Nakivale Refugee Innovation Survey Report

A
survey report on Innovation and

Refugee livelihoods in Nakivale
refugee camp-Uganda
Refugee Innovation and Livelihood.
For presentation in the conference of

Forced Migration Innovation Project
(FMIP) at Southern Methodist
University(SMU). Dallas, Texas, USA
May 2015
BY MINANI Leodegard
E mail: mileodegard@yahoo.ca
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
i.
Acknowledgment
This project to reach this stage, could not have been possible without anticipatory, intellectual,
professional and visionary input of the staff of Southern Methodist University (SMU), DallasTexas, Department of Anthropology, Forced Migration Innovation Project (FMIP). This is an
opportunity to express my gratitude to them for their professional effort they invested when
valuing the success of my idea.
I want to thank the authorities of Nakivale refugee Camp for accepting my request to conduct
the survey in the camp. Importantly, I would like to thank all respondents who committed their
contribution to this research project by answering questionnaires through interviews. The
information they provided contributed a lot in achieving the objectives of this research project.
Lastly but not the least, I do recognize all those, in one way or another, contributed in
accomplishing this research project.
A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 2
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
ii.
Abstract
Processes of acquiring and sharing knowledge in humanitarian interventions are critical to

facilitating and supporting innovations at all levels of the humanitarian ecosystem. In searching
how to address this challenge of sharing knowledge, humanitarian actors around the world are
considering the variety of ways that education and knowledge sharing can intersect with
intervention innovation, from supporting its development through educational and training
strategies to sharing information and knowledge about innovative approaches. This brought a
point of discussion of how can all humanitarian actors better share and use their knowledge
from innovative initiatives from grass root initiatives applicable to affected communities to
global initiatives involving transpacial approaches.
In response to it, stakeholders in refugee resettlement around the world are searching for
innovative and durable solutions to sustainable refugee livelihoods. For this purpose, the FMIP
is recently committed to bringing the best and brightest ideas in livelihood and career laddering
innovation; the unique conference to gather academics, relief services providers, donors,
humanitarian affected communities and other humanitarian practitioners to inspire creative
collaborative paths forward. Its goal is to inspire the rethinking of refugees in resettlement as
active agents in their own livelihoods.
In October 2014, FMIP announced the call for papers as competition for proposals to be
presented in the conference on Refugee livelihoods: innovations in career laddering.
On 17th November 2014, I was happy of the feedback that my abstract was selected for
presentation in the conference, where I submitted a proposal on Nakivale Refugee Camp
Electrification using mas milling factory engines. The project was selected for its presentation
in the conference as innovative, practical and durable solutions to sustainable refugee
livelihoods.
The project, to be presented in the conference, requires the field information collected using a
research instrument.
The aim of this research instrument was the investigation of the level and effect of using
electricity on refugee livelihoods and effect of using the same electricity on their career
laddering in Nakivale refugee camp, Uganda. The study was undertaken with selected
respondents drawn from Nakivale refugee camp residents in their different categories as
described by their profile in the instrument.
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Data were collected by means of interviews, observational field visits, documentary analysis
procedures, and questionnaires. The study has used a number of one hundred and eight (108)
respondents.
The study established the profile of respondents who participated in this investigation, as the
objective number one of this study. This is because when selecting potential respondents who
can provide the real information relevant to the study, it can assure the reliability of the
research outcomes. In relation to this study, respondents have been described basing on their
gender, group age, educational level, nationality, spoken languages, residential status and their
sector of activity.
The study also identified the level of using innovative electricity in relation to livelihoods in
Nakivale refugee camp as independent variable (IV), as well as the level of refugee career
laddering as effect of electricity in the camp as dependent variable (DV). This was done by
setting a questionnaire with items/questions that brought to the researcher informative data
needed by partners in the project and actions to be taken by the same partners.
Then the study tried to establish the relationship between the two variables. The relationship
here indicates the effect of independent variable on dependent variable. Thus, the more the
use of innovative electricity, the more the livelihood and career laddering improvement in
Nakivale refugee camp and vice versa.
Thus, the study established that there is a big gap between the use of electricity and refugee
livelihoods, as expressed by the low level of using electricity among Nakivale refugee camp
communities, leading to the poor livelihood situation.
The study recommends that there is great need to put more efforts in supporting innovative
electricity initiatives in refugee camps given the critical effect it has on their livelihoods
especially their career laddering. The study addresses the voice to any one with the heart
touched by these miserable communities in Nakivale refugee camp.
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Contents
i.
Acknowledgment. .......................................................................................................................... 2
ii.
Abstract. ......................................................................................................................................... 3
1.
Background information.................................................................................................................. 8
1.1.
Introduction ....................................................................................................8
1.2.
About Forced Migration Innovation Project. ..................................................8
1.2.1. Aims of FMIP. ..................................................................................................8

1.2.2. Projects of FMIP .................................................................................................8
1.2.3. Partners ......................................................................................................... 10
1.2.4. Contact information ...................................................................................... 10
1.3.
bout the conference. ..................................................................................... 11
1.4.
About Nakivale refugee Cmp. ....................................................................... 11
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
2.
Camp administration ......................................................................................... 12

The camp operational Context. ......................................................................... 13
Critical consideration......................................................................................... 14
Nakivale refugee camp sectoral Activities ......................................................... 14
Project justification. ...................................................................................................................... 17

2.1.
Introduction. ................................................................................................. 17
2.2.
Statement of the problem.
2.3.
Research components ................................................................................... 18
3.
............................................................................ 17
Understanding key terms: Refugee Livelihoods, Self-Reliance, and Innovation. ............................. 19
3.1.
Introduction. ............................................................................................................................. 19
3.2.
Interaction between the concepts. .............................................................. 19
3.3.
Refugee innovative projects in Nakivale refugee camp. ............................. 20
4.
Methodology.
4.1.
............................................................................................................................... 26
Introduction. ............................................................................................................................. 26
4.2.
Research design.
4.2.1.
4.3.
.............................................................................................. 26
Variables of Interest........................................................................................... 26
Respondents.
.................................................................................................... 27
4.3.1. Population of the study ................................................................................. 27
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
4.3.2.
4.4.
.............................................................................................. 27
Research Instruments. ...................................................................................... 28
4.4.1.
4.4.2.
4.4.3.
4.4.4.
4.5.
Sample population.
Interview method. .............................................................................................. 29

Questionnaire method. ....................................................................................... 29
Documentation method. ..................................................................................... 29
Observation method. .......................................................................................... 30
Validity and reliability ................................................................................... 30
4.6. Data collection procedures. .................................................................................. 30
4.6.1. Before the administration of the questionnaires. ...................................................... 30

4.6.2. During the administration of the questionnaires. ...................................................... 31
4.6.3. After the administration of the questionnaires. ..................................................... 31
4.7.
Data Analysis. ................................................................................................... 31
4.8.
Ethical consideration. ........................................................................................ 32
4.9.
Limitations of the study. .................................................................................... 33
5. Data presentation, interpretation and analysis. ................................................................................ 34

5.0. Introduction. .................................................................................................... 34
5.1. Question, variable and objective number one: Descriptive statistics of respondents.
.......................................................................................................................................... 34
5.2. Question, variable and objective number two: Statistical analysis of levels of
Innovation/ innovative electricity in the camp. ................................................................... 41
5.3. Question, variable and objective number three: Statistical analysis of levels of
refugee livelihoods/career laddering. ................................................................................. 45
5.4. Question, variable and objective number four: Relationship between
innovation/innovative electricity and livelihoods/career laddering in the camp and testing
the hypothesis. ................................................................................................................... 48
6.
Summaries, conclusion and recommendations. ........................................................................... 53
6.1.
Introduction. ............................................................................................................................. 53
6.2.
Summary of the findings............................................................................... 53
Summary of the findings on respondents profile. ................................................ 53

Summary of findings on the level of Innovation/innovative electricity in the camp.
54
6.2.3. Summary of findings on the level of refugee livelihoods in the camp/career
laddering. ......................................................................................................................... 54
6.2.4. Summary of findings on the relationship between innovation/innovative
electricity and refugee livelihoods/career laddering ...................................................... 55
6.2.1.
6.2.2.
6.3.
Conclusion........................................................................................................ 55
6.4.
Recommendations............................................................................................. 56
6.4.1.
Recommendations for promoting innovation. .................................................. 56
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
6.4.2.
Recommendations for promoting refugee livelihoods/career laddering. ......... 57
References. ........................................................................................................................................... 59
List of abbreviations.
AIRD: African Initiative for Relief development
ARC: American Refugee Committee
CTA: Community Technology Access
CVI: Content Validity Index
DRC: Democratic Republic of the Congo
DV: Dependent Variable
FMIP: Forced Migration Innovation Project
FRC: Finnish Refugee Council
GoU: Government of Uganda
HIP: Humanitarian Innovation Project
ICRC: International Committee of Red Cross
ICT: Information Communication and Technology
IP: Implementing partner
IV: Independent Variable
MTI: Medical Teams International
NGO: Non-governmental organization
OP: Operating partner
OPM: Office of the Prime Minister
SGBV: Sexual Gender Based Violence
SMU: Southern Methodist University
SRS: Self-Reliance Strategy
SRS: Simple Random Sample
TX: Texas
UNHCR: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UN: United Nations
URCS; Uganda Red Cross Society
USA: United States of America
VTC: Vocational Training Center
WASH: Water sanitation and Hygiene
WTU: Window Trust Uganda
WFP: World Food Programme
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
1.
Background information.
1.1.
Introduction
This chapter highlights in details information on FMIP, its creation rationale, its current
projects, its partners and the contact information. The chapter goes further to describe the
conference and the themes of the conference. Lastly, the chapter gives the guiding information
on Nakivale refugee camp, its statistical indicators, partners of the camp management and the
sect oral activities.
1.2.
About Forced Migration Innovation Project.
1.2.1.
Aims of FMIP.
The Forced Migration Innovation Project is located in the Department of Anthropology at

Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas.
The goal of the Forced Migration Innovation Project is to rethink refugees in resettlement as
active agents in their own livelihoods. FMIP works with practitioners, the private sector, and
refugees to develop sound programs based on research outcomes that contribute to alternative
and sustainable livelihood practices in resettlement. In looking at longitudinal refugee
employment outcomes, it hope to capture the enabling environments that facilitate upward
mobility in newcomer populations.
1.2.2.
Projects of FMIP
Facilitating collaborative solutions

