The Myth of Self-Reliance. Naohiko Omata
and Laura Hammond. Their guidance, advice and encouragement have significantly helped me to progress and complete this research. I would also like to extend my warm thanks to Alexander Betts, Dawn Chatty and other colleagues at the Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford, who gave me insightful advice and constructive feedback on my work.
In Ghana and Liberia, I received numerous forms of assistance from Liberian refugees and returnees, and throughout my fieldwork I learnt a great deal from them. Their friendship, interest and participation made this research possible. Their life was marked by uncertainty and full of difficulties. But they agreed with the aim and scope of my research project and sacrificed their time and energy to assist me in my studies. It is impossible to list by name all of those who assisted my fieldwork on the ground. However, I am particularly grateful to my five research assistants: Joseph, Shetha, Benjamin, Kevin and Pennie. Also, I would like to give thanks to my co-residents in Buduburam, Philip and Sam.
I would also like to extend my gratitude to the following institutions; UNHCR in Ghana and Liberia; the Ghana Refugee Board; the Liberia Refugee Repatriation and Resettlement Committee; the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research at the University of Ghana; the Embassy of Japan; and the Japan International Cooperation Agency. During fieldwork, I benefited immensely from their hospitality and generosity despite their busy schedules.
I would like to thank my funders, without whom the research would not have been possible. Principal funding came from the World Bank, with additional fieldwork grants from the University of London and from the School of Oriental and African Studies.
My particular thanks go to Kenji Hiratsuka, Tomoo Nakamura, Hideyuki Morie, Jeff Crisp, Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, Niels Hahn, Nina Weaver, Yasuko Kusakari, Artemy Izmestiev, Akihiro Fushimi and Akiko Tatsuta. I would not have been able to complete this project without their continued encouragement and assistance. Special thanks also go to Marion Berghahn, Caroline Kuhtz and Sasha Puchalski, as well as other staff at Berghahn Books, who helped this book appear in its current shape through their dedicated support and hard work.
Portions of Chapter 3 previously appeared in the Community Development Journal 48(2), 2013. Parts of Chapter 5 previously appeared in the Journal of Refugee Studies 26(2), 2013, and the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 39(8), 2013. My thanks go to the journal editors for permitting me to incorporate these materials into the book.
Finally, I would like to dedicate this book to those who currently live as refugees and asylum seekers in adverse and uncertain situations around the world. May your voices be heard and your experiences be highlighted.
Abbreviations
| AREU | Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit |
| CBO | camp-based organization |
| DAR | Development Assistance for Refugees |
| DFID | Department for International Development |
| ECOWAS | Economic Community of West African States |
GH | Ghanaian cedi |
| GRB | Ghana Refugee Board |
| HH | Household |
| IP | implementing partner |
| LRRRC | Liberia Refugee Repatriation and Resettlement Committee |
| LRWC | Liberian Refugee Welfare Council |
| MoI | Ministry of the Interior |
| NCS | National Catholic Secretariat |
| NGO | non-governmental organization |
| SLF | sustainable livelihoods framework |
| UN | United Nations |
| UNHCR | United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees |
| USCRI | US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants |
| WRC | Women’s Refugee Commission |
| WFP | World Food Programme |
Map 0.1 West Africa (courtesy of Michael Borop, sitesatlas.com).
Map 0.2 Buduburam refugee camp (courtesy of Michael Borop, sitesatlas.com).
Introduction
Buduburam
An Exemplary Refugee Camp?
Integration? NO!
Repatriation? PLUS USD 1,000 YES!
Resettlement? WHY NOT?
—Banner used during refugee protests in Buduburam camp
In early 2008, Liberian refugees in Buduburam refugee camp in Ghana attracted the attention of both the national and global media. Some 100 Liberian women refugees started protesting against the Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) at the entrance of the camp to firmly reject a local integration plan for Liberian refugees in Ghana. Instead, refugees demanded either third-country resettlement in the industrialized North or repatriation to Liberia with $1,000 for each individual (the repatriation cash grant from UNHCR before 2008 was $5 per person).1 As the refugee protests continued for nearly two months, the number of participants in the demonstrations grew to several hundred as more and more Liberian refugees supported the protestors’ messages. The series of demonstrations provoked the Ghanaian government to describe the demonstrations as ‘a threat to the security of the state’, and there resulted about 630 arrests and sixteen cases of deportation to Liberia.
Depicted as a ‘bustling African village’, the thriving economy in Buduburam camp amazed first-time visitors. Owusu, for example, states: ‘The camp community is lively … Signs of commerce are evident everywhere, and the main street bustles with life as one walks through the “camp”’ (Owusu 2000: 7; see also Antwi 2007; Codjoe et al. 2013; Dzeamesi 2008; Tete 2005). When I visited the camp for the first time in 2005, I was also struck by the vibrant commerce. There was a variety of economic activities inside and around the camp, such as fast-food restaurants, mobile-phone shops, mini-kiosks selling daily goods, internet cafés, clubs and bars, beauty salons and so on.
Due to the presence of active refugee commerce, UNHCR often commended the refugees in Buduburam as ‘self-reliant’, and the camp as an exemplary model in which refugees sustained themselves through robust businesses, boasting that the organization had facilitated their economic success by gradually withdrawing its assistance over the period of exile. The reputation of Buduburam as a self-sufficient camp was also supported by external researchers. In particular, Dick (2002a, 2002b) has published two influential reports highlighting refugees’ robust businesses inside the camp.2 In those reports, she argues that despite some challenges, on the whole, Liberian exiles in the camp had been able to assist themselves adequately in the face of UNHCR’s withdrawal of support.
When I embarked on field research in 2008, many UNHCR staff in Ghana still supported this perspective. A female UNHCR programme officer confidently said to me:
Refugees in Buduburam are doing very well. Many of them are running trading businesses. Between 2000 and 2002, UNHCR significantly reduced assistance for Liberians so they had to find a means of surviving on their own and of helping themselves … Now Buduburam is the biggest economic hub in the camp area. Many refugees are having good life there.3
However, the economic vibrancy of the camp