Patterns of Refugee Planning : A Comparative Analysis of Current Refugee Planning Approaches

In 2015, there were more than 21 million refugees globally; as conflicts continue and globalization expands, it is advantageous for planners to strategically manage population influxes of ill-equipped families. Refugee policy decisions have imperative effects on housing markets, economies, segregation, international relations, and refugees’ resilience. Bound by the 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees, every member state is obligated to protect refugees. This paper analyzes the varying conditions of refugees in the top six countries with the highest number of refugees; through a matrix, this paper compares what attributes promote effective refugee plans and which do not. Every conflict scenario is unique, and there are attributes that a refugee plan cannot change (length of conflict, host country’s economy, status of host country’s government, cultural clashes between local population and refugees). However, this paper seeks to empower planners to use policy in ways they can mitigate current and future refugee situations. This analysis concludes that refugee policies work best for the host country and the refugees when refugees: 1) are able to live outside of camps and in cities; 2) can be employed; 3) are distributed to not overwhelm housing/infrastructure; and there are multiple funding sources.


Introduction
Environmental degradation, civil war, natural disaster, territorial disputes, drug wars; refugees' hopes of fleeing terrible living conditions have been complicated by modern borders and political debates of international responsibility.Accord-cess of refugee programming.
Regardless of these discrepancies, people fleeing their homes from a "well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group" will not cease globally anytime soon (UNHCR, 2015).Understanding the nuances of failed refugee planning is vital to improving approaches in the future.This research is principal to not only mitigating mass migrations but capitalizing upon them.Policy-makers and planners should not only design with these populations in mind, but view refugees as an opportunity, especially for aging populations or supply-heavy economies.For instance, the (western) German Economic Miracle of the 1950s (Eichengreen & Ritschl, 2008).Germany recovered rather quickly as a result of the Marshall Plan, which stimulated capital along with returning prisoners of war and an influx of Polish and Russian refugees as a labor force (UNHCR, 2015).
As of spring 2017, more than half of all refugees are Somali, Afghan, or Syrian (UNHCR, 2017).The dominant host countries are the following: Jordan 664 thousand; Ethiopia 736 thousand; Iran 979 thousand; Lebanon 1.1million; Pakistan 1.6 million; and Turkey 2.5 million (UNHCR, 2017).These populations are disproportionately desperate women and children, who frequently sink into gridlocked checkpoint processes and camps for years, or even lifetimes.The agreed upon expectations in the 1951 Convention on Refugees declares that all member states of the United Nations (UN) must provide the right to liberty and security of person, freedom of movement, right to family life, access to employment, courts, and education.However, this is a non-binding convention, not a binding covenant, which results in states cherry-picking parts of the law to include and exclude (International Justice Center, 2017).These ambiguous "obligations" mean that states have unique methods of refugee planning policy with varying levels of success.
This analysis seeks to explore the methods of refugee planning implemented by the top hosting countries (Jordan, Ethiopia, Lebanon, Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey) by comparing their success with indicators.By measuring which methods harbor successful refugee planning, future efforts can be executed more effectively.Yet another question arises from this; for whom is a plan successful?One must consider who benefits from these policies.Perhaps it is successful for peace building after the conflict; the refugees themselves; or the host country's reputation.The most successful refugee policies structurally, economically, and socially integrate refugees with the local population; however, such plans are not popular to implement.

