In an effort to distinguish between 'declared intent' of refugees and internally displaced persons to the question whether 'they see themselves returning to the place they left' - to which almost all reply positively - I was wondering whether the existence of (newly created) social capital and connectedness in their place of exile is actually in 'inhibitor' / barrier/ 'reason not' to actual returns.
Does anybody have any thoughts, examples, suggestions?
Kindest
High degree of social capital in form of, for instance, trust, cooperation, and social networking/connectivity should in fact serve as anti-inhibitor for repatriation of refugees. Normally, refugees are prepared for repatriation. High stock of social capital can and usually positively contribute in such preparations. This is my personal observation.
Further, enablers for repatriation of refugees are several and may include improvement in compelling conditions in the countries of origin. However, the opposite can also be an inhibitor. Hospitality of recipient countries, integration packages and regulations can also play some role. Thus, decision to repatriate may be a complex one.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications