Reframing the private sector's role within refugee communities

July 29, 2019 4:14 AM

We often hear words like “burden” and “strain” attached to conversations about refugees, but what if we replaced those words with “potential”, “opportunity” and “service”?

RTFA on this one, folks. It is not about the private sector as a miracle cure for refugee crises. It is about empowering, and enabling refugees to participate in local economies, in ways we often take for granted in the west.

The transition from viewing refugees as core to business, rather than through the lens of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is promising, but gaps need to be filled in a host of sectors, including energy, technology, financial services, education and sanitation.

posted by smoke (21 comments total)

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
posted by chavenet at 4:36 AM on July 29, 2019 [10 favorites]

If this counts as reframing the private sector role, you've been running in some pretty inbred circles. By my reading what this amounts to is allowing private sector enterprise to take place. Words like "burden" and "strain" are more the result of governmental sector than private. The very same forces that discourage private sectors from jumping into the market among refugee communities. Energy, technology, financial services, education and sanitation are also typically largely reliant on governmental regulation, if not total responsibility. The biggest barriers do not really come from private sector interests, but government ineptitude, bureaucracy, antagonism and corruption, and the people who are served by it.
posted by 2N2222 at 5:56 AM on July 29, 2019

It seems to me like, for good or bad, this is a push for recognizing large refugee camps as a permanent state of affairs, to move away from a model where they're an emergency measure. I'm also getting the vibe that this is a plan which developed countries want to apply to places they're using as buffer zones for refugees, rather than something those developed countries would try out themselves.

(That's my impression based on the dozen or so paragraphs I'm seeing and a few minutes of video, let me know if my blockers are preventing me from seeing something more thorough or if I'm supposed to follow one of the links...)
posted by XMLicious at 7:13 AM on July 29, 2019

The way I've framed this here in the US: Who would you rather having coming to your hometown, Amazon or the Migrant Caravan?

Amazon is going to charge you billions of dollars in subsidies. Sure, they'll bring some white collar jobs. Or maybe a bunch of dehumanizing warehouse jobs.

The Migrant Caravan is going to present its own challenges. But, if given a hand, they'll be building the community from the ground up.
posted by bunbury at 7:32 AM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]

Refugees aren’t only refugees, they are employers, employees, entrepreneurs and consumers.

Over half the companies surveyed said they would like to increase their business with refugees and host communities, but were being held back by a lack of market intelligence, a shortage of financing, and an inability to find the right local partners.

IFC, for example, has been supporting clients and companies in the Middle East to de-risk and extend their services to refugee communities, as well as in East Africa by setting up the region’s first private-sector-focused refugee platform.

How bought into neoliberalism do you need to be to not think this sounds deeply sinister 2019?
posted by Reyturner at 7:48 AM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]

Shifting the message of the OP a bit, I'll note that immigrants are critical to some industries, like meat packing, where the work is grueling. A case in point is Garden City, Kansas, with a population of 27,000 that speaks up to 40 different languages, but its unemployment hovers around 3 percent (NPR, 2017)

The town's turning point came in the 1970s, says Sister Janice Thome, when city and church leaders debated bringing in a meatpacking plant.
...
Those leaders, as she recalls, "said, if we say 'no,' then Garden City is liable to become one of these ghost towns, like many other towns. If we say yes, then we've got a vibrant economy, but then we're going to be bringing all of, quotes, 'those people.' "

"Those people," as in immigrants, mostly poor ones, who don't speak English, and need significant help getting their footing in a new culture.

"They decided they didn't want to be a ghost town, so they would say yes, and then they said, 'OK, are we going to count the people that come in then, as a blessing or a curse?' " Sister Thome says.

Viewing them as a blessing won out. And after a lot of persistence, effort and patience, a pro-immigrant ethos has gradually taken root here.

Here's a short documentary about Garden City, called Strangers in Town (official site, with trailer and full 33 minute film embedded). Here's a news story about the documentary, from Greater Garden City:

The documentary focuses on Garden City’s ability to adapt and absorb families arriving from Mexico, Southeast Asia, Myanmar, Somalia and other nations. Many have come for jobs in the meat packing industry and additional fields, and their labor helps fuel the southwest Kansas economy.

“At a time when people from different ethnicities, cultures and religions aren’t necessarily getting along very well, and we’re seeing more and more ethnic and political violence across the country, Garden City serves as an example of how to be different and how to get along,” the producer said.

“This turned out to be a bigger story than we first thought,” Lerner added, noting that he and his team relied on the images and perspectives of newcomers and long-term residents of Finney County alike, shooting footage at festivals, programs and gatherings, as well as in churches, schools, parks, homes and additional public locations.

The United States, and other countries, could be filled with Garden Cities, where immigrants come in to do the hard work at low pay that residents don't want to do, and then many move on to start new businesses and culture to their new hometowns.

Instead, so many conservatives around the world feed their base on stories of how Those Others are going to ruin local culture, so the elected officials can stay in power, even while their communities falter.

