Suchergebnisse

Complementary pathways have gained much prominence in recent global and European policy discussions as an innovative and new tool to broaden and scale up third-country solutions for refugees. Indeed, the need for ramping up access to durable solutions for refugees is pressing in the face of ever longer-lasting conflicts and far too low resettlement numbers. While complementary pathways are commonly considered as new legal pathways that need to be developed for refugees, thereby perpetuating the narrative of refugees needing support while neglecting their human and social capital, various examples show that refugees do possess and use existing pathways and seek individual solutions outside of the refugee regime—if their resources and networks allow them to do so. Based on various examples, this policy brief, therefore, argues that facilitating movement for forced migrants based on their human and social capital could become the key added value of complementary pathways. ; TRAFIG Policy Brief No. 3

In the quest for sustainable solutions to record global displacement, promoting displaced persons' self-reliance and supporting them alongside host communities in regions of displacement have become buzzwords in global and European policy discussions. But despite such pledges, TRAFIG research in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) finds that internally displaced persons (IDPs) in urban settings are largely ignored and unassisted by the state and international humanitarian and development interventions—and are proactively seeking their own solutions. The lack of institutionalised assistance means that IDPs mostly depend on the solidarity of others to be or become self-reliant. In this context, networks are a particularly important source of support and include assistance with locating housing and finding a job in Bukavu and with maintaining and harvesting crops in communities of origin. However, even with the benefits that these connections can bring, IDPs face serious challenges related to their displacement and contend with multiple types of limbo, making it difficult for many to truly overcome situations of protracted displacement. Findings thus point to the need for policies and practices that support urban IDPs in the DRC by helping them nurture and leverage their networks to unlock opportunities. The Policy Brief comes up with four central findings and recommendations: While networks constitute a significant source of support, for too many IDPs, such assistance is only temporary or insufficient to really overcome displacement. Humanitarian and development initiatives should aim to bolster resilient connections, which include informal (e.g.host families) and formal (e.g. churches and labour associations) networks. Many urban IDPs leverage resources in their home communities to make a living in the city. Development actors should support IDPs' efforts to maintain ties with their communitiesof origin and safeguard mobility between Bukavu and the surrounding rural regions. Not every IDP has a ...

Complementary pathways have gained much prominence in recent global and European policy discussions as an innovative and new tool to broaden and scale up third-country solutions for refugees. Indeed, the need for ramping up access to durable solutions for refugees is pressing in the face of ever longer-lasting conflicts and far too low resettlement numbers. While complementary pathways are commonly considered as new legal pathways that need to be developed for refugees, thereby perpetuating the narrative of refugees needing support while neglecting their human and social capital, various examples show that refugees do possess and use existing pathways and seek individual solutions outside of the refugee regime - if their resources and networks allow them to do so. Based on various examples, this policy brief, therefore, argues that facilitating movement for forced migrants based on their human and social capital could become the key added value of complementary pathways.

In the quest for sustainable solutions to record global displacement, promoting displaced persons' self-reliance and supporting them alongside host communities in regions of displacement have become buzzwords in global and European policy discussions. But despite such pledges, TRAFIG research in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) finds that internally displaced persons (IDPs) in urban settings are largely ignored and unassisted by the state and international humanitarian and development interventions - and are proactively seeking their own solutions. The lack of institutionalised assistance means that IDPs mostly depend on the solidarity of others to be or become self-reliant. In this context, networks are a particularly important source of support and include assistance with locating housing and finding a job in Bukavu and with maintaining and harvesting crops in communities of origin. However, even with the benefits that these connections can bring, IDPs face serious challenges related to their displacement and contend with multiple types of limbo, making it difficult for many to truly overcome situations of protracted displacement. Findings thus point to the need for policies and practices that support urban IDPs in the DRC by helping them nurture and leverage their networks to unlock opportunities.

Free movement within the Schengen area is a cornerstone of European integration—and indeed an essential part of the European way of life. However, this freedom of movement is limited for forcibly displaced people residing within the European Union (EU). European asylum systems are designed to suppress mobility, which actually prevents many asylum seekers from finding a 'durable solution'. In contrast, enabling legal mobility within and across EU countries, when paired with access to labour markets and ensuring the right to family life, can open new opportunities for forced migrants to settle into receiving communities and truly rebuild their lives. Based on TRAFIG research in Greece and Italy, this policy brief illustrates why mobility is important for displaced people and how it is being hampered by policies and practices. It then suggests strategic ways that policymakers can tap into the potential of mobility to provide additional solutions to protracted displacement in Europe. Key findings & policy recommendations: Migration policies of the EU and its Member States largely restrict the mobility of forced migrants. For practical and political reasons, states do deliberately move asylum seekers across national reception facilities and, to a lesser extent, to other EU countries. In both instances, the consideration of asylum seekers' preferences is limited. Displaced people in Europe use multiple opportunities to move, including irregular ones, to respond to constraints and to seek a solution – whether this means navigating (around) the asylum system, seeking livelihood opportunities and/or joining family and friends. However, this outward mobility does not always lead to upward mobility. Enabling intra-national mobility can equip more displaced people with opportunities to rebuild their lives. Easing reception-related movement limitations, promoting family-related and work-driven internal mobility and strengthening transportation infrastructure between camps and cities can improve livelihood and integration ...

