Uganda has long promoted refugee self-reliance as a sustainable livelihood strategy with progressive land-allocation and free-movement-for-work policies. Framed as a dialogue with related Oxford University Refugee Studies Centre (“the Centre”) research on refugee economies, this article explores sustainable solutions that benefit refugees as well as the host populations that receive them. It explores the self-reliance opportunities that depend on the transnational, national, and local markets in which refugees participate. It acknowledges the Centre’s substantial work and welcomes its focus on economic outcomes. For Nakivale Refugee Settlement in Uganda, however, the discussion of “refugee economies” may not be complete without problematizing the effects on the host populations living alongside the refugees. Based on qualitative data collected at Nakivale in 2013 (concurrent with the Centre’s fieldwork), the article discusses the Centre’s market-based approach to refugee economies by emphasizing four essential considerations: Land distribution in Nakivale is not sustainable. Corruption strongly influences the refugee and host populations living in Nakivale. The impact on the local host population is not homogeneous. Among refugees, the Somali–Congolese relationship is exploitative, not amicable. This article discusses how Uganda’s refugee policies create economic profit for some but poverty for others. As a result, its welcoming open door is on the verge of collapse. The recommendations address alternative refugee-protection approaches that aim to lower the pressure on land allocation, enable a self-sustainable approach that protects the host population, and provide refugees with some degree of self-reliance. This discussion does not discount the Centre’s finding that entrepreneurship is an important part of such solutions. Instead, it addresses the challenges of using entrepreneurship as a durable solution — as long as Uganda’s dominant policy is self-reliance based on distribution of food and land and the refugees’ limited cultivation of that land. To addresses some of the obstacles for durable solutions in a way that protects both the refugees and the host population, this article makes four recommendations for policy and practice. With assistance from the international community, the Ugandan government should: Prioritize the welfare of its citizens who live in Nakivale in the national land-allocation strategy. Enact clear and consistent legislation regarding autochthonous land ownership and use of eviction policies, and design economic reforms to eliminate systemic corruption. Include non-agricultural income-generating activities in the self-reliance policy, and finance entrepreneurs through governmental or international funding. Allow refugees to move away from the settlement without loss of refugee status or access to assistance.
This article discusses methodological challenges in refugee studies through a case study of interactions between refugees and host-population in Nakivale Refugee Settlement, Uganda. The article suggest that one solution to the challenges identified is to make use of James C. Scott's theory of private and public transcripts to form an argument that public stories of victimhood are utilized strategically as a weapon of the weak to navigate the terrain of Nakivale. Victimhood is one of many social roles among the actors in Nakivale and the stories become performance narratives with shifting roles depending on the audience. To shift from a social pose as a hardworking refugee in everyday life to a public presentation of self as a refugee with uttermost needs to the researcher is a tactic move. We can successfully read and interpret how the actors in Nakivale navigate in a competitive terrain by listening to the meaning of the public stories, and thus also understand the powerful narrative(s) across the different groups that live within the settlement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.