Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- List of Illustrations -- List of Acronyms -- Maps -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- Part I: Context -- 1. Refugeehood in Africa -- 2. Refugee Studies -- 3. African Refugee Studies -- 4. Human Rights Instruments on African Refugees -- 5. States and Policy Frameworks -- Part II: Making Refugees -- 6. Colonialism and the Making of Refugees in Africa -- 7. Postcolonial Politics, Wars, and African Refugee Problems -- 8. Internal Displacement in Africa -- Part III: Displaced Lives -- 9. Refugee Camps and Settlements in Africa -- 10. Urban Refugees -- 11. African Refugee Women: Gendering Policy and Protection -- 12. African Refugee Youth -- 13. Hope in Displacement: Refugees and Cultures of Creativity -- Part IV: Protection and Solutions -- 14. Refugee Protection and Management -- 15. Durable Solutions and the Crisis of Development -- 16. Home, Return, and Postrelocation -- Part V: Conclusion -- 17. Citizenship, Rights, and Development -- 18. The Future: Ending Africa's Refugee Crisis -- Bibliography -- Index -- About the Author.

Abstract
In its efforts to control the mobility and whereabouts of its refugee populations, Turkey enforces registration requirements for refugees, tying refugee rights to continuing residency in a particular province. Drawing on the literature on rescaling of borders and illegalization of refugee mobilities, this article argues that the Turkish asylum regime creates internal borders, producing the province as the key legal geography of asylum. Based on qualitative data collected in 2018–19, this article illustrates that refugees gain their liminal legality only at the scale of the province. As a result, Turkey systematically creates a type of refugee illegality defined relative to internal borders. Unauthorized presence outside the province through illegalized, yet mundane, mobilities makes refugees susceptible to forced relocations to other provinces, detention centres, and refugee camps.

Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork conducted in Sweden, Finland, Greece, and Bulgaria during 2015-2019, this study examines one of the greatest challenges of our time—refugees. Refugee flows are not only something chaotic but also something that is organized. In this study, the phenomenon is referred to as organizing refugees: an actor-network that consists of people, their practices, supporting non-human actors, held together by a narrative. Organizing is a verb and implies that something is constantly being made, i.e. refugees are made through interactions between the refugees themselves, other people and non-human actors. Instead of viewing refugees as a means to explain something else, this study takes refugees as a variable that needs to be explained. Accordingly, this research is an investigation of "refugees in the making." Conventional organizational research takes for granted certain approaches of engaging with, seeing, and writing about the "world," which results in the world (i.e. reality) being kept constant. By employing actor-network theory, particularly Mol's (1999; 2002) version, this study alters the notion of reality and tries to understand the world differently, i.e. as a multiple rather than a plural one. It is a dramatic shift. In this quest, I challenge the conventional organizational theories' idea of changing the epistemological conditions while keeping the reality (i.e. our perception of the world) constant. When something is made and re-made, it gives rise to different ontological worlds - it is not just about different perspectives. The organizing of refugees thus contains different, multiple, worlds - and they interact, although their coexistence always contains more or less frictions, or tensions. It is these tensions that this dissertation focuses on and it is where Mol's version of the actor-network theory is especially useful to understand the organizing of refugees. In other words, this is an investigation into how different practices and different worldviews interact in the making of refugees and what happens in those interactions. In this process, Organizing Refugees furthers Mol's (2002) work on multiplicity, analytically generalizes her conceptual tools, identifies—as well as accounts for—new "modes of organizing," and offers a time multiple approach to advance our understanding of organizing. Moreover, the analysis shows how understanding of the world as multiple creates new ethical and political opportunities for organizing refugees, i.e. what we should do and what opportunities we have to act differently. ; Nu är det Gröjersalen som rum men det kan ändräs till Zoom beroende på hur situationen utvecklas inom de kommande månaderna.

This article challenges the assumption that until relatively recently refugees or persons with lived refugee experience have not been involved in the development of international refugee law and policy. By drawing on primary source material – including the preparatory work for international legal instruments such as the 1933 Convention relating to the International Status of Refugees and the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, along with the operational work of the League of Nations, the International Refugee Organization and the early years of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees – this article argues that refugees and persons with lived refugee experience exercised significant influence and thought-leadership in the development of international refugee law and policymaking during the foundational years between 1921 and 1955. These contributions to the development of international refugee law and policy are significant because they not only reorient our understanding of the ways in which international law and policy pertaining to refugees has been developed and negotiated to date, but also because they provide a practical example of how refugees can more meaningfully be included in the creation of laws and policies that affect them going forward.

The United Nations' 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees attempted to define and, ultimately, protect refugees after World War II. However, government efforts to regulate the entry and reception of refugees and asylum seekers have throughout history been challenged by a variety of political, religious, and cultural pressures. The essays in this chapter reveal, through sometimes personal accounts of individual experiences, the plight of refugees in a number of countries around the globe in obtaining human rights protection and social justice.

It is generally accepted by the community that nations have obligations to protect refugees. This tradition has long roots in Western thought spanning across centuries of political and religious oppression despite its various shortcomings. The origins of the legal and moral obligations towards refugees is beyond the scope of this paper. It suffices to point out that helping refugees is a valance issue. Like promoting peace and cleaning up the environment, helping refugees has primarily advocates. However, there is frequent and at times bitter disagreement as to how one should approach this issue in practice. Among the most disputed issues are (1) hammering out a definition of a 'refugee', (2) determining who defines and implements this definition, (3) halting the flow of refugees, and (4) creating an international regime to effectively deal with refugees. The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss various definitions of what is a refugee as a precondition of both, political analysis and political action. The controversy of defining a refugee is deeply entangled with the sovereignty of individual nations. The paper concludes by offering an alternative perspective for analyzing the current international refugee crisis.