The Forced Migration Project is facilitating collaborative solutions between multiple
stakeholders, including the refugees themselves.
Working directly with refugees and the private sector
FMIP is redeveloping the way resettlement agencies recognize the specific job skills refugees
possess upon entering the country. By working directly with refugees and the private sector, we
are working to create a more comprehensive inventory of refugee assets. We will then pilot a
new skill assessment intake form that will better connect newcomers with employers' needs.
Expanding entrepreneur mentorship programs
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
FMIP is working with the Small Business Administration to expand their entrepreneurship
mentor programs to be more inclusive of refugees, both as mentors and as mentees. This
partnership will open opportunities to thousands of refugees with entrepreneurial dreams in
the US.
Utilizing new technologies with Ideas Box
FMIP is interested in rethinking how to utilize new technologies to connect refugees with the
vast amount of livelihood advancement information and training available online. We have
partnered with Ideas Box, a portable multimedia center created by Libraries Without Borders,
to deliver resources to refugees in overseas camps. Partnering with Ideas Box and innovative
translation technologies, FMIP's goal is to launch a pilot "Livelihood Resource Box" in its first
urban resettlement setting within a year.
Studying the public perception of refugees
FMIP is currently engaged in a study of public perception of refugees and the relationship
between those attitudes and employment outcomes. The outcomes of our study are informing
a series of Public Service Announcement videos designed to get the public to Rethink Refugees.
Another outcome will be to produce a set of recommendations for the press in how they talk
about newcomer populations.
Preparing refugees for today's workforce
FMIP is working with the private sector to understand how to prepare refugees to meet the
needs of today's workforce. This includes a thorough vocational audit of the area to determine
the quickest and most feasible paths to sustainable jobs. With this information, we will initiate
collaborative partnerships with businesses, service providers, refugees, vocational instructors,
ESL providers, and workforce development to create career-ladders for refugees that work for
all stakeholders.
Creating new specialized programs
It has long been known that refugees with limited English need to improve their language
abilities and acquire the needed job skills to advance in the U.S. labor market. FMIP is working
to create new specialized programs for refugees by adapting existing ESL programs to the needs
of living wage occupations. By combining language services with workplace communication
skills, job-specific language, skill training, certifications, soft skills, and job placement services,
refugees can be competitive for sustainable careers.
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Working with refugee communities
An important part of helping refugees find self-sufficiency is understanding the livelihood
strategies used by those who have been resettled in the U.S. for a long time. FMIP is working
with refugee communities to capture the enabling environments they used to support their
success. Through this bottom-up approach we are developing a database of innovative
strategies to leverage them with existing programs in a way that accelerates a newcomer's path
to meaningful and sustainable employment. We are also working to quantify the economic
trajectories of those who have been here for 30 years in order to understand the factors that
affect living wages.
Conducting seminars for refugee empowerment
FMIP is working through a series of seminars to empower refugees to be advocates for their
own skills, talents, ambitions and contributions to the American fabric and economy. In support
of these efforts, we are developing a platform for them to carry these messages to the
legislature through a breakfast hosted at the Texas State Capital next Spring.
1.2.3.
Partners
The ROi project, HIP, Miami College of Arts and Sciences, the US Small Business Administration
(SBA), HIAS, IdeasBox, CWS and DN/OMEGA Productions.
1.2.4.
Contact information
Physical Address
Southern Methodist University, Forced Migration Innovation Project
3225 Daniel Avenue, Heroy Hall, Room 307, Dallas, TX 75205
Mailing Address
Forced Migration Innovation Project, Department of Anthropology
Southern Methodist University, P.O. Box 750336, Dallas, TX 75275
Email: fnibbs@smu.edu
Office Hours: Mon - Fri: 8:00 - 5:00
A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

10
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
1.3.
bout the conference.
The Forced Migration Innovation Project at Southern Methodist University major objective is to
bringing the best and brightest ideas in livelihood and career-laddering innovation. This unique
conference believed to gather academics, service providers, employers, state actors, faith
based organizations, and academics to inspire creative collaborative paths forward. Its goal was
to inspire the rethinking of refugees in resettlement as active agents in their own livelihoods.
The 2015 meeting intends to focus on this provocative subject of refugee livelihoods:
innovation in career laddering, where they intended to welcome debate, discourse, and
research from scholars and practitioners who want to engage with a broad audience these
issues as well as other subjects related to facilitating moves for refugees toward sustainable
livelihoods.
Conference themes:
Proposals for inspiring presentations, workshops, short films, posters, or colloquia were invited
that addressed the broader themes listed below. In addition to the special focus, paper
presentations were grouped into one of the following categories for presentation at the
conference:
Theme 1: New technologies aiding marginalized populations in obtaining sustainable livelihoods
Theme 2: Creative private/public sector partnerships moving newcomers into living wages
Theme 3: Mainstream development programming that could be adapted to limited English
speakers
Theme 4: Innovative solutions to overcoming the traditional barriers to career-laddering
Theme 5: Policy and public discourse barriers and prospects for overcoming them
Theme 6: Refugee voices- their experiences and strategies for overcoming obstacles in careerladdering.
1.4.
About Nakivale refugee Cmp.
Refugee Population: 60,992 (as of March 31st 2014)

Creation: 1958
Size: 185 km with 3 Zones (Rubondo, Base camp and Juru) and 79 villages
Location: Nakivale settlement is located in Isingiro district South West Uganda.

11
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
1.4.1.
Camp administration
Working in partnership, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) works with the Government of
Uganda, through OPM, other UN agencies, NGOs and civil society in providing protection and
support to people of concern. The Government of Uganda (OPM) ensures the security of all
refugees and has a generous policy which provides refugees in settlements with plots of land
(50 metres x 100 metres) in order for them to become self-sufficient.
Table1. Statistical indicators of Nakivale refugees.

Country Of Origin
Asylum seekers
Burundi
365
Congo DRC
1,881
Eritrea
35
Ethiopia
22
Kenya
Liberia
Rwanda
335
Somalia
535
Sudan
2
Tanzania
South Sudan
TOTAL
3,175
Source: UNHCR, Nakivale fact sheet, 2014
Refugees
8,134
30,574
644
208
27
1
8,686
9,457
78
1
7
57,817
Total
8,499
32,455
679
230
27
1
9,021
9,992
80
1
7
60,992

12
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Figure 1. Statistical indicators of Nakivale refugees by nationalities.
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
Asylum seekers
10000
Refugees
5000
Total
1.4.2.
The camp operational Context.
Nakivale refugee settlement was established in 1958 and officially recognized as a refugee
settlement in 1960 through the Uganda Gazette General Notice No. 19. Currently the majority
of refugees in the settlement (49.8%) are Congolese. The settlement is divided into 79 villages
with an average of 800 to 1,000 people per village.
There is also an estimated population of 35,000 nationals surrounding the Refugee Settlement
who directly benefit from water, education, health and nutrition programmes in the
settlement. UNHCR monitors the implementation of sub projects in all protection, community
services, education, health, nutrition, WASH, livelihoods, and environmental activities and
interfaces with operational partners involved in providing food, adult education and tracing and
reunification.
Table2. Implementing Partners for 2014
Field of operation
Institution
Settlement management, Coordination, and Office of the Prime Minister (OPM)
Security
Protection
American Refugee Committee (ARC)
Community services
Education
Windle Trust Uganda (WTU)

13
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Health/Nutrition
Water/ Sanitation
Livelihoods & Environment
Shelter/ Logistics
Reception Center
Medical Teams International (MTI)

Nsamizi
African Initiative for Relief Development
(AIRD)
Table3. Operating Partners in the camp.

Field of operation
Adult Education & Youth Leadership
Institution
Finish Refugee Council (FRC)
Food
WFP through Samaritans Purse
Child Protection/Tracing
Uganda Red Cross Society (URCS)
Psychosocial counseling
Tutapona
Community Services/sport
Right to Play
1.4.3.
Critical consideration.
Nakivale is the 8th largest refugee camp in the world. It is same geographical size as the Indian
city of Kolkata (formerly Calcutta)
1.4.4.
Nakivale refugee camp sectoral Activities
Protection: The protection sector is involved in strengthening protection from crime and
reducing or eliminating arbitrary detention, prevention and response to Sexual and Gender
Based Violence (SGBV) as well as provision of child protection services to unaccompanied
minors/separated children and children at risk. Support is given for durable solutions through
individual protection case identification for resettlement and voluntary repatriation activities
including information campaigns, "Go See and Come Tell visits" and escorting returning
convoys. Nakivale receives an average of 2,000 new asylum seekers in its reception centre
every month who await decisions on their refugee status by the Ugandan government Refugee
Eligibility Committee which visits the settlement every 3 months.

14
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Community Services: Support includes distribution of non-food items, construction of shelters
to persons with specific needs (PSNs) and psychosocial support to vulnerable refugees.
Vulnerable groups supported by this sector include the elderly, people with disabilities, single
parents, unaccompanied/separated children, as well as other men, elderly persons, women at
risk, persons with medical conditions, children at risk and more generally women and children
in the settlement. It is also involved in the capacity building of refugee leaders, and mobilizing
of communities for community works such as building PSN houses, classrooms, water point
maintenance and community roads. The sector is also responsible for mobilization for other
sector activities including health and WASH and the community mobilization and sensitisation
for the celebration of international days such as International Womens Day, World Refugee
Day and 16 days of activism.
Education: There are 9 primary schools and 27 Early Childhood Development Centres in
Nakivale along with 1 secondary school and 1 vocational school. Windle Trust Uganda (WTU)
also implements the German-funded DAFI scholarship programme which supports tertiary
education. Children requiring special needs education are supported in 2 schools outside the
refugee settlement. The Vocational Training Centre (VTC) provides skills training for asylum
seekers, refugees and Ugandan nationals to give them the skills necessary for informal
employment opportunities and small scale entrepreneurship. Nakivale also hosts a Community
Technology Access (CTA) Centre which consists of a training area where students enroll and are
trained in basic computer courses and an internet caf. Finnish Refugee Council (FRC) provides
training in Adult Literacy, English for Adults and related life skills through 36 learning centres
across the settlement.
Health: Services provided include Out-Patient Department services, community outreach
activities such as immunization, sensitization and mobilization for antenatal care (ANC) and
systems strengthening. There are 4 health centres in Nakivale (one grade III and three grade II
H/Cs). Main referral point is Mbarara RRH and Rwekubo H/C IV. MTI intervenes and also
supports awareness messages on HIV/AIDS, other communicable diseases, health promotion
campaigns, and capacity building of Community Health Workers. As a result there has been an
improvement in ANC attendances, maternal child health and family planning response. All
indicators in morbidity and mortality are also within standard. Most common diseases within
the settlement are Malaria and Respiratory Tract Infections. The Global Acute Malnutrition
(GAM) for Nakivale in 2013 was 2.9% (with critical being more than 15%) and Severe Acute
Malnutrition rate was negligible (critical = 5%).
WASH: Refugees receive both underground water (through boreholes and shallow wells) and
surface water pumped from Lake Nakivale and treated at one of 3 water plants in the
settlement (Base camp, Misiera and Kabazaana). There are 50 hand pumps and 318 water taps

15
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
in the settlement. Water trucking (in schools and health centres) is also used during the dry
season and rain water harvesting during the wet season. The sanitation sector is involved in
hygiene promotion in communities and institutions. Latrine coverage in 2013 was 87%.
Livelihoods & Environment: Main activities include food crop production (including mushroom
growing inside houses), crop post-harvest handling (mainly for maize), livestock husbandry,
small businesses and vocational skills (tailoring, soap making, bakery and crafts/sandal making),
making energy efficient stoves that use less firewood and making charcoal out of household
waste. As part of promoting and supporting small holder associations, beneficiary households
have also been organized into groups/associations. In order to promote conservation and stop
deforestation tree-planting and energy saving technologies have been introduced.
Resettlement: Nakivale is the main settlement for resettlement cases due to its size and the
length of stay of many of its refugees. The focus is on individual protection cases and Congolese
refugees for durable solutions.
Additionally, follow-up and counseling is provided for the Somali refugees whose cases were
submitted between 2009 and 2011 and still pending. In 2013, UNHCR referred 999 individuals
from Nakivale and 1,763 individuals departed. In 2013, resettlement submissions from Nakivale
are expected to continue increasing significantly with a main focus on Congolese refugees.

