (The Refugee Act of 1980). Nevertheless, their economic self-sufficiency and the intertwined ideas of employment and wellbeing remain little examined. A global systematic review of available high-quality evidence examined whether interventions affect resettled refugees' economic self-sufficiency and wellbeing. Although 9,260 citations were reviewed from a wide variety of academic, policy, and grey literature, no studies met inclusion criteria. This Campbell-registered systematic review concludes that evidence is insufficient to determine if programs affect resettled refugees' economic self-sufficiency and wellbeing. Subsequently, qualitative research explored existing interventions to improve the economic self-sufficiency of resettled refugees, their theories of change, and perceptions of effectiveness in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Program design follows a policy mandate and expects that initial employment leads to sustained self-sufficiency and wellbeing, albeit without measuring these outcomes or providing long-term assistance. The findings serve as a basis for future research and reveal programming implications for the Bhutanese refugee community in Pittsburgh and broadly for refugee resettlement. Next, a cross-sectional survey of 145 randomly selected Bhutanese refugees in Pittsburgh (a response rate of 92.9%) was conducted to provide groundbreaking demographics, rates of economic self-sufficiency, and correlates with improved outcomes. The population was overwhelmingly low-income with high usage of certain assistance such as food assistance. Both bivariate relationships and predictive models for employment, gross income, wages, assistance usage, and having 'enough' money to pay the bills were examined. Overall, these paint a complex picture, including the potential importance of neighborhoods, household size, and religious affiliation as well as a more typical picture of the importance of gender, education levels, and time in the country for certain measures of employment, earnings, and household self-sufficiency. The evidence-based perspective on the economic self-sufficiency of resettled refugees shows that little is known globally, including the potential for interventions to cause harm or success. Understanding the employment services and perspectives of economic self-sufficiency and wellbeing for the Bhutanese population provides a lens to view not only the challenges and successes of this population, but also national and international obligations. As one focus group participant stated, 'Government should understand the nature of the refugees arriving and put us with jobs that ... allow the life to sustain.'