A comparison of the settlement and adaptation of Somali refugees in Ethiopia and the United Kingdom with special attention to females

This study aims to investigate the settlement and adaptation of Somali refugees in Ethiopia and the UK since 1991. Through comparative and historical case studies of Somali refugees in both countries, we investigate the reasons for insufficient levels of integration and the reasons for poor adaptation. We argue that refugees in Ethiopia cannot settle and adapt despite long periods of stay in the country due to their living in camps, being excluded from society, and inability to integrate into local societies and economies. While Ethiopia follows a compassionate policy of open- borders and settlement of a large number of refugees, the economic and legal-political limitations of the Ethiopian state mostly account for the protracted non-integration of refugees. Comparatively, re-settled and "legal" refugees in the UK do not suffer from "bare life" issues and can reach education and employment, though their adaptation is severely limited by feelings of insecurity and discrimination due to raising New Right, racist, and anti-immigrant movements. However, the UK does not even aim to settle a larger portion of "illegal" or "irregular migrants," which are also in fact refugees escaping war and poverty. The thesis pays special attention to female refugees, who are the least integrated and who suffer incredible costs in the process of migration and settlement due to violence, breakdown of families and social norms, and lack of gendered policies to pay special care for their security, reproductive health, and dignity. Keywords: Somali refugees, settlement, adaptation, female refugees, Ethiopia, UK