16
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
2.
Project justification.
2.1.
Introduction.
In this new chapter, the researcher provides key elements of the rationale for the study, critical
elements of the study and the expected hypothesis to be tested. Elements include research
questions, variables and objectives.
2.2.
Statement of the problem.
According to refugee policy analysts and scholars, three main durable solutions to the
refugee solution have been identified: repatriation, integration, and resettlement (Crisp, 2003).
Repatriation continues to be impossible for many of the refugees in Nakivale due to their
security in home countries. Integration is often regarded as a threat to domestic security and
detrimental to the host economy, a perception that is especially prevalent in Ugandan policy
(Jacobsen, 2001; Hovil, 2007; Walker, 2008). Resettlement, where refugees are relocated more
permanently to a safe third country (Kneebone, 2008), is attractive to both the refugees and
the host country but is becoming increasingly rare and difficult, as Crisp (2003) explains: Very
few of Africa's long-term refugees are likely to be accepted for resettlement, which is in any
case a relatively complex and costly way of finding solutions to refugee problems. Many
refugees in Uganda are considered to be in protracted refugee situations, which are defined
by UNHCR as a situation where refugees have lived in exile for more than five years, and when
they still have no immediate prospect of finding a durable solution to their plight (Crisp, 2003).
Refugees find themselves in a long-lasting and intractable state of limbo. Their lives may not be
at risk, but their basic rights and essential economic, social and psychological needs remain
unfulfilled after years in exile. A refugee in this situation is often unable to break free from
enforced reliance on external assistance. This dependency and the long-term nature of these
situations not only create huge financial burdens for the host states, but also often lead to
negligence of rights of the refugees. A fourth and well-researched alternative as a response
after a failure to these alternatives had to take place. The result was the self-reliance strategy,
a new philosophy and approach to refugee livelihoods improvement; the social and economic
ability of an individual, a household or a community to meet essential needs (including
protection, food, water, shelter, personal safety, health and education) in a sustainable manner
and with dignity. Self-reliance, as a programme approach, refers to developing and
strengthening livelihoods of persons of concern, and reducing their vulnerability and long-term
reliance on humanitarian/external assistance.

17
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
2.3.
Research components
Table4. Research questions, variables and objectives.

Research questions
Research variables
Research objectives
1. What is the profile of

research respondents?
1. Descriptive/categorical
variables in terms of
gender, age, education,
nationality, language, living
status and sector of activity
of respondents.
1. Identifying the profile of

respondents in terms of
gender, age, education,
nationality, language, status
and activities of
respondents.
2. What is the level of using

innovative energy for
improving livelihoods?
2. IV= Cause variable

agreement:
Innovation=innovative
electricity.
2.Establishing the level of

innovation/innovative
electricity in the camp
3. What is the level of

3. DV= Effect/outcome
innovative electricity in
variable agreement:
promoting career laddering
Refugee livelihoods=career
laddering
in the camp?
3.Establishing the level of

refugee livelihoods/career
laddering in the camp.
4. What is the relationship

between
electricity and refugee
livelihoods/career
laddering
4.Determining the degree of

the relationship between
electricity and refugee
livelihoods/career
laddering.
4. Innovation/innovative
electricity versus refugee
livelihoods/career laddering
in the camp
O Hypothesis (Null): In Nakivale refugee camp, there is no relationship between

innovation/innovative electricity and refugee livelihoods/career laddering.

18
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
3.
3.1.
Understanding key terms: Refugee Livelihoods, Self-Reliance, and Innovation.
Introduction.
The chapter describes related views on key terms and sample case studies of related projects in
the camp of reference. The researcher had the intention to making the topic understandable.
3.2.
Interaction between the concepts.
Rocco Nuri, the Communications Officer for UNHCR Innovation, states three questions about
the relationship between refugee livelihoods, self-reliance, and innovation. These questions
are:
Whats the link between innovation and refugee self-reliance?
Self-reliance relates to peoples ability to meet their needs in a sustainable and dignified way
rather than remain in a situation of long-term dependency. Innovation is a methodology for
specifying problems, identifying possible untapped solutions, adapting them to context, and
where appropriate, scaling them. Around the world refugees engage in an array of economic
activities, often under the radar. Yet, there may be untapped practices among refugees, with
UNHCR, or beyond, that could inform new approaches that build upon refugees existing
livelihood assets and strategies. New approaches to microcredit, social enterprise development,
vocational training, agricultural techniques, business incubation, and data outsourcing may
have potential to enhance autonomy, when adapted appropriately to context (Alexander
B.2013).
How can the private sector help expand livelihood opportunities for refugees?
According to Alexander B. 2013, the traditional assumption in many protracted refugee
situations is that donor states are the main source of assistance, whether working through
UNHCR or NGOs. The role of states is, of course, crucial, especially at the emergency phase. But
ultimately livelihoods, and self-reliance are about jobs and opportunities for self-employment
and business development. It is access to the private sector that is likely to provide such
opportunities in a sustainable way. Yet the private sector has, until recently, been almost totally
neglected in the world of refugee and humanitarian assistance. There has been a tendency to
crowd out enterprise and investment, which can emerge from not only the global level but also
local and transnational actors. A range of livelihoods ideas are also emerging from the private

19
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
sector such as reverse supply chain and data outsourcing, which have potential to create
opportunity even in the most remote areas. By simultaneously benefiting citizens of a host
state, private sector job creation may also gradually enable refugees to be perceived as a
benefit rather than a burden, and so change restrictive regulatory frameworks in host states.
The private sector is a crucial missing link but one that needs to be incorporated based on
clear principles that ensure opportunities are protection-enhancing.
Whats the role of refugees in the context of innovative solutions for their self-reliance?
In many ways there are two worlds of humanitarian innovation: one based on the top-down
aim of improving organisational responses; the other based on a bottom-up approach that
builds directly on the skills, initiative and entrepreneurship of so-called beneficiary populations
(Alexander B 2013). Across the whole of the innovation literature, it is the latter that has been
neglected, and it is this niche that initiatives like FMIP and HIP are trying to address such
challenges. Refugees themselves adapt and find creative solutions to the everyday challenges
created by exile, including through finding innovative livelihood opportunities in both the
formal and informal sectors. The challenge for a genuinely bottom-up approach to innovation is
work with and build upon the talents, ideas and aspirations of refugees themselves rather than
to just impose solutions from the outside. This involves looking below the radar at how
refugees themselves adapt to context, and working in a participatory way with refugee
communities to support and nurture these ideas.
3.3.
Refugee innovative projects in Nakivale refugee camp.
In addition to the large number of common primary livelihood activities identified in the camp,
refugees have also created numerous unique businesses which defy easy categorisation. These
examples from Nakivale show a rich creative capacity amongst refugees to be innovative in
their approaches to their businesses, seeking out niche opportunities in broad markets.

20
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Electricity plant.
Photo1. Electricity plant in Nakivale using mais milling machine owned by a Somali.
Source: HIP photo gallery.
Mohammad, a Somali refugee living in Nakivale Refugee Settlement, has created a set-up to
provide electrical power to 100 surrounding houses in the settlement. The set-up consists of a
milling machine motor, a large dynamo to convert the motor power into electricity, and old oil
drums to hold water for cooling the motor. The idea for this set-up came from Mohammads
time spent in a border town near Tanzania when he used to work in transporting people and
goods from the settlement. He saw the milling machine motor being used by a trader and had
the idea to join a large dynamo to it in order to get more power than you could typically get
from a standard generator.
To test his idea, Mohammad borrowed the equipment from a Ugandan trader at the border to
see if his idea of connecting the dynamo would work in generating a lot of power, which could
then be sold to many people in Nakivale. His idea was successful, and so he was able to repay
21
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
the trader who lent him the equipment using the money he charged monthly to supply power
to the houses in the settlement. The people who Mohammad supplies electricity to pay him on
a monthly basis. Therefore to pay for the regular fuel costs each day, Mohammad has also
started a cinema in the settlement bringing in a daily income to pay for the fuel.
Mais milling factory.
Photo2. Milling factory of a Rwandan refugee in Nakivale.

In the heart of Nakivale, Claude runs a thriving set of business ventures from a complex joined
to his home. He owns a milling machine, which he uses to grind maize flour for customers
ranging from refugees to local Ugandans and even the World Food Programme, which used his
services to help feed a recent influx of Eastern Congolese arrivals.
Employing five other refugees to help with maize milling, he also diversifies his income by
selling leftover maize husks to livestock owners for use as chicken feed.
The success of his maize milling enterprise has allowed Claude to save up enough to build a
rain-water storage tank behind his milling shop. Water from this tank helps cool the hotrunning diesel milling machine. During the dry season the water tank is used as an additional
income-generating activity, selling water for household consumption to neighbours.

22
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Computer-game room
Pfoto3. Computer game room set up by a Somalis refugee in Nakivale refugee camp.
After discussing with friends who ran a similar business in Kampala, Abdi, a Nakivale-based
Somali refugee, initiated his own computer game business where children and adults come
from across the settlement to play games for a small fee. Instead of waiting for donors, Abdi,
a Somali business man in Nakivale settlement in Uganda explained, I wanted to make a living
by myself. He purchases the televisions second hand in the settlement, and purchases
computer games when making trips outside the settlement to nearby towns. As Abdi explains,
you must grab skills from wherever you can. After working as a mechanic back in Somalia,
Abdi learnt new skills in electronics from others living in the settlement. This knowledge
enables him to repair his own televisions, his generator (for powering the televisions), and also
his collection of games controllers. He proudly displayed for us his vast collection of spare parts
and metal devices, essential for repairing his generators, game consoles, and controllers, which
he has diligently collected over time. His skills are not only essential for repairing equipment
(such as water damaged televisions from the leaky tarpaulin roof, and games controllers due to

23
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
vigorous use by the children who come to play), but also to prolong the life of some of his
equipment.
Cinema room
Photo4. Cinema room owned by a Congolese in the camp.

A popular pastime for Nakivale residents in Base Camp 2 is the New Congo market cinema.
Here, at the back of a large mud-daub hall large enough to seat dozens, a large screen television
and speaker system play movies and television programmes. For a small fee, customers can
choose from a range of daily entertainment, from recent football matches to Hollywood and
Chinese movies dubbed into French, Swahili, and English. The theatre manager we spoke to
explained his strategy for attracting new customers: a loudspeaker over the cinemas entrance
plays audio tracks from these movies and TV shows while they play in order to grab the
attention of passers-by.
Photo studio.
Demou-Kay, a young Congolese refugee, embodies this entrepreneurial creativity in his love of
technology. Each day, he arrives at the CTA in Nakivale with his laptop, which he rents from
another refugee, and uses the cafs internet connection and electricity supply to enable his
video editing work. He has a keen eye for photography and cinematography, and uses rented
camera equipment to film community weddings, concerts, and other events for clients, then
editing the footage into montages and souvenir videos.

24
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Community radio.
Photo5. A room of combined photo studio and community radio set up by a Congolese in the
camp.
Alongside this livelihood activity, Demou-Kay has also used his self-taught technical skills to
make a radio transmitter to create a radio station the only one in the settlement. The radio
transmitter was constructed out of second-hand electrical parts and a mobile phone found in
the settlement. His radio station transmits over a 5-10 km radius, providing songs, news
updates and health messages to listeners in and nearby Nakivale. Only one month after the
station was established, Demou-Kay said that the radio had already helped one family to be
reunited from its communication about new arrivals to the settlement. By charging a small fee
for song requests, he has begun to generate income from the station, helping to maintain the
project.
Music shops.
Music shops are common in Nakivale and rely directly on computers and phones for their
services. Henry, a young Congolese man who owns one such shop in Juru Zone, Nakivale, leaves
the settlement every month for the neighbouring Ugandan city of Mbarara. There, he loads up
a USB stick with hundreds of MP3 files covering popular Congolese and Western musicians,
which he purchases from a Ugandan merchant. On returning to Nakivale, he transfers the files
from his USB onto a laptop. From his computer, he then loads the files directly onto his
customers mobile phones or on CDs, charging a fee per individual song.

25
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
4.
4.1.
Methodology.
Introduction.
This chapter clarifies in details the hierarchical actions and steps followed in a methodological
manner by the researcher to carry out this empirical study. These include the research design,
population size and samples for selecting respondents, research instrument used in collecting
information from the field, validity for the questionnaire to be valid, reliability statistical
techniques, data collection procedures, data analysis, ethical consideration and limitations to
the study.
4.2.
Research design.
A research design lays the foundation for conducting the research in an effective and efficient
manner. Bryman and Bell (2007) define a research design as a framework for the collection and
analysis of data. Coolican (1994:4) refers to research design as a method for gathering empirical
data with which to test a hypothesis or develop a theory. Bless and Higson-Smith (1995:63) say
that a research design specifies the most adequate operations to be performed to test specific
hypothesis under given conditions. In another dimension Monetle, Sullivan and Dejong (1990)
maintain that a research design is a detailed plan utilizing how observations will be made.
In this study of innovative electricity and livelihoods in refugee camp of Nakivale, the research
has used the exploratory research design, where the research questions were identified based
on research variables and objectives as indicated in table4.
Table5. Research integrated scheme.
Data analysis
Concept generation
Reviewing literature
Proposal
development
Field data collection
4.2.1.
Variables of Interest
Hypothesis
Variables
Measures
Sampling
Design
Report writing
Presentation of
findings
Dissemination of
research report

26
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
In this study, the researcher intended to manipulate an environmental condition
(cause=innovation/innovative electricity) to determine its effect on behavior (outcome=refugee
livelihoods/career laddering), as variables. A variable is any condition that can vary or change in
quantity or quality. Categorical Variable is predictor variable that contains values indicating
membership in one of several possible categories. E.g., gender (male or female), marital status
(married, single, divorced, widowed).
Independent variable (IV), or treatment, is under the control of and administered by the
experimenter. In our case, innovation/innovative electricity was considered as IV. The behavior
that is potentially affected by the treatment and that we measure is called the dependent
variable.
Dependent variable (DV) is always a measure of behavior that we record after first
manipulating the independent variable. In our study, refugee livelihood was taken as DV. It is
referred to as dependent because changes in it depend on the effects of the independent
variable. If a systematic relationship is found between the independent and dependent
variables, then we have established an empirical or causal relationship.
4.3.
Respondents.
4.3.1.
Population of the study
Moonie, (2000) defines population as the entire group of persons having the same
characteristics that are of interest to the researcher. Ringrose (1986) postulates that population
denotes all the potential participants from which the sample is drawn.
In our case of study, the population includes the refugees in the camp, given their gender,
education, nationalities, languages, status and sector of activities.
4.3.2.
Sample population.
According to Best and Khan (1993:13) a sample refers to a small proportion of a

population selected for observation and analysis. Simple random sampling (SRS) technique is
the natural alternative. Aldridge and Levine (2001) define it as a design in which the cases that
will make up the sample are chosen in a single process of selection from the sampling frame
that covers the entire target population. In this regard each element has an equal chance of
being chosen.
Given the large scale of space of the camp and the big number of residents, this would
make a huge population for this study. Therefore, for the reason of lack of money, limited time,

27
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
and nature of this study, the researcher could not take the whole population under this study.
Thus, there was a need to select a sample of a specific number of respondents representing the
total population.
Thus, target population of this study consisted of 108 refugees in the camp.
4.4.
Research Instruments.
Denscombe (2000) advocates the use of two or more methods of data collection to
enhance the validation and reliability of data, arguing that the use of multi method approach
allows findings to be corroborated or questioned by comparing data produced by different
methods. Determining the impact of the results of any research work is dependent upon two
concepts: validity and reliability (Drucker 2001).
Essentially, validity entails the question, Does your measurement process, assessment,
or project actually measure what you intend to measure? Simon (1989) defines validity as that
quality of data gathering instrument that may enable it to measure what it is supposed to
measure.
Aldridge and Levine (2001) define validity as whether a measuring instrument indicates
success in measuring what it is designed for. Content validity is defined as an approval to
establish the validity measurements including assessing the logical relationship between the
proposed measure and the theoretical definition of the variable (Sullivan et al.1989). Reliability,
on the other hand, addresses whether repeated measurements or assessments provide a
consistent result given the same initial circumstances (NATCO, The Organisation for Transplant
Professionals: 2009).
Sullivan et al. (2000) say reliability refers to the ability of a measure to yield consistent
results each time it is used. Similarly Aldridge and Levine (2001) define it as a measure of the
extent to which the results of an indicator or test are consistent over time. Internal validity
encompasses whether the results of the study are legitimate because of the way the groups
were selected, the data was recorded or the analysis was performed. External validity, often
called generalizability, involves whether the results given by the study are transferable to other
groups (i.e. populations of interest) as postulated by Handley (2009). Russ - Eft (1980: 37) for

28
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
him, defined reliability as the degree to which the results are attributable to sources of
variance.
4.4.1.
Interview method.
Bryman and Bell (2003: 115) define an interview as the soliciting of information by the
interviewer from the interviewee. Saunders et al.(1997) citing Kahn and Cannell (1957) describe
an interview as a purposeful discussion between two or more people. Interviews are meant to
elicit primary data responses through direct questioning, (Wegner, 1993).
It is the most common form of data collection in any social survey such as elicit different
peoples opinions on a subject such as the socio-economic impact of foreign aid on
development. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (1996), the advantages of using the interview
technique approach are that the respondents can expand on areas of interest and can use nonverbal cues such as expression to emphasize their responses. In this study, few respondents
were approached for interviews. In our case, discussion with respondents focused on items in
questionnaire, where the researcher filled the questionnaire upon the interviewee responses.
4.4.2.
Questionnaire method.
Questionnaires are used to investigate attitudes, beliefs, feelings, opinions, knowledge

and some aspects of behaviour (British Educational Research Association, 2006 2009 http://www.bera.ac.uk/questionnaire/#use) This method, if expertly designed, can give
the researcher reliable data. Denscombe (1998) argues that the questionnaire works on the
premise that if you want to find out something about people and their attitudes you simply go
and ask them what you want to know, and get the information straight from the horses mouth.
Using questionnaires to collect data is a relatively quick way of gathering such information with
relatively good response rates, in addition to preserving respondent confidentiality. In this
respect the questionnaires were relying on intellectual and literacy competence of the
respondents. The researcher never posted any questions but has physically talked to
respondents, discussing on items/questions to be judged.
Questions were grouped into two groups where one was concerned with scrutinizing the role of
electricity in improving routine livelihoods of refugees in the camp and the other concerned
with discovering the role of innovative electricity in promoting the career laddering of refugees
in the camp.
4.4.3.
Documentation method.

29
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Documentation analysis is a systematic research technique that focuses on the analysis
of both quantitative and qualitative manifest or latent meanings of words, ideas, phrases,
postures, objectives and artefacts (Achola 1995). Against this backdrop it follows that
documentary analysis procedure will generate natural data for analysis. It is further assumed
that it saves both money and time. Shumba and Kaziboni (2005) credit this method, an
advantage to the researcher that she/he interacts with printed materials which are non-human
in nature. In view of the merits, textual data and all forms of materials related to the innovative
electricity and livelihoods in the context of Nakivale refugee camp were scholarly scrutinized in
an effort to see whether they have a bearing to the topic under study.
4.4.4.
Observation method.
During this instrumentation method, the researcher used his own sight and judgment of
what has been observed on the ground. For this research case, the researcher has limited
himself on the observation of the camp on the ground.
4.5.
Validity and reliability
To ensure the content validity, the researcher gave questionnaires to experts to judge
the questions, after which a content validity index (CVI) was computed. Computing CVI, the
researcher used the following formula:
CVI=Number of items declared valid/the total number of items (questions).
As a result, the researcher found the CVI greater to 0.7, and the instrument was judged
to be valid in the reverse case, and finally the questions were revised with removing irrelevant
questions to replace with more valid ones.
To ensure the content reliability, results from respondents were analyzed using pearsons linear
correlation coefficient (PLCC) and regression analysis.
4.6. Data collection procedures.
4.6.1. Before the administration of the questionnaires.

