Resettlement as a development discourse has become a worldwide phenomenon. This phenomenon is mainly caused by population pressure, war or prolonged hostilities between countries or groups within the country, irreversible environmental degradation and development projects. While there are diverse causes of resettlement situations, this study focused on state sponsored resettlement programmes caused by socio-economic, political and environmental problems in Amhara and the southern regions of Ethiopia. The main objective of this empirical study was to analyse the effects of planned government intra-regional resettlement programme on the sustainable livelihoods of resettled households in Ethiopia. The central research question was: Does a planned intra-regional resettlement programme provide sustainable livelihoods for settler households in the two selected regions of Ethiopia? If it does, what chain of factors explains the livelihood security and sustainability? If it does not, what are the interacting variables and how have they generated a process of livelihood insecurity? To this end, the combination of Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) and Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) models were used as the pillars of the theoretical and conceptual framework of the study. Mixed method design that combines both quantitative and qualitative data from primary and secondary sources were used in this study. Primary data were collected through a household survey, key informants interview, focus group discussion and field observation. A total of 250 households were surveyed and a total of 28 interviewees were contacted from the two regions. A total of 6 focus group discussions were also conducted with purposively selected participants. This study concludes that the effects of planned resettlement on the sustainable livelihoods of resettlers were mixed and challenged the generic representation of the scheme as a success or a failure. The adverse effects were mainly due to policy gaps, the mismatch between policy and practice, poor inter-sectoral and inter-regional integration and inadequate capacity building efforts. Recommendations were provided in line with these gaps. In addition, the knowledge documented through the application of SLF and IRR in mixed method design contributed to the methodological and theoretical advancement of resettlement and livelihood studies. / Development Studies / D. Litt. et Phil. (Development Studies)

Resettlement as a development discourse has become a worldwide phenomenon. This phenomenon is mainly caused by population pressure, war or prolonged hostilities between countries or groups within the country, irreversible environmental degradation and development projects. While there are diverse causes of resettlement situations, this study focused on state sponsored resettlement programmes caused by socio-economic, political and environmental problems in Amhara and the southern regions of Ethiopia. The main objective of this empirical study was to analyse the effects of planned government intra-regional resettlement programme on the sustainable livelihoods of resettled households in Ethiopia. The central research question was: Does a planned intra-regional resettlement programme provide sustainable livelihoods for settler households in the two selected regions of Ethiopia? If it does, what chain of factors explains the livelihood security and sustainability? If it does not, what are the interacting variables and how have they generated a process of livelihood insecurity? To this end, the combination of Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) and Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) models were used as the pillars of the theoretical and conceptual framework of the study. Mixed method design that combines both quantitative and qualitative data from primary and secondary sources were used in this study. Primary data were collected through a household survey, key informants interview, focus group discussion and field observation. A total of 250 households were surveyed and a total of 28 interviewees were contacted from the two regions. A total of 6 focus group discussions were also conducted with purposively selected participants. This study concludes that the effects of planned resettlement on the sustainable livelihoods of resettlers were mixed and challenged the generic representation of the scheme as a success or a failure. The adverse effects were mainly due to policy gaps, the mismatch between policy and practice, poor inter-sectoral and inter-regional integration and inadequate capacity building efforts. Recommendations were provided in line with these gaps. In addition, the knowledge documented through the application of SLF and IRR in mixed method design contributed to the methodological and theoretical advancement of resettlement and livelihood studies. / Development Studies / D. Litt. et Phil. (Development Studies)

Beim Blick auf die Migrationsgeschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland bzw. deren Vorgeschichte von 1945-49 lassen sich zwei große Zuwanderungsbewegungen von Deutschen aus dem Osten feststellen. Diese waren gekennzeichnet durch starke Zuwanderung in einem kurzen Zeitraum. Dabei handelte es sich zum einen um die aus dem Zweiten Weltkrieg resultierende Zwangsmigration der Vertriebenen und zum anderen um die nach dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs Ende der 1980er Jahre schlagartig für einige Jahre zu einer Massenbewegung anwachsende Zuwanderung der Aussiedler (seit 1993 Spätaussiedler). Vertriebene und die ab Ende der 1980er Jahre einreisenden Aussiedler/Spätaussiedler gelangten zu unterschiedlichen Zeiten in den Westen und trafen somit vor dem Hintergrund unterschiedlicher wirtschaftlicher und sozialer, politischer und kultureller Rahmenbedingungen ein. Allerdings handelte es sich bei beiden Gruppen um deutsche Staatsangehörige bzw. als ´deutschstämmig´ anerkannte Zuwanderer, die sich in ihrer rechtlichen Behandlung gravierend von anderen Zuwanderergruppen unterschieden. Sie wurden unter Berufung auf ein Kriegsfolgenschicksal sofort bzw. unter erleichterten Bedingungen eingebürgert, sie erhielten einen erleichterten Zugang zu sozialstaatlichen Leistungen und vor allem zahlreiche spezielle, materielle Eingliederungshilfen. Im Vergleich zu anderen Migranten waren die beiden Gruppen von Deutschen aus dem Osten somit deutlich privilegiert. Die Arbeit fragt danach, ob und inwieweit es Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in den Eingliederungsprozessen von Vertriebenen und den ab Ende der 1980er Jahre eingereisten Aussiedlern/Spätaussiedlern gibt und woraus diese resultieren.