‘Resilient’ Refugees? Eritreans in Addis Ababa

ABSTRACT Resilience — the ability to ‘bounce back better’ from hardships — has gained prominence as an empowering idea for refugees worldwide. However, due to its conceptual ambiguity, there is no consensus on what counts as ‘resilience’ in practice. To survive without access to humanitarian aid or the right to work, Eritrean refugees in Addis Ababa adopted a range of tactics: mobilizing their networks with Ethiopian hosts and the diaspora, forming cohabitation groups with fellow refugees, and pursuing migration to the Global North. While aid workers perceived refugees’ use of social networks and cohabitation groups positively as forms of ‘resilience’, Eritrean refugees themselves regarded these practices as unavoidable responses to a lack of alternatives. Meanwhile, aid workers dismissed refugees’ transcontinental migration aspirations as a non‐resilient practice although refugees saw it as one of the few available avenues to ‘bounce back better’. By juxtaposing the perspectives of aid workers and refugees, this article highlights the gaps between their understandings of ‘resilience’ and demonstrates how certain activities described as resilience by aid agencies can be harmful for refugees. It also illuminates the role of resilience as a governing tool and highlights implications for the mainstreaming of resilience in refugee protection and humanitarian governance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Development and Change
Published
2026-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.70093
Primary Topic
Migration and Exile Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘Resilient’ Refugees? Eritreans in Addis Ababa

Naohiko Omata
Development and Change
Migration and Exile Studies
article

‘Resilient’ Refugees? Eritreans in Addis Ababa

Naohiko Omata
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Resilience — the ability to ‘bounce back better’ from hardships — has gained prominence as an empowering idea for refugees worldwide. However, due to its conceptual ambiguity, there is no consensus on what counts as ‘resilience’ in practice. To survive without access to humanitarian aid or the right to work, Eritrean refugees in Addis Ababa adopted a range of tactics: mobilizing their networks with Ethiopian hosts and the diaspora, forming cohabitation groups with fellow refugees, and pursuing migration to the Global North. While aid workers perceived refugees’ use of social networks and cohabitation groups positively as forms of ‘resilience’, Eritrean refugees themselves regarded these practices as unavoidable responses to a lack of alternatives. Meanwhile, aid workers dismissed refugees’ transcontinental migration aspirations as a non‐resilient practice although refugees saw it as one of the few available avenues to ‘bounce back better’. By juxtaposing the perspectives of aid workers and refugees, this article highlights the gaps between their understandings of ‘resilience’ and demonstrates how certain activities described as resilience by aid agencies can be harmful for refugees. It also illuminates the role of resilience as a governing tool and highlights implications for the mainstreaming of resilience in refugee protection and humanitarian governance.

Development and Change
IKEA Foundation
Partnerships for the goals, No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Migration and Exile Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon