4.1 Article

Empowerment in the Asylum-seeker Regime? The Roles of Policies, the Non-profit Sector and Refugee Community Organizations in Hong Kong

期刊

JOURNAL OF REFUGEE STUDIES
卷 34, 期 1, 页码 305-327

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jrs/fez090

关键词

Asylum seekers; NGO; RCO; empowerment; Hong Kong; international refugee regime

资金

  1. Research Grants Council Competitive Research Funding Schemes for the Local Self-financing Degree Sector under the Faculty Development Scheme (FDS) during 2015/16

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article analyzes the empowerment of asylum seekers in Hong Kong by NGOs and RCOs, highlighting the differences in roles between mainstream NGOs and RCOs. The major challenges include financial dependence on the government by NGOs and the government's perceptions of welfare policy.
This article presents an analysis of the extent to which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and refugee community organizations (RCOs) empower asylum seekers in Hong Kong. Based on 28 in-depth interviews with asylum seekers and five interviews with NGO managers, the author argues that mainstream NGOs adopt the traditional roles of Provider and Liberator, whereas RCOs take up 'alternative roles' in addition to a limited range of traditional roles. Mainstream NGOs determine and hierarchize the needs and wants of their clients and cater only to the former. This, in turn, is experienced as disempowerment by service recipients, who feel that the NGOs are not working for the recipients' benefit, but rather to further their own agenda. RCOs proactively engage in policy advocacy, although this has yet to enhance their popularity among asylum seekers. Overall, the major challenges to empowerment for asylum seekers in Hong Kong are the financial dependence of mainstream NGOs on the government, the Hong Kong government's perceptions of welfare policy and civil society, the existence of the international refugee regime and disunity among asylum seekers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据