LSE’s Marina Elgawly discusses Uganda as a potential model for addressing the refugee crisis globally

Elgawly, Marina

LSE Research Online

1.2.2017Uganda’s Exceptional Approach to the Refugee Challengeblogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2017/02/01/ugandas-exceptional-approach-to-the-refugee-challenge/LSE’s Marina Elgawly discusses Uganda as a potential model for addressing the refugee crisis globally.October 2016 marked the full dismantlement of “the Jungle”, the notorious refugee camp in Calais that had cometo symbolise the failure of EU refugee and migrant policy. The squalor of Calais brought to light the currentrhetoric which surrounds the global approach towards the refugee crisis. Refugees are often framed as societal‘burdens’ to be shared. More often they are seen as security threats, their presence understood as a danger tohost communities. Around the world, mainstream refugee policies approach the crisis as a zero-sum issue. InJordan, refugees face restricted access to education , while in Germany, they face restricted access tohealthcare. In Lebanon, refugees face residency regulations that prevent them from renewing their residencypermits, putting them at risk of arrest and ill-treatment by authorities. In Kenya and Ethiopia, they face restrictedfreedom of movement and, in turn, restricted access to employment.Uganda represents a bright spot in this bleak global landscape of refugee despair. Rather than packing refugeesinto quasi-permanent tent camps, which are often in austere locations like deserts, and miles away from localcommunities, “Uganda has chosen a policy of inclusion over marginalisation”. Refugees are provided with afertile parcel of land to cultivate, as well as a “starter kit”, which includes seeds to plant food and constructiontools to build a home. If they wish, they may lease other parcels of land and open their own businesses.Refugees in Uganda have the same access to public services, like schools and healthcare clinics, as Ugandannationals. They are even allowed to vote. The Ugandan model poses a sharp contrast with the restrictiverefugee policies of other countries such as Jordan, where refugees often cannot leave their camps, or Turkey,where refugees cannot work without acquiring costly short-term work permits, rendering them vulnerable toexploitation.A refugee settlement in Nyumanzi, UgandaPhoto Credit: Geno Teofilo/Oxfam via Flickr (http://bit.ly/2jnCfBa) CC BY-NC-ND 2.0While refugee policies in many countries tend to focus on redirecting substantial responsibility to neighbouringcountries, Uganda’s refugee policy addresses key post-displacement development issues. Granting refugeesfreedom of movement means they are not bound to one place indefinitely. And more mobility means more self-sufficiency. Running businesses, trading goods and farming reduce the need for government handouts and allow1/2refugees to lead sustainable livelihoods, discouraging dependency. Host communities benefit too: as refugeesare able to build new lives as small-scale entrepreneurs, they can contribute to the local economy.The development of the Nyumanzi market is just one of the encouraging narratives that illustrates this enablingenvironment. The market, which is shared between South Sudanese refugees living in the Nyumanzi RefugeeSettlement and Ugandan nationals, stands as a hub of cultural coexistence and diverse entrepreneurship. Day-to-day interactions between the locals and refugees catalyse local integration and assimilation of refugees intotheir host communities. Such cooperation leads to community resilience. Intermarriages have also even beenreported.Uganda’s refugee management system is not immune to error. Despite a liberal legal framework, first- andsecond-generation refugees under the Ugandan constitution remain unable to acquire full citizenship. Forrefugees who cannot resettle elsewhere, the barrier to naturalisation poses a major limitation to human security.Refugees with homes and businesses in Uganda face a sense of uncertainty: should their refugee status lapse,they risk eviction from the settlement towns. In such situations, refugees’ fear of being forced “home” is nohyperbole. As long as they cannot attain full citizenship, a long-term solution in settlements is still out of reach.Nevertheless, the success of the Ugandan model of self-reliance lies in its ability to exemplify that ‘their’ sufferingdoes not equivocally translate into ‘our’ burden. The reality is that local populations and communities can benefitfrom a refugee presence. Refugees do not have to be a perceived as a drain on our economy. They do notsimply steal jobs from locals; they can contribute, but only if we let them.It will be difficult to persuade host states that alternatives to camps are not only better for refugees, but can alsobenefit the local economies and communities. As we approach year six of the Syrian refugee crisis, Europe andparts of the Middle East still struggle to cope with the increasing influx of refugees. The issue remains whetherhost governments will continue to rely on the stagnant narrative of humanitarian assistance vis-à-vis dependencyand charity aid, or whether they will grant refugees with autonomy and sustainable living solutions. Uganda hasprovided the opportunity to transform how we talk about refugees. Whether or not there is global will to expandthe choice set we offer refugees is one of the pressing questions facing our world, and it is yet to be answered.Marina Elgawly is a MSc candidate in International Relations at LSE. The views expressed in this post are those of the author and in no way reflect those of the Africa at LSEblog or the London School of Economics and Political Science.2/2

Uganda’s exceptional approach to the refugee challenge

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online