30
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
1. An introduction letter was obtained from the camp administration to solicit approval to
conduct the study from respective respondents.
2. After this introduction letter, the researcher established a list of the qualified
respondents from their respective categories, and selected through systematic random
sampling from this list to arrive at the minimum sample size.
3. The respondents were explained about the study and were requested to sign the
Informed Consent Form.
4. The researcher reproduced more than enough questionnaires for distribution.
5. The researcher selected research assistants to assist in the data collection; briefed and
oriented them in order to be consistent in administering the questionnaires.
4.6.2. During the administration of the questionnaires.
1. The respondents were requested to answer completely and not to leave any part of the
questionnaires unanswered.
2. The researcher and assistants emphasized on retrieving answered questionnaires within
five days from the date of distribution.
3. On retrieval, all returned questionnaires were checked if all were answered.
4.6.3. After the administration of the questionnaires.
The data gathered were collected, encoded into the computer and statistically treated using
the Statistical Package for Social Sciences ( SPSS) and Microsoft Office Excel computer package.
4.7. Data Analysis.
Borgdan and Biklen (1992) define data analysis as a process of systematically searching
and arranging the interview transcripts and other materials that the researcher accumulates to
increase his/ her understanding of them and enable him/her to present what he/she would
have discovered to them.
During this process of data analysis, the researcher used frequencies and percentage
distribution to analyze data on profile of respondent. Mean and standard deviation were used
to determine the level of using innovative electricity and livelihoods in Nakivale refugee camp.
Numerical values and the interpretation were used to interpret the response based on the
mean score, for each item question.
The following numerical values and interpretation were used to interpret the
respondents based on the mean score of each item or question;

31
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Table6. Likert table:.

Mean range.
Response mode.
Interpretation.
3.26-4.00
Strongly agree.
Very high.
2.51-3.25
Agree.
High.
1.76-2.50
Disagree.
Low.
1.00-1.75
Strongly disagree.
Very low.
Range =High-Low/Low=4-1/4=0.75
The Pearsons linear correlation coefficient (PLCC) has been used to determine if there
was a significant relationship between the level of these variables 0.05 level of significant and
to test the last hypothesis.
4.8. Ethical consideration.
To ensure confidentiality of the information provided by the respondents and to
ascertain the practice of ethics in this study, the following activities were implemented by the
researcher:
1. The respondents were coded instead of reflecting the names.
2. Solicit permission through a written request to the concerned officials of the institutions
responsible of the field of this study.
3. Acknowledge the authors quoted in this study and the author of the standardized
instrument through citations and referencing.
4. Present the findings in a generalized manner.

32
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
4.9. Limitations of the study.
In view of the following threats to validity, the researcher claimed an allowable 5%
margin of error at 0.05 level of significance. Measures were also indicated in order to minimize
if not to eradicate the threats to the validity of the findings of this study.
1. Extraneous variables which should be beyond the researchers control such as

respondents honesty as many of them keep conscious about their security of their
full information revelation, personal biases of being a refugee itself and
uncontrolled setting of the study as the study is an personal initiative.
2. Instrumentation: The research instrument on refugee livelihoods might not be
standardized. Therefore a validity and reliability test were done to produce a
credible measurement of the research variables.
3. Testing: The use of research assistants can bring about inconsistency in the
administration of the questionnaires in terms of time of administration,
understanding of the items in the questionnaires and explanations given to the
respondents. To minimize this threat, the research assistants were oriented and
briefed on the procedures to be done in data collection.
5.
Attrition/Mortality: Not all questionnaires cold be returned completely answered

nor even retrieved back due to circumstances on the part of the respondents such as
travels, sickness, hospitalization and refusal/withdrawal to participate. In
anticipation to this, the researcher reserved more respondents by exceeding the
minimum sample size. The respondents were also reminded not to leave any item in
the questionnaires unanswered and were closely followed up as to the date of
retrieval.

33
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
5. Data presentation, interpretation and analysis.
5.0. Introduction.
This chapter presents, categorizes, interprets and analyses the data on the profile of
respondents, the level of innovation/innovative electricity in the camp, the level of refugee
livelihoods/career laddering in the camp and the relationship between these two variables
indicated in table4. Data were gathered using the questionnaire analysis. A discussion of
descriptive and inferential statistics was done. The data was collected from selected
respondents of the study.
5.1. Question, variable and objective number one: Descriptive statistics of respondents.
Table 7. Respondents rate.
Category
Classes
Frequencies
Percentage
Respondents rate
Missing questionnaires
12
11.22
Questionnaires collected
96
88.88
Total
108
100
Source: Primary data.
Missing
questionnaires
Questionnaires
collected
As indicated in a table 5, 108 questionnaires were distributed and only 96 that is 88.22%
have been collected. This was due to the surprisingly occurrences beyond respondents control
like sickness, work duties, etc

34
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Table8. Presentation of respondents gender.
Category.
Classes.
Frequencies.
Percentage.
Gender
Males
54
56.25%
Females
42
43.75%
Total
96
100
Males
Females
During the study,96 over 108 questionnaires were retrieved. 54/96 respondents were
males, that is 43.75% of the respondents and 42/96 respondents were females, that is 56.25%
of respondents as indicated in the table 6. This creates an image of the extent to which men are
more than women.
Table9. Presentation of respondents age groups.
Category.
Age Classes.
Frequencies.
Percentages.
Age groups
Up to-20
17
17.70%
21-35
38
39.58%
36-55
29
26.85%
55 and above
12
12.5%
96
100
TOTAL

35
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Frequencies of respondents age groups.

40
30
20
Frequencies.
10
0
Up to-20
21-35
36-55
55 and
above
The table 7 above shows that over 96 respondents, 17 of them were aged of up to 20
years, that is 17.70%, 38 of them aged between 21 and 35 corresponding to 39.58%, then 29 of
them are aged between 36 and 55 years old corresponding to 26.85%, and 12 of them were
above 55 years old which is 12.5%.
From the above summary, we can realize that most of refugees in the camp are still
young, the generation of a major constituent of the future society and implication of this young
generation can contribute a lot in promoting livelihoods in the camp.
Table10. Presentation of respondents educational level.
Category.
Classes.
Education level
Up to primary education 56
58.33%
Secondary education
21
21.87%
Undergraduate
16
16.66%
Postgraduate
3.12%
96
100
Total
Frequencies.
Percentages.

36
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Frequencies of respondents educational

level.
60
50
40
30
20
Frequencies.
10
0
Up to primary
education
Secondary
education
Undergraduate
Postgraduate
From the information in the table 8, majority of respondents (56/96=58.33%) in this

study have studied up to primary education level. This brought the researcher to judging
education services to be inefficient in the camp as supported by the presence of only one
secondary school in the whole camp. On the other hand, the situation can hinder the
improvement of livelihoods and career laddering as a result of illiteracy.
Table11. Presentation of respondents nationalities.
Category.
Classes.
Frequencies.
Percentages.
Nationalities
Burundi
9.37%
DRC
34
35.41%
Eritrea
7.29%
Ethiopia
12
12.5%
Rwanda
16
16.66%
Somalia
12
12.5%
South Sudan
2.08%
Other
4.16%
96
100
Total

37
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Frequencies of respondents nationalities.

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Frequencies.
Over 96 respondents, 34 equal to 35.41% were of DRC nationality, 16 of them equal to

16.66% were Rwandans, 12 of them equal to 12.5% Ethiopians, 12 equal to 12.5% were Somalis
and other nationalities in minor proportions.
Table12. Presentation of respondents languages.

Category.
Classes.
Frequencies.
Percentages.
Languages
Luganda
18
18.75%
English
9.37%
Swahili
7.27%
French
29
30.20%
Arab
7.27%
Other
23
23.95%
96
100
Total

38
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Frequencies of respondents languages.

Other
Arab
French
Frequencies.
Swahili
English
Luganda
0
10
15
20
25
30
One unexpected realization, apart from Congolese who made French as their home
language, was the use of the dialect languages used in refugee camp as shown by the indication
of 23 over the total of 96 respondents who confirmed their interest in their home country
languages.
Table13. Presentation of respondents status.
Category.
Classes.
Frequencies.
Percentages.
Status
Refugees
73
76.04%
Asylum seeker
14
14.58%
IDPs
9.37%
96
100
Total

39
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Refugees
Asylum seeker
IDPs
Most of respondents in this survey were refugee, who spent long time in the camp as the
table 11
above indicates.
Table14. Presentation of respondents working sector.
Category.
Sector.
Frequencies.
Percentages.
Sector of activity
Agriculture
33
34.37%
Animal faming
6.25%
Trading
15
15.62%
Processing
3.12%
Mechanical repair
9.37%
Electrical repair
13
13.54%
Private sector services
7.27%
Public sector services
6.25%
96
100
Total

40
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Frequencies respondents sectors of activities.

