Displacement, host governments' policies, and constraints on the construction of sustainable livelihoods

TLDR: The authors argue that refugee status rarely leads to acquisition of nationality or denizenship, and rights and sources of livelihoods basic to warding off poverty are accessible only to nationals, and that not belonging to a spatially bounded community or geo-political entity is the single most important factor preventing formulation and implementation of long-term development programmes that enable refugees to recoup the losses they incur in connection with displacement and to construct sustainable livelihoods in countries of asylum.

Abstract: This paper examines the structural and institutional factors that preclude the ‘‘risk prevention’’ and rehabilitation strategies of the best-known victims of displacement, refugees. Though restrictive refugee policies are increasingly becoming common worldwide (Frelick 2001, GoodwinGill 1999), drawing on the experiences of refugees in many developing countries, I argue that refugee status rarely leads to acquisition of nationality or denizenship, and rights and sources of livelihoods basic to warding off poverty are accessible only to nationals. Not belonging to a spatially bounded community or geo-political entity is the single most important factor preventing formulation and implementation of long-term development programmes that enable refugees to recoup the losses they incur in connection with displacement and to construct sustainable livelihoods in countries of asylum. Refugees are people who flee their homes against their will because they fear for their lives. When refugees flee, they incur immense losses in life-sustaining resources, including social support networks, neighbours, friends, relatives, cultivable and grazing lands, livestock, jobs, houses, and access to common property resources such as forest produce, surface water, wild fruits, roots, and wildlife. In most rural societies, there is a strong sense of close interdependence between individuals, or their descent group, and the land with which that group is traditionally associated. In some of these communities land is neither divisible nor alienable – it is held in perpetuity. In such societies, land is the centre-piece of cultural systems, and its meaning incorporates people, traditions, customs, values, beliefs, institutions, soil, vegetation, water, and animals. Land and/ or house possession in one’s place of origin is seen not only as a wealth-creating and livelihood-sustaining resource, but also as the basis of status and identity. In such societies, belonging to a particular place is necessary for being rooted and therefore for acquiring land.