Search results

This research aims to determine to what degree registered and nonregistered Rohingyas differ in their difficulties and coping strategies.

Kutupalong registered and one nonregistered camp (Camp 2E) were selected as the study area, and a mixed-methods approach was followed to collect the data. Six in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted first, and then the questionnaire survey was conducted on 315 Rohingyas, comprising 116 registered and 199 non-registered refugees.

The results indicate a substantial difference in the difficulties and coping techniques of registered and nonregistered refugees in food, residence, health and security. Except for the health and security issue, the registered Rohingyas (RRs) have a relatively better life than the nonregistered Rohingyas (NRRs). The main problem registered refugees undergo is economic, followed by health service, food, residence, social and security issue. For nonregistered refugees, economic and social issues receive maximum attention, while security is their last concern. The coping strategies show that all strategies against difficulties significantly differ between registered and nonregistered Rohingyas.

Based on their registration status, this research may assist humanitarian workers and policymakers in better understanding of Rohingya refugees' livelihood strategies and challenges in Bangladesh. The findings may also help practitioners and policymakers build new programs and services to assist complex and difficult refugee groups in improving their livelihoods and access to essential amenities.

Previous research shows little attention to the variations between registered and unregistered refugees. However, almost no studies have compared the challenges and coping methods of registered and unregistered Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and other regions. This research was meant to define and offer an in-depth analysis of the Rohingya refugees' livelihood strategies in the Kutupalong registered and nonregistered camp in Bangladesh to fill the knowledge gap.

We are in the midst of a refugee crisis, and the ways in which we approach the issue of unprecedented numbers of people crossing borders will shape our world for generations to come. In this chapter, we problematize immunology, capitalism and other lenses through which we construct, label and categorize others and how such constructions and categorizations manifest in educational spheres for migrants, immigrants, refugees and host country nationals. As with access to education, the resources one has also determine one’s ability to migrate and the conditions of one’s resettlement. Therefore, we discuss the ways in which globalization provides greater mobility for those with substantial wealth and how conditions with/in post-modernism serve to create borders between people, their wealth and the social contexts in which they and their wealth reside. We create boxes as labels into which we slot people all too easily. While we critique the discourses and systems that create the socio-political milieu of education for immigrants, migrants and refugees in the US, we also highlight issues abroad, including how language is weaponized in the framing of immigration and those who emigrate.

This paper aims to present a brief discussion on the geopolitical aspects of diplomatic divergences between India and Bangladesh regarding the Rohingya issue. Presently, more than a million people are living in 30 refugee camps in Bangladesh. In August 2017, the plight of Rohingya refugees broke all the previous record and had largely affected the Cox's Bazar region of Bangladesh when Bangladesh decided to provide shelter to the Rohingyas, identifying them as “Forcibly Displaced Myanmar Nationals (FDMN). Due to geographical closeness and historical linkage with both Myanmar and Bangladesh, India, despite taking strict measures to avoid any cross-border opportunities for Rohingyas, could not escape the consequences. Myanmar, due to its strategic position and natural resources, has always been the epicentre of attention and investment of foreign powers. The crisis has all the elements in it to create political turbulence in South Asia and South East Asia. A peaceful environment based on mutual trust and cooperation is required for the continuing economic growth of the region. Considering the importance of in-depth research in this arena, the study pursued the qualitative method.

After being forced to flee their respective home countries, Sri Lankan Tamils and Rohingya refugees resettled in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. This study attempts to explore the extent to which the state has provided means for integration in the absence of refugee protection laws and citizenship.

A qualitative research approach was used, including in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) with participants from both refugee groups between 2019 and early 2020. A representative sample of male and female Sri Lankan Tamils, living in or outside government camps, in urban and rural areas, was included (total number = 75). Similarly, a representative sample of the Rohingya refugee community was included for this study (n = 44).

Despite constraints imposed by inadequate infrastructure, the study finds that Sri Lankan Tamils and Rohingyas both show to be progressively integrated in local society and have been capable of fulfilling some important basic livelihood needs, especially with regards to education. Some areas for improvement are identified as well, most urgently in terms of health and accommodation.

Other states in India, as well as in similar low-income countries (LICs), could learn from the current case study with regards to administering workable policies for small groups of refugees.

With minimal state facilitation and within the context of limited legal backing, refugee groups have somewhat managed to re-built their lives. This study identifies the threshold of requirements that make this achievement possible and suggests what more could be done to further advance the current state.

The Rohingyas are forcefully displaced from Myanmar and sheltered in the Cox's Bazar district of Bangladesh. They have outnumbered the local people indicating a critical condition of their living situation after the year 2017 influx. The aim of this paper is to present how coexistence has impacted social cohesion and reconciliation among different groups of Rohingyas and host communities.

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 903 households through a multistage stratified random sampling. Social cohesion and reconciliation (SCORE) index was measured as a multifaceted theoretical construct based on the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.

The findings of this study are inclined toward the miracle of social cohesion and reconciliation between the Rohingya and host communities. Also, it is revealed that youth, males and Rohingyas who came before the year 2017 influx are more cohesive. In the host or local community, people having lower income, less education and involvement with the informal sector are revealed as less cohesive.

This study suggests vocational training as a short-term, cash-for-work as a mid-term and repatriation, proper identity, and protection services as long-term strategic plans to make the two communities more cohesive.

This study focuses on the SCORE indexes with a quantitative format, applying a second-order factor model.

One of the serious crises faced chiefly by the developing countries is the large influx of people from neighbouring poor and less developed countries as a result of civil wars, political and social turbulence, to name some. Following UNHCR's latest available publication of data on refugees (2016), this chapter attempts to highlight the world's major refugee producing countries, inherent causes of such generation and destination of the emigrants on one hand and the scenario of world's major refugee hosting countries, refugees from countries received by them and their present condition, on the other. Disaggregation of data is done in each case to provide further insightful analysis.

In this study, the authors develop in-depth understanding of how refugee entrepreneurs navigate institutional voids in market participation in Malaysia. The authors employ an inductive research design consistent with recent research investigating adversity and disadvantaged entrepreneurship. The findings of this study reveal that refugees adopted different, gendered approaches to navigate institutional voids in market participation. The women refugees in this study anchored towards safety by leveraging legitimacy of market intermediaries (e.g. social ventures and refugee support organisations) to gain protection for entrepreneurial activities and access markets while conducting their labour at home. The men refugees in this study engaged in harbouring – concealing entrepreneurial activities in the local community or under others’ identities to protect income-generating opportunities. The findings of this study thus provide nuance and demonstrate plurality in how refugee entrepreneurs navigate institutional voids, contributing towards more holistic understanding of refugee entrepreneurship, offering insights for development agencies, policy-makers, and other institutions on how to support refugees’ entrepreneurial activities.