Angolan refugees in South Africa: alternatives to permanent repatriation?

S. Carciotto
{"title":"Angolan refugees in South Africa: alternatives to permanent repatriation?","authors":"S. Carciotto","doi":"10.14426/ahmr.v2i1.757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For almost twenty years, voluntary repatriation has been considered by the international community the preferable, durable and fitting solution to refugee situations. However, the numerous range of socio-economic and political factors which caused protracted refugee situations in the countries of asylum and the reluctance of refugees to return have raised doubts regarding the effectiveness of these programmes. The existing body of literature on return migration focuses on migrants’ decision-making processes to return and on the challenges encountered upon their return including post-return reintegration and identity crises, but a limited number of studies address the issue of refugees facing repatriation to post-conflict areas. This article seeks to contribute to the available literature on repatriation by examining the case study of Angolan refugees in South Africa, the implementation of the cessation of refugee status and its consequences on the decision-making process. Findings revealed that the lack of options to acquire permanent residence in the country of asylum represented a major block to transnational mobility. The article addresses the urgent need to reshape the notion of return in the context of refugee repatriation towards more flexible forms of return involving periods of dual residence and back and forth movements.","PeriodicalId":447313,"journal":{"name":"AFRICAN HUMAN MOBILITY REVIEW","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AFRICAN HUMAN MOBILITY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14426/ahmr.v2i1.757","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

For almost twenty years, voluntary repatriation has been considered by the international community the preferable, durable and fitting solution to refugee situations. However, the numerous range of socio-economic and political factors which caused protracted refugee situations in the countries of asylum and the reluctance of refugees to return have raised doubts regarding the effectiveness of these programmes. The existing body of literature on return migration focuses on migrants’ decision-making processes to return and on the challenges encountered upon their return including post-return reintegration and identity crises, but a limited number of studies address the issue of refugees facing repatriation to post-conflict areas. This article seeks to contribute to the available literature on repatriation by examining the case study of Angolan refugees in South Africa, the implementation of the cessation of refugee status and its consequences on the decision-making process. Findings revealed that the lack of options to acquire permanent residence in the country of asylum represented a major block to transnational mobility. The article addresses the urgent need to reshape the notion of return in the context of refugee repatriation towards more flexible forms of return involving periods of dual residence and back and forth movements.
南非的安哥拉难民:永久遣返的替代方案?
近二十年来,国际社会一直认为自愿遣返是解决难民局势的较好、持久和适当的办法。然而,造成庇护国难民情况长期存在的各种社会经济和政治因素,以及难民不愿返回,使人对这些方案的效力产生怀疑。关于返回移民的现有文献集中在移民返回的决策过程和他们返回时遇到的挑战,包括返回后重新融入社会和身份危机,但有限数量的研究涉及难民面临遣返到冲突后地区的问题。本文试图通过审查在南非的安哥拉难民的个案研究、终止难民地位的执行情况及其对决策过程的影响,对现有的关于遣返的文献作出贡献。调查结果显示,缺乏在庇护国获得永久居留权的选择是跨国流动的一个主要障碍。该条论述了迫切需要在难民遣返的背景下重新定义回返的概念,使回返的形式更灵活,包括双重居住和来回流动的时期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信