Ord men inga visor : En jämförande masterstudie om humanitära organisationers policy kring dialog och mänskliga rättigheter i relation till praktiskt genomförande av flyktingläger

• Main Author: Ekstrand, Moa
• Format: Others
• Language: Swedish
• Published: Uppsala universitet, Teologiska institutionen 2015
• Subjects: Refugee camps; human rights; collaborative rationality; dialogue; DIAD; Habermas; Nussbaum; Innes and Booher; Social Sciences; Samhällsvetenskap; International Migration and Ethnic Relations; Internationell Migration och Etniska Relationer (IMER); Social Sciences Interdisciplinary; Tvärvetenskapliga studier inom samhällsvetenskap; Globalisation Studies; Globaliseringsstudier; Other Civil Engineering; Annan samhällsbyggnadsteknik
• Online Access: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266329

The average time for an individual to be located in a refugee situation is 17 years. That people are fleeing for such a long period of their life means that a large part of their human rights can easily be neglected. This study examines the humanitarian organizations MSB’s and UN- HCR's implementation of refugee camps and how they allow refugees to play a part in this process. This essay intends to examine the policy the organizations adhere to, namely the in- ternationally recognized handbooks Handbook of Emergencies and The Sphere Project. Em- pirical material is based on a qualitative interview method where a comparison between poli- cy and practice is investigated. Employees of organizations and experts on refugee camp de- sign, management and urban planning have served as respondents in this study. The city planning theory collaborative rationality is used to examine the empirical data to answer how organizations work with refugee camps, if a dialogue processes occur between organizations and refugees, and what benefits the theory can provide. This is followed by a discussion re- garding the human rights of the refugees and whether these are considered in the implementa- tion of the camp. A question raised in the discussion is whether a clarification of the concept could help the organizations' employees to meet the human rights of the refugees. The aim of this thesis is to create an interdisciplinary understanding across disciplinary boundaries. The idea is that the amalgamation of disciplines can improve the humanitarian organizations’ work and aid refugees living conditions. This study highlights a discrepancy in the relation- ship between policy and practice in relation to the procedure manuals, but also in relation to refugees and the satisfaction of human rights. A majority of the respondents testify a wish that a dialogue should be conducted between the organization and the recipients of humanitar- ian aid but that issues such as time pressure, ignorance and power relations complicates this process. What is needed for an improvement of dialogue processes is that the organizations need to take clearer positions on how the practical implementation should play out which would more easily control their employees to execute their work. States need to review their approach to refugees and to take responsibility for the people who need help. Last but not least, the concept of human rights and Nussbaum's definition of it is offered as a suggestion as to how UNHCR and MSB could simplify their work to accommodate that the refugees are treated within the realms of the human rights legislation.