Historical Refugee Policy Precedents
As the severity of the Holocaust became public, the world was shocked and The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 was the first substantial refugee resettlement project using modern refugee law.The majority of the 200 thousand Hungarian refugees fled to Austria.Austria quickly called upon the international European community to contribute equally to this refugee crisis: Austria will therefore take into consideration the number of displaced persons to be received in proportion to the total population of Austria, and will compare that to the corresponding proportions in the other Member States in order to ensure that the burden is shared equally between all the EU Member States (Zieck, 2013: p. 62).
There was debate over how many states must "share the burden".The reset-Advances in Applied Sociology tlement of these Hungarian refugees was relatively swift and shared among many states.Currently, relocating refugees happens seldom and is typically viewed as not ideal; however in this case, western states had motive to take in refugees.
This refugee population was mostly young and could fill a void in labor.Amidst the Cold War ideology, the US and other democratic powers offered freedom to these freedom-fighters; these refugees had valuable inside information on the Soviet regime; and the conflict was short-lived with a clear ending (Zieck, 2013).
Signing up to support refugees for a short-lived conflict is much more attractive than signing up for a decade-long conflict.
In 1975, the Vietnam War ended, which commenced a massive departure of Vietnamese refugees, primarily by boat.The lines of who was a refugee and who was an economic migrant became blurry as this exodus continued until 1988.More than 1 million Vietnamese left to start a new life outside their borders (Tran, 2015).
The Comprehensive Action Plan was a coordinated resettlement strategy between Vietnam and western powers, which limited the number of people who qualified as refugees.After a decade of funding resettlement programs, host countries had "compassion fatigue" and were looking for exceptions to these rules so they could be excused from their responsibilities.The "boat people" are not the first example of states using exceptions to the rules, but this crisis illustrates when arguments against complying with international refugee agreements become mainstream.
Yet even "short" conflicts can be considered unattractive refugee obligations.
After an embarrassing, failed-attempt of humanitarian peacekeeping in Somalia, Bill Clinton could not muster the congressional support to aid Rwanda before it was too late.Rwanda was not considered a geostrategic ally, and it does not have resources the US was hoping to exploit.Not reacting fast enough to prevent a genocide was equally embarrassing as Somali pirates were hijacking US aid.Some consider this lack of effort as racism, while others interpret this as merely political.Table 1 charts generalized refugee recovery trends throughout three historical phases.

International Distribution of Resources
Despite a country's good intentions of actually implementing policies to help Table 1.This table summarizes and simplifies the three main attitudes toward refugee assistance in three time periods post World War II.for.This analysis discusses these scenarios to materialize patterns and tendencies of which planners should take note.

Ethiopia
Define abbreviations and acronyms the first time they are used in the text, even   (Jeffery, 2015).Most of the refugee camps are outside of main cities, making the ratio between native populations and displaced populations disproportionately high.This counters the 1951 Convention, which guarantees freedom of movement and employment.Ethiopia's largest refugee camp, in Gambella, has 270,000 refugees and 300,000 native residents (Boradhurst, 2016).Refugees escaping violence in South Sudan could easily bring guns into the refugee camps in Gambella (Soloman, 2016).This southeastern region is further complicated by territorial and ethnic clashes, which date back for centuries.The Nuer peoples, from South Sudan, culturally conflict with the Anuyak peoples of Ethiopia.
Contrasting to most refugees' experience in Ethiopia, if Eritreans have family sponsors, they are permitted to live integrated lives in the capital city, Addis Ababa.However, even Eritreans cannot work in Ethiopia; thus, most Eritreans attempt to leave Ethiopia for Israel, Egypt, or Europe.
The status of refugees in Ethiopia is certainly not good, and most likely not changing anytime soon.Out of fear and desperation, refugees are mostly isolated from society with no mobility.This system of continuously handing out supplies at camps, and not enabling this new population, causes refugees in Ethiopia to be dependent on the generosity of others (nonprofits) to live.This model is unsustainable, but understandable considering where Ethiopia is at economically and politically.

Lebanon
The Lebanese Republic has 1.1 million refugees living among its small popula- Lebanon has a prolonged history of housing refugees (Palestinians) who often live in camps for generations.For this reason, the government decided not to construct camps for the incoming Syrian refugees (Rosenberg, 2013).Refugees live primarily in abandoned buildings within their cities, and are not allowed to work.Most children are not enrolled in school, and, instead, work alongside their parents doing odd jobs.One positive attribute to refugee planning in Lebanon is the UN World Food Program's cash stipend card.Depending on need, families receive appropriated amounts of money per month on these cards, which contribute to food, rent, and other necessities (Rosenberg, 2013).These cards give refugees the autonomy to personalize decisions for their family, and support the local economy, instead of requiring refugees to wait in lines for daily food rations in camps.Refugees are mostly clustered in cities beside the Syrian border, far away from Beirut.Proportionally, Lebanon simply has too many refugees.Its minimalistic, integrative system is probably the best policy the government could muster from the extremely limited support it accrues.However, when a country's population increases by nearly 25%, the need for new infrastructure, housing and schools, everything changes.Much more outside assistance is necessary in Lebanon for this to end well for refugees and Lebanese citizens.