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Frequencies.
According to the respondents sector of activities, 33 respondents in the camp out of 96 ,

that is 34.37% respondents were working in agriculture sector. This leads to the
recommendation to promote other sectors through innovations for better livelihoods
improvement.
5.2. Question, variable and objective number two: Statistical analysis of levels of
Innovation/ innovative electricity in the camp.
To find out these levels, the researcher used the mean deviation and to calculate the
extent to which one variable relates to another. Calculating these levels, the researcher
provided the interpretation guide for mean and standard deviation responses as shown in the
table of Likert scale below;
Table15. Likert scale table.
Mean range.
Response mode.
Interpretation.
3.26-4.00
Strongly agree
Very high
2.51-3.25
Agree
High
1.76-2.50
Disagree
Low
1.00-1.75
Strongly disagree
Very low

41
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Table16. Descriptive statistics on the level of innovation/ Innovative electricity in
Nakivale refugee camp communities as a factor of promoting livelihoods/career laddering.
Item/ Question.
Stro Dis
ngl agr
ee
y
disa
gre
e.
Agre
e.
Stro
ngly
agre
e.
Mean
Correla
tion
Regressi
on
1. Use of kerosene to light home
12
21
62
3.265
0.9967
99
0.99360
8
2. Use of candle to light home
11
38
43
3.085
0.9646
0.9304
3. Burning tree to light home
79
13
1.549
-0.855
0.7305
4. Use of solar to light home
70
19
1.652
-0.897
0.8037
5. Use of electricity to light home
56
31
1.786
-0.965
0.9316
6.Never lighting home
83
1.510
-0.834
0.6949
7. Use of energy for night darkness
16
72
3.363
0.856
0.7328
8. Lighting home for supper cooking
41
34
17
2.010
-0.989
0.9777
family 11
12
41
32
2.883
0.8096
0.6555
0.1248
0.0156
-0.87
0.7561
9. Lighting
discussion
home
for
10. Lighting home for students 17

works
23
visitors 35
41
11. Lighting
reception
home
for
42
12
14
2.562
2.079
12. Lighting home for night security
62
29
1.683
-0.962
0.9256
13. Lighting home below 1 hour
12
28
32
24
2.675
0.6093
0.3713

42
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
14. Lighting home for 2 hours
22
30
26
18
2.453
-0.39
0.1522
15. Lighting home beyond 2 hours
27
19
27
23
2.500
-0.123
0.0151
16. Cost below UGX 5000/month
15
34
21
26
2.592
0.3146
0.099
17. Cost up to UGX 10,000/month
26
25
23
22
2.459
-0.992
0.9843
18. Cost of UGX 15,000/month
21
29
32
14
2.448
-0.268
0.0718
19. Cost of UGX 20,000/month
25
42
22
2.224
-0.662
0.4388
20. Cost beyond UGX 20,000/month
31
50
13
2.025
-0.763
0.5816
21 1 lamp use
14
32
48
3.129
0.9968
0.9937
22 2 lamps use
10
16
14
56
3.042
0.8047
0.6475
23 3 lamps use
24
37
12
23
2.4
-0.368
0.1358
24 4 lamps use
36
41
12
2.055
-0.886
0.7855
25 More than 4 lamps use
30
39
15
2.040
-0.853
0.7281
26 Lighting home in the camp 2

improves childhood
12
24
58
3.219
0.9467
0.8962
27 Lighting the camp promotes youth 7

entertainments
12
0.9789
0.9583
28 Lighting the camp promotes 6

security
0.9444
0.8919

health care service delivery
0.8941
0.7993

refugees education
0.8416
0.7083
31 Lighting the camp enhances 5

humanitarian services delivery
31
0.8116
0.6587
32
27
21
13
23
45
54
67
78
37
3.043
3.150
3.327
3.448
2.859

43
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
32 Lighting the camp fights against 1
SGBV

community social relationship
34 Lighting the camp

refugees living in towns
attracts 8
33
35 Lighting the camp helps refugees 0

living with disabilities
36 Lighting the camp promotes life of 4

elderly refugees
37 Lighting the camp reduces risks of 9

HIV and AIDS infection
27
38 Lighting the camp increases the 2

standards of living
Average
36
23
21
24
32
26
31
53
71
34
68
53
34
58
3.248
0.9712
0.9432
0.9083
0.825
0.6915
0.4782
0.9219
0.8499
0.9622
0.9259
0.898
0.8063
0.9558
0.9136
0.1717
4
0.74
3.429
2.772
3.391
3.191
2.805
3.277
3.121

Looking at the overall level of energy innovations in improving community livelihoods in
the camp, has been rated high, considering the overall mean average of 3.121 which is
equivalent to strongly agree or agreeing with doubt, according to the Likert scale, and this
shows relatively high level of energy innovations in improving community livelihoods in the
camp.
Whereas the improvement of education as a result of camp electrification was rated the most
very high (Item No 30) with the mean of 3.448, indicating the critical relationship between
electrification and education improvement in the camp. Other factors rated very high in this
category include the very high use of kerosene to light home (item No 1) with 3.265 mean, the
very high use of lighting to address the darkness in the night (item No 7) with 3.363 mean, the
very high contribution of electrification in promoting health care services in the camp (item No
29) with the mean score of 3.327, the very high level of promotion of community social
relationship as a result of the camp electrification (item No 33) with the mean score of 3.429,

44
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
the very high level of promotion of lives of refugees living with disabilities (item No 35) with
the mean score of 3.391 and finally the very high level increasing the standards of living in the
camp (item No 38) with the mean score of 3.277.
On the other hand, however, respondent have expressed their total disagreement with a
number of factors in this category. Among the factors, the subject of never lighting home has
been rated the most disagreed with (strongly disagreed with) as shown by the item No 6 with
the mean score of 1.510. The hierarchical order of strong disagreement in this category
followed with strong disagreement of burning trees to light homes in the camp (item No 3) with
1.549 mean score , followed by strong disagreement of using solar energy to light homes in the
camp (item No 4) with mean score of 1.652, strong disagreement of lighting homes for night
security (item No 12) with mean score of 1.683 and finally a strong disagreement of using
electricity to light homes in the camp (item No 5) with a mean score of 1.786.
5.3. Question, variable and objective number three: Statistical analysis of levels of refugee
livelihoods/career laddering.
Table17. Descriptive statistics of the level of livelihoods/ career laddering in the camp
as effect/outcome of innovation/innovative electricity.
Item/ Question.
Strongl
y
disagre
e.
Disa
gree
Agre
e.
Strong
ly
agree.
Mean Correla
.
tion
Regress
ion
39 The use of electricity in the camp 14

creates new sources of income
16
27
39
2.852
865
0.9615
0.9245

increases the profit of businesses
11
3.121
823
0.9839
0.9681

open new skills of existing businesses
15
2.908
125
0.9695
0.9399

opens innovative activities
3.163
802
0.8929
0.7972
33
28
23
48
41
58

45
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
allows business growth
16

improves agro business
11

improves animal farming
13

improves trading activities
13

boosts mechanical informal sector
12

boosts electrical informal sector

improves private service sector
12

improve public service sector
18

extends the time of business
operation

opens new markets for businesses
16

increases the labor market demand
12

decreases the labor market supply

increases the minimum wage
15
21
38
32
28
34
26
23
27
27
32
33
26
39
55
42
48
53
47
63
56
43
53
36
44
51
36
3.131
823
0.9248
0.8552
3.061
615
0.9577
0.9172
3.121
406
0.993
0.9861
3.174
271
0.9789
0.9583
3.122
344
0.9896
0.9794
3.329
688
0.9461
0.8951
3.156
146
0.9306
0.866
2.962
552
0.9876
0.9753
0.9403
0.8841
2.863
125
0.969
0.939
3.035
729
0.9779
0.9563
3.047
813
0.8859
0.7848
2.968
281
0.925
0.8557
3.126
667

46
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
opens new resources utilization
13

promotes value addition to local
product

promotes value addition to services
14

fights gender disparities in business
16

promotes youth employment

promotes
business
women
associations
10

promotes
business
youth
associations
15

reduces the traditional business
practices
12

reduces the cost of goods
manufacturing
13

reduces the cost of service delivery
Average
31
22
34
40
23
34
26
21
42
34
45
64
41
39
68
50
53
58
35
41
3.034
792
0.9837
0.9677
0.9164
0.8398
0.9814
0.9631
0.9489
0.9005
0.9192
0.8449
0.9851
0.9704
0.9718
0.9443
0.9111
0.8302
0.8802
0.7747
0.9131
0.8338
0.9322
6
0.8706
8
3.296
458
2.997
135
3.06
3.382
3.17
3.157
708
3.170
833
2.977
2.957
3.087
925
Source: primary data.

47
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
The table 17 shows the average mean of 3.087, which is meant by the high level of
relationship between electrification and career laddering in the camp. Though this average
mean is lower than 3.121 of energy innovations towards improving livelihoods in the camp,
there is neither a case of strong disagreement nor disagreement by respondents. Generally,
almost all the factors have been rated high as a proof of confirming the important contribution
of electricity in career laddering in the camp. In addition, three factors have been scored very
high level of expression of contribution electricity in career laddering. These include the very
high agreement of youth employment promotion by electricity (item No 60) with mean score of
3.382, the very high agreement of promotion of electrical informal sector activities ( item No
48) with the mean score of 3.329 and finally the very high agreement of local production value
addition (item No 57) with 3.296 mean score
5.4. Question, variable and objective number four: Relationship between

innovation/innovative electricity and livelihoods/career laddering in the camp and testing
the hypothesis.
During this study, the researcher considered the interaction and influence between the
two variable. To approve this interaction and influence, the researcher has used correlation
analysis to measure the degree of the relationship. In addition, regression analysis has been
used to measure the direction of the variables.
Correlation analysis.
Correlation analysis is used to establish of the strength of the linear relationship
between the two random variables (Johnson and Bruce, 1989), that is to measure how strong a
relationship is between two variables i.e it measures the extent to which the points cluster
about a straight line. Correlation ranges between -1 and +1, and is a measure of co-movements
(linear association) between two random variables (CFA Curriculum, 2009). Two random
variables are positively correlated if high values of one are likely to be associated with high
values of the other. They are negatively correlated if high values of one are likely to be
associated with low values of the other. Otherwise, if results are close to 1 indicate a strong
positive correlation and results close to -1 indicate a strong negative correlation. A result of 0
indicates no correlation at all.

48
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
In our case study, two variables; innovation (innovative electricity) and career laddering
( improvement of livelihoods), will be correlated to establish the linear cause-effect of one
another.
A measure of the correlation between two variables commonly used is the pearson
coefficient correlation , denoted by r and is given by the formula below;
r=n(xy)-(x)(y)/*nx-(x)+*ny-(y)+
where
r=Correlation
x=Independent variable
y=Dependent variable
Table 18: Relationship between innovation and refugee livelihoods

Variables to be correlated
R-value
Sig. value
Interpretation
Ho decision
Innovation/innovative electricity
0.17
.000
Positive
Rejected
livelihoods/career 0.93
.000
Rejected
Strongly
positive
and
significant
Refugee
laddering
Source: Primary Data.
Discussion:
The table 16 presents the correlation results between energy innovations and
livelihoods improvement in the camp. Thus the primary operation was to correlate the energy
innovations to refugee livelihoods in the camp. Electricity was also correlated to the career
laddering. During the correlation analysis, the researcher has found the following outcomes;

49
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
The correlation between energy innovations and livelihoods was somehow positive (average
correlation of 0.14). This is above 1, and implies that energy innovations used in the camp has a
weak relationship with the improvement of livelihoods in the camp. This is an indicator that
there are other factors that contribute to the improvement of livelihoods in the camp. To
Naohiko O. and Josiah K. 2013, livelihoods activities in the camp include farming, animal
husbandly, petty trade, food related business, beauty care, clothing products, transportation,
commercial sex, etc
On the other hand, the correlation between electricity and career laddering was rated strong
positive (average correlation of 0.91), indicating a strong relationship between these two
variables. Though the use of electricity in the camp was rated low, respondents have shown the
important contribution that electricity should play in promoting career laddering in rfugees
communities of Nakivale refugee camp. This was shown by the greater interest and
opportunities confirmed by respondents in this field and supported by the work Naohiko O. and
Josiah K. 2013.
As a conclusion, the null hypothesis that there is a relationship between
innovation/electricity and livelihoods/career laddering was rejected.
Regression analysis.
Regression refers to the fitting of mathematical relationship between two variables say
in our study innovative electricity and career laddering for promoting livelihoods.
Whereas in linear correlation we deal with the strength of the association between two
linear variables, in linear regression we are interested in direction; that is one variable is
predicted (dependent variable = career laddering) and the other variable is the predictor
(independent variable = Innovation), and in linear correlation the interest is non-directional and
the relationship is what is critical. The same to linear correlation, the formulas return a value
between -1 and 1, where results close to 1 indicate a strong positive correlation and results
close to -1 indicate a strong negative correlation. A result of 0 indicates no correlation at all.