We could see more shifts to the Garden City model if the private sector promoted the benefits of diversity over homogeneity. They could then continue to out-source humanitarian assistance, education or financial services to governments or NGOs, reaping benefits of dedicated, low-wage workers with little of the overhead costs.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:52 AM on July 29, 2019 [12 favorites]

This article is not about garden cities, it's about recognizing opportunities to monetize the rot of late capitalism, forever war and climate change.
posted by Reyturner at 8:04 AM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]

IDK seems like this is selling migrants and refugees as an underclass for the private sector to exploit LEGALLY instead of being forced to hide them off the books like they do currently? Which... I have a hard time believing the private sector will ever support. Refugees will certainly be better off when employers are forced to pay them a minimum wage on the books. Even though they will still be exploited (no proposal for permanent work visas or asylum in the works, right?) this is an incremental step towards a fully legal status for them. Their employers have nothing to gain and a vast slave labor class to lose.
posted by MiraK at 8:21 AM on July 29, 2019

"The way I've framed this here in the US: Who would you rather having coming to your hometown, Amazon or the Migrant Caravan?"

Has that been a successful framing, given the cities that were lobbying across the country and begging for Amazon to arrive and receive their subsidies?
posted by Selena777 at 8:26 AM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]

Reyturner: This article is not about garden cities, it's about recognizing opportunities to monetize the rot of late capitalism, forever war and climate change.

I recognized that, but I'm trying to put a positive spin on the general topic. I agree, the language in the OP is not framed to see the refugees as people to support and help, but customers to reach and resources to utilize. Better than non-entities or the eternal "other" boogeymen of conservative fear-mongering, but not much.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:17 AM on July 29, 2019

IDK seems like this is selling migrants and refugees as an underclass for the private sector to exploit LEGALLY instead of being forced to hide them off the books like they do currently? Which... I have a hard time believing the private sector will ever support. Refugees will certainly be better off when employers are forced to pay them a minimum wage on the books. Even though they will still be exploited (no proposal for permanent work visas or asylum in the works, right?) this is an incremental step towards a fully legal status for them. Their employers have nothing to gain and a vast slave labor class to lose.

Interestingly, this is exactly the line of thinking used to argue against refugee/immigration. They're only going to be exploited anyway, right? Despite the opportunity to be exploited is exactly what is being sought after.

This is why I'm generally puzzled by left wing support for immigration either humanitarian or economic. Because ultimately it is about the opportunity to engage in economic activity for their own personal success. And the left is often suspicious or outright hostile to economic activity. Particularly if they cannot dictate how much success, and who it goes to.
posted by 2N2222 at 9:27 AM on July 29, 2019

Humanitarian leftist support for immigration is usually done out of compassion for their ability to live in relative safety, rather than support for a desire for economic success. There used to be a right wing pro-business argument for immigration touting the industriousness and ingenuity of immigrants from modest backgrounds, but I have no idea what Stephen Miller did with all of those Republicans two years ago.
posted by Selena777 at 9:44 AM on July 29, 2019 [5 favorites]

This is an article pondering how to find local partners in order to de-risk the extraction of surplus labor and rent from refugee camps by financial companies but, sure, it's the left who is uniquely bothered by who gets to keep what.
posted by Reyturner at 9:48 AM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]

Because ultimately it is about the opportunity to engage in economic activity for their own personal success.

Every reactionary I meet tells me this, and I know it's true for some, and I'm fine with that, because if you steal your neighbour's lumber and set fire to their barn it's hardly greed for them to claim a corner of the roof you built with their wood and like as not labour.

But no-one can ever tell me how setting yourself on fire helps get someone a better job. People have real reasons to be refugees, good cause to flee, and I don't know how someone could not believe that.
posted by Acid Communist at 10:12 AM on July 29, 2019

This article is not about garden cities, it's about recognizing opportunities to monetize the rot of late capitalism, forever war and climate change.

Who do you think owns those businesses in refugee camps? They were surveying chevron and McDonalds.
posted by smoke at 1:47 PM on July 29, 2019

I mean weren't, obviously.

I dunno, I knew this argument would come up when I posted the report here and tried to address it in the framing. Whatever the flaws of capitalism and its role in generating the conditions that create refugee camps, reality is better functioning capitalism would absolutely add value to the lives of people living in the camps.

The ability to deride that option is actually a result of privilege that comes from living somewhere with functioning rule of law, much more successful economies, and some kind of functioning commerce sector.

Moreover, refugees are often perceived as helpless victims and drains on local economies. The converse can be true, if conditions and support are right, and that is very powerful.

Many of the refugees I have interacted with have really wanted to be viewed as workers, sources of potential, people with value to offer.

Like I get it capitalism bad etc, but it's the world we live in, it's the world a lot of refugees want - to be able to work and make a safe living. I don't think those choices and that agency should be ignored.
posted by smoke at 4:06 PM on July 29, 2019

reality is better functioning capitalism would absolutely add value to the lives of people living in the camps

Even taking the framing of the article as given, based on historical precedent (see: American privatization of prisons) it seems like if this were to succeed the next thing which would happen would be "Refugees are now a resource to extract, so we should maximize refugees for maximum profit".