Pakistan
The Islamic Republic of Pakistan hosts 1.6 million refugees.Comparing the number of refugees to Pakistan's bountiful population, its refugees-per-1000-citizens is only 8.33.However, the GPD to refugee ratio is 322.47, which limits Pakistan's ability to serve and protect asylum seekers and its own citizens.
In The refugee experience in Pakistan has been dynamic.Considering its autonomy, Pakistan was working well with refugees; however as national security was threatened, its displaced persons policy was turned upside down.Regarding pre-9/11 methods, Pakistan served as an example for impoverished states facing refugee problems.One must consider Pakistan's unique situations, which permitted successful refugee resettlement: common religion, often times common language, large host population, thus a lower refugee-citizen ratio, and, in the 1970s, the refugees were militarily strategic.With that said, perhaps this refugee story is difficult for struggling countries, like Ethiopia, to imitate.One must also note that Pakistan failed to protect refugees in times of war as promised in the Fourth Geneva Conventions (Geneva Conventions, 1950).The international community did not effectively enforce these binding standards; this sets new precedents for how other states mitigate refugee trials.

Iran
The Islamic Republic of Iran followed a similar refugee policy-path to Pakistan.
Iran hosts 979 thousand refugees, with a 12.53 refugees-per-1000-citizens ratio.has yet to answer these important questions.