50
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
By formula;
Regression equation (y)= a+bx.
Where:
X is an independent variable, and y is a dependent variable,
b (slope)= *Nxy-(x)(y)+/*Nx-(x)+ and
a (intercept)= *y-b(x)+/N.
On the other hand Fisher value is calculated to find the test statistics that have an Fdistribution under the null hypothesis. In ANOVA, F-test is used to determine the group of trials
which differs significantly from an expected value. In its calculation, we use variances, as shown
in the formula below;
F-value=S1/S2,
Where,
S1 is the variance of first set of values and
S2 is the variance of second set of values.
Table 19: Regression analysis and F-test.

Variables regressed.
Innovation
laddering
Vs
Adjusted R- Sig.
square.
value
career 0.74/0.87=0.
89
0.000
Interpretatio
n.
Ho
decision
Positive and Rejected

significant

51
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
According to regression analysis results in table 17, innovation factors considered were
collectively good explanatory variable of career laddering as supported by the correlation of
0.89. These results lead to a conclusion that innovations (innovative electricity) significantly
influence the livelihoods of refugees in the camp through career laddering.
100
80
60
40
20
Y
Y
0
1
X
3
Figure 4.1 Illustration of various types of relationships between the independent

variable (IV=X) and the dependent variable (DV=Y).
Curves X and Y depict monotonic relationships. In graphing relationships, the horizontal axis (xaxis) depicts values for the IV and the vertical axis (y-axis) depicts values for the DV. This
indicate the proportionate degrees/levels between X=innovation and Y=refugee livelihoods. As
a result, Y (DV=Refugee livelihoods) has higher degree (0.93 correlation and 0.87 regression)
than X (IV=innovation) with 0.17 correlation and 0.74 regression.
The implication is that the increase in X indicates the increase in Y and vice versa, which is
supported by a positive and significant relationship between innovation and refugee
livelihoods.
It also shows the strong dependency of refugee livelihoods on innovation. Otherwise promoting
refugee livelihoods should depend on promoting innovation in the camp. Thus, without
promoting innovation in the camp, refugee livelihoods would not be improved.
However, there are factors other than innovation contributing to improvement of refugee
livelihoods in the camp at the rate of 11%. These include assistance provided the refugees in
the camp among others.

52
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
6. Summaries, conclusion and recommendations.
6.1.
Introduction.
This chapter presents a summary of the research findings. It further makes conclusion
and gives recommendations for the study on the basis of the findings of this study in relation to
the major research questions variables and objectives set in table4. The samples used were
also representative in nature, taking into account the principles of generalization as stated by
Lincoln and Guba (1985). The study was also conducted through the use of both qualitative and
quantitative research methodologies. Following recommendations by Borgdan and Biklen
(1992), themes formulated from the research questions, variables and objectives shall guide the
summary of major findings. As such, the major findings in this section are presented in the
order of the research questions set out in table 4.
6.2.
Summary of the findings.
6.2.1. Summary of the findings on respondents profile.

The first objective of this study was the determination of profile of respondents in terms
of gender, ages, education, nationalities, languages and sector of activity. The findings on this
objective indicate that majority of respondents were male (56.25%), whereas female accounted
for 43.75%. Most of these respondents were between 21 and 55 years of age(66.4%). This
means that the camp hosts working population that can benefit from the promotion of
innovation for improving their livelihoods.
Concerning their education, 58.3% of respondents float up to primary education, where
senior six secondary school level accounts 21.87% and the few remaining with undergraduate
and postgraduate education. This means that the majority of the respondents were non-skilled
persons, needing the support of promoting innovation in the camp that can help them
improving their livelihoods in the camp.
In terms of their status, languages and nationalities, most of them are refugees from
Congo (35.41%) speaking French, Rwandese (16.6) speaking Luanda and their local language,
Somalis and Ethiopians (12.5% each) speaking English and their local dialects. The remaining
proportion includes IDPs, Burundians and Eritreans speaking English and their dialects. This
implies that respondents gave information on what they better know and what they have
experienced.

53
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
6.2.2. Summary of findings on the level of Innovation/innovative electricity in the
camp.
Whereas the improvement of education as a result of camp electrification was rated the most
very high (Item No 30) with the mean of 3.448, indicating the critical relationship between
electrification and education improvement in the camp. Other factors rated very high in this
category include the very high use of kerosene to light home (item No 1) with 3.265 mean, the
very high use of lighting to address the darkness in the night (item No 7) with 3.363 mean, the
very high contribution of electrification in promoting health care services in the camp (item No
29) with the mean score of 3.327, the very high level of promotion of community social
relationship as a result of the camp electrification (item No 33) with the mean score of 3.429,
the very high level of promotion of lives of refugees living with disabilities (item No 35) with
the mean score of 3.391 and finally the very high level increasing the standards of living in the
camp (item No 38) with the mean score of 3.277.
On the other hand, however, respondent have expressed their total disagreement with a
number of factors in this category. Among the factors, the subject of never lighting home has
been rated the most disagreed with (strongly disagreed with) as shown by the item No 6 with
the mean score of 1.510. The hierarchical order of strong disagreement in this category
followed with strong disagreement of burning trees to light homes in the camp (item No 3) with
1.549 mean score , followed by strong disagreement of using solar energy to light homes in the
camp (item No 4) with mean score of 1.652, strong disagreement of lighting homes for night
security (item No 12) with mean score of 1.683 and finally a strong disagreement of using
electricity to light homes in the camp (item No 5) with a mean score of 1.786.
6.2.3. Summary of findings on the level of refugee livelihoods in the camp/career

laddering.
The findings in table 15 shows the average mean of 3.087, which is meant by the high
level of relationship between electrification and career laddering in the camp. Though this
average mean is lower than 3.121 of energy innovations towards improving livelihoods in the
camp, there is neither a case of strong disagreement nor disagreement by respondents.
Generally, almost all the factors have been rated high as a proof of confirming the important
contribution of electricity in career laddering in the camp. In addition, three factors have been
scored very high level of expression of contribution electricity in career laddering. These include
the very high agreement of youth employment promotion by electricity (item No 60) with mean
score of 3.382, the very high agreement of promotion of electrical informal sector activities (
54
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
item No 48) with the mean score of 3.329 and finally the very high agreement of local
production value addition (item No 57) with 3.296 mean score
6.2.4. Summary of findings on the relationship between innovation/innovative
electricity and refugee livelihoods/career laddering
The correlation between energy innovations and livelihoods was somehow positive (average
correlation of 0.14). This is above 1, and implies that energy innovations used in the camp has a
weak relationship with the improvement of livelihoods in the camp. This is an indicator that
there are other factors that contribute to the improvement of livelihoods in the camp. To
Naohiko O. and Josiah K. 2013, livelihoods activities in the camp include farming, animal
husbandly, petty trade, food related business, beauty care, clothing products, transportation,
commercial sex, etc
On the other hand, the correlation between electricity and career laddering was rated strong
positive (average correlation of 0.91), indicating a strong relationship between these two
variables. Though the use of electricity in the camp was rated low, respondents have shown the
important contribution that electricity should play in promoting career laddering in rfugees
communities of Nakivale refugee camp. This was shown by the greater interest and
opportunities confirmed by respondents in this field and supported by the work Naohiko O. and
Josiah K. 2013.
Thus, the null hypothesis that there is a relationship between innovation/electricity and
livelihoods/career laddering was rejected.
6.3.
Conclusion.
The purpose of this study was to investigate how innovation influence the refugee livelihoods in
Nakivale refugee camp. As supported by the evidences given in background of the study and
reviews, innovation promotion is the key factor to developing refugee livelihoods in refugee
camp. The study revealed that majority of respondents were agreeing with the role innovative
electricity plays in their livelihoods improvement. The findings further reveal that there is a
significant relationship between these guiding variables. As a result, Y (DV=Refugee livelihoods)
has higher degree (0.93 correlation and 0.87 regression) than X (IV=innovation) with 0.17
correlation and 0.74 regression. The implication is that the increase in X indicates the increase
in Y and vice versa, which is supported by a positive and significant relationship between
innovation and refugee livelihoods. It also shows the strong dependency of refugee livelihoods
on innovation. Otherwise promoting refugee livelihoods should depend on promoting
innovation in the camp. Thus, without promoting innovation in the camp, refugee livelihoods
would not be improved. However, there are factors other than innovation contributing to
55
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
improvement of refugee livelihoods in the camp at the rate of 11%. These include assistance
provided the refugees in the camp among others.
6.4.
Recommendations.
During this study, the researcher came up with suggestions to the research questions
based on the finding; that is recommendations on what can be done to address the analyzed
situation. We remember our main research questions, variables and objectives. Basing on
general context of findings, the researcher is proposing the recommendations to be applied on
the following areas in innovation and refugee livelihoods in Nakivale refugee camp.
6.4.1. Recommendations for promoting innovation.
Basing on the findings during this study, a number of elements was identified as factors
critical in promoting innovation in Nakivale refugee camp. These factors need to be taken into
consideration in promoting innovation in the camp. The following suggestions are considered
by the researcher;
Promoting clean energy as sources of fuel in the camp. This suggestion considered
the high rate of refugees using kerosene in their home lighting. This high rate of
kerosene as a source of home lighting in the camp is associated with a number of
consequences including eyes diseases, respiratory diseases resulting from the smock
and inappropriate light of kerosene in small houses/tents, as said by health experts.
The clean energy alternatives should be innovative electricity initiatives, solar energy
lights, candles, generator, etc which would provide non risky energy for better
livelihoods refugees as human beings.
Equipping refugee public institutions with full energy infrastructure. These public
institutions are schools, health centres, associations, cooperatives, administrative
offices, security agency centres, public place lighting, humanitarian agency offices,
etc. This suggestion considers the high estimates from respondents judgments about
the role electricity plays in human being lives. They mentioned improvement of
education, reduction of SGBV, decrease in HIV/AIDS infection, good service delivery,
security in the camp, promotion of gender based association, promoting youth
associations, promoting entertainments in the camp, helping refugees living with
disabilities and many more.
Supporting innovative energy initiatives. Many refugees in the camp have shown
their grass root innovative initiatives in contributing in addressing energy issue in the