Let's take a look at the 5 Main Pathways as described in the article, as they've already been applied to a captive population:

1) Sharing capabilities such as technology or technical expertise to provide access to humanitarian assistance, education or financial services
2) Extending services by adapting current business models to refugee needs
3) Enabling employment by providing job training and entrepreneurship support to refugees
4) Integrating into value chains by hiring refugees directly or working with smaller enterprises that hire refugees
5) Building a business by selling goods and services tailored to refugee populations

#1 previously: Pennslyvania prisons switching to ebooks (Mefi)
#2 & #3, arguably #4 previously: Prisonstrike: A Rebellion Inside America’s Profitable Gulag Archipelago - ‘Imprisoned men and women are the drivers of a multibillion-dollar shadow economy: its laborers and its prey’, Prisoners With Jobs (Mefi)
#5 & #1 again: Captive Audience: How Companies Make Millions Charging Prisoners to Sent An Email
#5: Toilet paper and other things I lacked in prison (Mefi)

(This is just a quick sampling of Mefi FPPs from within the last year, there's a lot more out there)
I have no doubt there's quite a bit of market potential, as the article describes. There's a lot of companies out there who've specialized in exactly this sort of thing and they've had a long time to practice. But none of this sounds better to anybody but the retirement funds buying into it. And I don't see any sort of protections even remotely proposed to keep this from turning out exactly like it already has.
posted by CrystalDave at 4:22 PM on July 29, 2019

Like I get it capitalism bad etc, but it's the world we live in, it's the world a lot of refugees want - to be able to work and make a safe living. I don't think those choices and that agency should be ignored.

But you understand, right, that if converting refugees to an exploited underclass becomes a sanctioned, profitable enterprise, and Dadaab in Kenya with a quarter-million refugees becomes one giant cha-ching sound, there won't be any reason to ameliorate the conditions that produce the refugees in the first place?

This just seems like a really steep road to hell to be building at the time when climate change refugee flows are really going to start picking up. Accept refugees as new citizens and work towards prosperity in the resultant immigrant communities, yes; but not some special status.
posted by XMLicious at 4:25 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]

I think the prison analogy is very flawed and I think it would be awesome if we could avoid making the conversation about what's happening in America.

Here's an article with more detail about kakuma camp

Despite the practical and legal limitations faced by refugees, who cannot be formally employed, own property or move, some 12 per cent of them identify as business owners or self-employed. The town, meanwhile, has 232 shops along or near the main road.

Here's what unhcr thinks:

“We need to change the mindset that refugees are sitting at the camp, doing nothing but receiving assistance,” says Raouf Mazou, UNHCR representative for Kenya.

“Many of them are, in fact, running businesses and creating jobs for others, and doing other important thing to formalize their enterprises.

“We tend to see the private sector as something sophisticated, coming from outside, but most times, it is built on initiatives of individuals who want to make money using what they know best, like a refugee who bakes bread.”

Some of the businesses investing in kakuma:

Equity Bank, the largest commercial bank in Africa, has developed financial services that both refugees and members of the host community can use, including bank accounts and access to credit. The business model in Kakuma has thus far been profitable, and it is looking to expand its activities. Sanivation, a Kenyan social enterprise established in 2011, is piloting a project in Kakuma for in-home toilets that convert waste into fuel. The company addresses two of the most pronounced needs in the camp – sanitation and cooking fuel – and as a result faces an opportunity to expand. M-Kopa and D.light are solar energy companies that specialize in providing electricity to low-income customers in remote areas off the grid.

I think it's really important in conversations about refugees not to deprive them of agency or position them as helpless victims. This study shows how untrue those characterisations are.
posted by smoke at 5:00 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]

If you get more neighbors, build a longer table exploited work force, not a higher wall
posted by FirstMateKate at 10:42 AM on July 30, 2019

I think it was Arizona back in 2011 where, in reaction to the frothing-at-the-mouth racist anti-immigrant folks, the legislature implemented a simple digital SSID verification requirement for employers - i.e. employers were now required to prove they were hiring only legal workers, rather than immigrants having to live in fear of having to show their papers at any moment.

That scheme worked like fucking magic. Illegal immigrants were gone like *poof* when nobody could exploit their slave labor anymore without incurring massive profit-eating penalties.

Also the scheme was scrapped within one year because of untold millions of dollars worth of food rotting in farms, because no legal workers were willing to harvest it for the laughable wages offered by giant corporate farms.

That was morbid fun, like somebody pulled back the curtain on the Wizard of Oz for a split second before gasp, shudder, pay no attention, draw the curtains closed again!

I think my point is that whatever the failings of capitalism in general, the failings of this corporate-owned-government flavor of capitalism - which is what we currently live under - is significantly more murderous than any other kind.

So a move towards the "ideal", acknowledged version of capitalism, where migrants are employed at poverty wages but still on the books and penalties are enacted upon those who profit from illegal slave labor rather than on the slaves themselves, is nothing to sneer at and nothing to mock. This has the potential to save the lives and families of all these millions of refugees.

Our energy needs to go towards enacting legislation for an on-the-books migrant labor class --- legislation which will be (and is being) fought against tooth and nail by our corporate overlords.
posted by MiraK at 12:48 PM on July 30, 2019