Jordan
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has 664 thousand refugees, making its refugees-per-1000-citizens ratio the second highest of this study at 89.55.Fortunately, Jordan has the second-best refugee-GDP ratio (United Nations Refugee Data, 2015).Jordan's approach to its current refugees is evolving as its resources and generosity grow weary.Initially, all refugees could settle into their cities and start their new lives alongside Jordanians.Influxes of refugees are routine to Jordan; Syrian refugees settling in Jordan was not shocking or unwelcomed, at first.After several years, the housing market, job demand, and need for schools exploded.
In 2012, the government started to limit the number of refugees by placing them in camps.Currently, refugees need a sponsor to live in cities (Fröhlich et al., 2015).
Despite these restrictions, 80% of the refugees live outside the camps (Ingrasci et al., 2015).However, when living outside, it is difficult to find consistent work, and food is only distributed at schools for children.Recently, refugees have begun to encounter "random-ID checks" to confirm that they are allowed to be outside of camps.In the camps, shelter and food are accounted for.
The camps, particularly the Za'atari camp, have morphed into semi-functioning cities. Za'atari is the second-largest refugee camp in the world, and, at one point, was Jordan's "fourth largest city" (Ingrasci et al., 2015).This camp has an informal economy from smuggled in goods.Za'atari's economy has brought on a sense of belonging and purpose to its residents internally, and it contributes to the greater Jordanian economy as well.UN workers know these informal exchanges are occurring, but they mostly permit it, seeing it as an opportunity to jump-start a shrinking city (Kimmelman, 2014).
Despite the increased demands for housing and jobs, the relationship of Jordanians with refugees is positive overall.Refugees are a normalized occurrence; Syrians and Jordanians both speak Arabic and are mostly Sunni Muslim.The royal monarchy continues to appear devoted to aiding its Muslim brothers and sisters.The welcoming, integrated approach, along with being used to refugees, having a decent GDP, and sharing the same culture, all contribute to a relatively A. M. Wissel Figure 1.Pie charts depicting the UNHCR's budget distribution; this illustrates how some countries receive more resources than others.The data is from the UNHCR Financial Report.Questions on the quantity and sources of funding are important questions but further discussion on finances is outside the scope of this paper (UNHCR, 2017).
the 1970s, Pakistan openly welcomed Afghans escaping the Soviet invasion.These refugees were mostly from the Pashtun tribe, which fit into Pakistani culture nicely (BBC, 2016).The Pakistani government saw welcoming this population as a strategy to combat the Soviets by recruiting men in Islamist fronts.These Afghan refugees could work and integrate into society, and the government pressured refugees to identify as Muslims before Afghans to integrate them more (BBC, 2016).There are camps along the Afghan border, but most refugees just began new lives in Pakistan with an amiable relationship with locals, until September 11, 2001.Even before the terrorist attacks in the US, in November 2000, the Pakistani government commenced efforts to close off the Afghan border.Subsequently, the government began monetarily incentivizing refugees to repatriate voluntarily to Afghanistan.Throughout the 2000s, offshoots of the anti-Pakistani Taliban sprouted up near campsites.In 2014, the Taliban's attack on the Public Army School soured the relations between the Pakistani government and the Afghan refugees (BBC, 2016).Police harassment followed along with diminishing support.By the end of 2015, 58,211 Afghans in Pakistan repatriated back to Afghanistan (UNHCR, 2016).Tensions climaxed in December 2015 when the Pakista-ni government announced it would give refugees six months to repatriate back to Afghanistan.These policy-reactions would have been vastly different had this happened in the 1950s.How does the UNHCR not see this as a direct violation of the 1951 Convention's forced repatriation clause?The Pakistani government has recently bullied the Afghan refugees so much that many feel coerced to return to Afghanistan.A 2017 Human Rights Watch report claims that: Afghan refugees told Human Rights Watch that a toxic combination of insecure legal status, the threat of deportation during winter, and police abuses-including crippling extortion, arbitrary detention, and nocturnal police raids-had left them with no choice but to leave Pakistan (Human Rights Watch, 2017).
vowed that these human rights violations would never occur again.The UN was established, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written in 1948.
1951).The weakness of the 1951 Convention is that it only defines refugees from events preceding 1951 (essentially the events of World War II) and was regarded as a Eurocentric responsibility.Suddenly, there were refugees from non-European theatres, and these regulations did not apply.This loophole was amended by the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, which nullified the limitations of the 1951 Convention's assumptions; ergo international refugee law finally applied to any person in any place at any time(United Nations, 1967).There are The following pie charts in Figure1indicate the distribution of UN funding to the top six host countries.In 2015, the UNHCR needed roughly $7 billion US dollars to fully satisfy the needs of displaced people collective, comprehensive, international responsibility 1960-1990s Cold War (East Asia), Independence Wave(Africa) loop holes distinguishing refugees from economic migrants emerge 1990s-Present Consistent Conflict overwhelmed by need and lacking collective international responsibility Advances in Applied Sociology refugees, fiscal international support and internal autonomy greatly influence what can actually be done.organizations, and levels of overall success.Table 2 displays these disparities; each country's situation is discussed and evaluated going forward.Readers must remember that it is impossible to overtly compare these "successes" because each country possesses unique advantages and disadvantages which cannot be controlled

Table 2 .
This table summarizes the top six host countries' refugee strategies as of spring 2017.The list of funding sources is not exhausting, but rather highlighting a few key players (United Nations Refugee Data, 2015).
in the Mile 46 and Mekaki camps in Afghanistan near the Iranian border(Human Rights Watch, 2002).Iran has implemented repatriation efforts similar to Pakistan, but with far fewer refugees deciding to return to Afghanistan.Perhaps this is because, although there is discrimination in Iran, it provides more opportunity than Afghanistan.Here, refugees prioritize resources over social harmony, which is not the case in Turkey and other places.
education, and other services.However, after hosting refugees for years, Iran has compassion fatigue.Alike Pakistan, in 2000 Iran started closing its Afghan border, thus blocking further refugees from entering.An estimated 10 thousand refu-A.M. Wissel DOI: 10.4236/aasoci.2017.711023358 Advances in Applied Sociology gees live