Displacement is undoubtedly one of the greatest challenges facing the world today. At the end of 2020, more than 82 million people across the globe were categorised as forcibly displaced, whether remaining within their countries of origin or having crossed an international border. If this group were a country, it would rank 20th in the world in terms of population, right after Germany. An increasing number of refugees - 16 million in 2020, or 4 million more than in 2016 - find themselves in a long-term situation of vulnerability, dependency, and legal insecurity, lacking, or actively denied, opportunities to rebuild their lives. Such situations are termed 'protracted displacement'. While not captured in these statistics, internally displaced persons (IDPs) may also find themselves in situations of protracted displacement. While the protracted nature of many conflicts is a critical contributing factor, there is considerable room for improvement in policies and practices to more effectively address protracted displacement. This is where the EU-funded Transnational Figurations of Displacement (TRAFIG) research project has aimed to contribute. Undertaking more than 2,700 interviews with displaced persons, policymakers, and practitioners in 11 countries across the Middle East, East Africa, and Europe, the TRAFIG project investigated the reasons why people end up in protracted displacement situations and what coping strategies they use, thus identifying possible courses of action for policymakers. This handbook shares 10 takeaways for strengthening policy responses to protracted displacement that have emerged from this endeavour, with empirical examples and policy recommendations, as well as a non-exhaustive list of promising practices for inspiration. These 10 points centre on the TRAFIG project goal of identifying solutions that are better tailored to the needs and capacities of displaced persons.

Study for the LIBE Commitee ; This study, commissioned by the European Parliament 's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, assesses the operation and impact of the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism in its first multiannual programme (2014-19), with the aim of identifying what has worked well and developing recommendations to strengthen it. The past decade has presented multiple controversies involving the governments of Schengen states as well as EU institutions, leading to a persistent state of apparent crisis. The ongoing "Schengen crisis" is rooted in political changes and in structural shortcomings of the Schengen regime. Despite these obstacles, the resilience of the Schengen system should not be underestimated.

As displacement continues to rise globally, more and more people are 'stuck' in situations of protracted displacement, where they find themselves in a long-term situation of vulnerability, dependency and legal insecurity, lacking or actively denied opportunities to rebuild their lives. While the protracted nature of many conflicts is a critical contributing factor, there is considerable room for improvement in policies and practices to more effectively address protracted displacement - and an urgent need to strengthen responses. The complicated 'maze' of international, national and local laws, policies and practices often backfires, exacerbating precarity and preventing many displaced persons from finding sustainable solutions for themselves and from contributing to receiving communities. It is not only the widening gap between the scale of displacement and the solutions offered but also the diversity of individual profiles and experiences that underscores the urgent need to expand the range of solutions so that more displaced persons can find long-term prospects. A paradigm shift that places people at the heart of solutions, meaning that countries enable displaced persons to make use of their own capacities, would open new doors for people to become 'self-reliant'. Such an approach is not only vital for addressing existing protracted situations - but it can also help prevent those more recently displaced from finding themselves in protracted situations in the future. The lessons below highlight critical entry points for European stakeholders seeking solutions for (protracted) displacement.

Establishing a secure livelihood is a key element that enables refugees to rebuild their lives and overcome protracted dis placement situations. Not only can a steady source of income help refugees afford housing, food and other basic necessities, it can also facilitate their integration by connecting them with others in the community. While some seek jobs in existing organisations or businesses in the formal or informal economy, others create their own enterprises from scratch. This policy brief shares TRAFIG findings from two key refugee-hosting countries in Africa, Ethiopia and Tanzania, and illustrates how refugees are using connectivity to create livelihood opportunities, with a focus on those engaging in entrepreneurial activities. It also puts forth ideas for those seeking to scale up access to entrepreneurship for displaced persons.

Free movement within the Schengen area is a cornerstone of European integration - and indeed an essential part of the European way of life. However, this freedom of movement is limited for forcibly displaced people residing within the European Union (EU). European asylum systems are designed to suppress mobility, which actually prevents many asylum seekers from finding a 'durable solution'. In contrast, enabling legal mobility within and across EU countries, when paired with access to labour markets and ensuring the right to family life, can open new opportunities for forced migrants to settle into receiving communities and truly rebuild their lives. Based on TRAFIG research in Greece and Italy, this policy brief illustrates why mobility is important for displaced people and how it is being hampered by policies and practices. It then suggests strategic ways that policymakers can tap into the potential of mobility to provide additional solutions to protracted displacement in Europe.

Jordan and Pakistan are among the countries that host the most refugees worldwide - refugees who come from countries facing protracted conflicts with no end in sight. TRAFIG research at multiple sites in Jordan and urban Pakistan (con ducted before the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021) found that, despite myriad challenges, many refugees are mobile - and they are using this mobility to unlock a range of opportunities. However, the potential benefits of mobility are far from being fully leveraged. This policy brief examines how and why refugees are moving after their initial displacement and suggests how policymakers in the region and elsewhere, in collaboration with humanitarian, development and integration stakeholders, can help Afghans and Syrians tap into outward mobility to improve their upward mobility.