56
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
camp. This suggestion takes a reference from a number of refugees who
implemented on their own human and financial capital innovative energy business
initiatives. With their limited abilities to cover the little scope, these initiatives should
be adopted by bodies having promoting humanitarian innovation in their
responsibilities. These are Global Innovation Fund, Humanitarian Innovation Fund,
global philanthropic organization, donors in the field of humanitarian intervention,
donors in the field of innovation and any other interested body. The intervention in
promoting these initiatives will extend the scope of coverage to reach the whole
population in the camp.
6.4.2. Recommendations for promoting refugee livelihoods/career laddering.
During this study, the researcher found all stakeholders as key players in promoting
refugee livelihoods in the camp. This will allow each stakeholder to focus on his side and
provide the complementing lay for his next partner in certain order. These partners are
refugees, humanitarian service providers in the camp, civil societies, national policy makers,
global humanitarian agencies, governments and the UN system. Recommendations attributed
to each partner are described below:
Refugees are advised to generate initiatives in responses to their livelihood

challenges in the camp. Defined as end users in the system, beneficiaries in a legal
sense, refugees easily identify challenges in their routine lives. This should be the
starting point create innovative initiatives to address those challenge. This will be
through individual initiatives, creation of connotative associations, cooperative
associations to share ideas, etc.
Humanitarian service providers in the camp should empower refugee initiatives.
Operating partners should plan and involve their resources in refugee innovation and
livelihoods with priority to refugee initiatives as key role players in this process. On the
other hand, implementing partners should, in their proposal filling process,
collaborate with refugee initiatives so as to be given chance of promotion.
Civil Societies and institutional contributions are to be encouraged. Non profit
intended organizations are encouraged to involve their contribution in either
advocacy, recommendation, awareness and any other form of assistance towards
refugee livelihoods improvement. These institutions are universities, religions, human
right institutions, gender based organizations, youth communities, etc. on the other
hand, corporate companies are advised to increase their Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR), a new way for their advertisement, through engaging in
promoting livelihoods of refugees in the camp.

57
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
National policy makers and other influences are to consider the refugee inputs in
their policy making process. Legal policy makers, economic policy makers and local
political decisions should consider the refugee needs and claims in terms of their
rights to pursue livelihoods as clearly set forth in the principle international
instrument pertaining to refugees, the United Nations Convention relating to the
status of refugees, adopted in Geneva on 28th July 1951, and commonly referred to as
the 1951 refugees convention. According to articles 17 and 18, the contracting states
shall accord to refugees lawfully staying in their territory. Beside policy makers,
cultural influences and social norms should tolerate the gap that may arise because of
refugees not fluently merging with locals. The central political strategy on refugee
maters should increase its commitment in responding to refugee needs in long-term
by easing integration, resettlement and contribution to peace and conflict resolutions
before refugee repatriation.
Technology should not forget refugees, whatever the cost. With globalization, the
world has become the global village. This happened because of mostly one factor;
technology. Thus ignoring the role of technology in the globalization process, would be
like ignoring the law of gravitation. Refugees are also part of the community that
should move along with the rest in development process.
Donors should be encouraged to fund refugee livelihood initiative that best relate to
self reliance projects. In addition to emergency assistance and relief assistance,
donors should increase the amount of the assistance package provided for refugee
self reliance initiatives, based on existing initiatives already promoted by refugees
themselves.
The UN system should manage policies regarding refugee livelihoods. This should
start with harmonization of clear and proper provision of refugee livelihood rights.
Next, there should be the permanent monitoring and evaluation system to judge the
implementation of such provisions.

58
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
References.
Bagenda E., Naggaga A., & Smith, E. (2003). Refugee livelihoods: a review of the evidence.
UNHCR Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit (EPAU/2006/04). Retrieved from:
http://www.unhcr.org/4423fe5d2.html.
Dryden-Peterson, S. & Hovil, L. (2004). A remaining hope for durable solutions: Local
integration of refugees and their hosts in the case of Uganda. Refuge, 22(1), 26-38.
Harrell-Bond, B. (2000). Are refugee camps good for children? (UNHCR Working Paper No.
29). UNHCR Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit. Retrieved from:
http://www.unhcr.org/3ae6a0c64.html.
Hovil, L. (2007). Self-settled refugees in Uganda: An alternative approach to displacement?

Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(4), 599-620.
Kaiser, T. (2006). Between a camp and a hard place: Rights, livelihood and experiences of the
local settlement system for long-term refugees in Uganda. The Journal of Modern
African Studies, 44(4), 597-621.
Kaiser, T. (2007). Moving up and down looking for money: Making a living in a Ugandan
refugee camp. In J. Staples (Ed.), Livelihoods at the margins: Surviving the city (pp. 215236). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Meyer, S. (2006). The refugee aid and development approach in Uganda: empowerment and
self-reliance of refugees in practice (UNHCR Research Paper No. 131). UNHCR
Evaluation and Policy Analysis Unit. Retrieved from: http://www.unhcr.org/4538eb172.html.
Omata, N. & Kaplan J. (2013). Refugee livelihoods in Kampala, Nakivale and Kyangwali

59
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
refugee settlements: Patterns of engagement with the private sector, Refugee Studies
Centre Working Paper Series No. 95, Oxford, University of Oxford.
Refugee Law Project. (2006). Refugee Law Project critique of The Refugees Act (2006).
Retrieved from: http://citizenshiprightsinafrica.org/docs/Uganda_RefugeesActRLPCritique.pdf.
Tumushabe, A. (2010, January 27). 6,000 Somali refugees in Nakivale to resettle in USA. The
Monitor. Retrieved from: http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/.
UNHCR. (2003). Development Assistance for Refugees (DAR) for Uganda Self Reliance Strategy:
Way forward (Report on Mission to Uganda RLSS/DOS Mission Report 03/11). Retrieved from
UNHCR website: http://www.unhcr.org/41c6a19b4.pdf.
UNHCR. (2004a). Protracted refugee situations. Executive Committee of the High

Commissioners Programme, Standing Committee, 30th meeting, June 10 2004. Retrieved
from: http://www.unhcr.org/40ed5b384.html.
UNHCR. (2005). Handbook for self-reliance. Retrieved from:

http://www.unhcr.org/44bf40cc2.html.
UNHCR. (2014a). Global Strategy for Livelihoods: A UNHCR strategy 2014-2018. Retrieved
from: http://www.unhcr.org/530f107b6.html.

60
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Annexes:
1. Researcher introductory letter.
Minani Leodegard
Rubaga, Kampala
A refugee inUganda
Refugee No. 662-14C07571/
E-mail: mileodegard@yahoo.ca
Dear respondent,
Nakivale refugee camp resident.
Dear Sir/Madame
Re: Researcher introduction letter.

I am humbly approaching you as a potential information provider to seek your contribution in
obtaining data on electricity in relation to livelihood in the camp survey.
As a refugee, I have been granted an invitation for participation and presentation in a
conference on Refugee livelihoods: innovations in career laddering upon the selection of my
abstract on Nakivale refugee camp electrification using mais factory engines; an innovation by
and for humanitarian affected community as practical and innovation solution to refugee
livelihoods, by the Forced Migration Innovation Project (FMIP) of Southern Methodist
University (SMU) of Dallas in Texas, USA.
Within this context may I request you to participate in this study by answering the
questionnaires. Any data you will provide shall be for the research intended purpose only and
no information of such kind will be disclosed.
I will appreciate your contribution towards the success of this survey.
Sincerely.
Minani Leodegard.

61
Refugee
Innovation and
Livelihood.
Researcher refugee ID.

62

Nakivale Refugee Innovation Survey Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nakivale Refugee Innovation Survey Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

survey report on Innovation and

Refugee Innovation and Livelihood.

For presentation in the conference of

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 2

Processes of acquiring and sharing knowledge in humanitarian interventions are critical to

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 3

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 4

About Forced Migration Innovation Project. ..................................................8

1.2.1. Aims of FMIP. ..................................................................................................8

bout the conference. ..................................................................................... 11

About Nakivale refugee Cmp. ....................................................................... 11

Camp administration ......................................................................................... 12

Project justification. ...................................................................................................................... 17

Statement of the problem.

Research components ................................................................................... 18

Understanding key terms: Refugee Livelihoods, Self-Reliance, and Innovation. ............................. 19

Interaction between the concepts. .............................................................. 19

Refugee innovative projects in Nakivale refugee camp. ............................. 20

4.3.1. Population of the study ................................................................................. 27

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 5

Research Instruments. ...................................................................................... 28

Interview method. .............................................................................................. 29

Validity and reliability ................................................................................... 30

4.6. Data collection procedures. .................................................................................. 30

4.6.1. Before the administration of the questionnaires. ...................................................... 30

Data Analysis. ................................................................................................... 31

Ethical consideration. ........................................................................................ 32

Limitations of the study. .................................................................................... 33

5. Data presentation, interpretation and analysis. ................................................................................ 34

Summaries, conclusion and recommendations. ........................................................................... 53

Summary of the findings............................................................................... 53

Summary of the findings on respondents profile. ................................................ 53

Recommendations for promoting innovation. .................................................. 56

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 6

Recommendations for promoting refugee livelihoods/career laddering. ......... 57

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 7

About Forced Migration Innovation Project.

The Forced Migration Innovation Project is located in the Department of Anthropology at

Facilitating collaborative solutions

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 8

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page 9

Office Hours: Mon - Fri: 8:00 - 5:00

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

bout the conference.

About Nakivale refugee Cmp.

Refugee Population: 60,992 (as of March 31st 2014)

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

Table1. Statistical indicators of Nakivale refugees.

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

Medical Teams International (MTI)

Table3. Operating Partners in the camp.

WFP through Samaritans Purse

Uganda Red Cross Society (URCS)

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

Statement of the problem.

A case of Electricity in Nakivale refugee settlement. Page

Table4. Research questions, variables and objectives.

1. What is the profile of

1. Identifying the profile of