ABSTRACT

This article critiques Zimbabwe's refugee policy and practice context, with a focus on the ideological underpinnings of aided income generation activities in Zimbabwe's Tongogara refugee camp. We apply the lenses of Joan Tronto's political, or democratic ethics of care, and Fiona Robinson's critical ethics of care, to conduct an ideology critique of the aid agencies' expressed goal of refugees' economic ‘self-reliance’. We demonstrate that their underlying assumptions about ‘dependency’ and ‘autonomy’, in conjunction with Zimbabwe's policy of refugee encampment, are at the heart of the income generation activities’ lack of sustainability. We argue further that all caring relationships are characterised by unequal power relations, and that this needs to be acknowledged in order to enable a shared commitment to equal participation, in a partnership towards agreed-upon development goals. Moreover, the ideologies of autonomy and self-reliance must be replaced with a policy commitment to fostering interdependence as the ontological condition under which income generating activities can evolve into sustainable livelihoods. We recommend that the critical ethics of care and the radical-democratic practices for which it calls, provide an apt framework within which to reconsider the policies governing refugee support and practices, so as to foster a caring context for human wellbeing.

摘要

本文对津巴布韦的难民政策和实践背景进行了批评，重点是津巴布韦的通加拉难民营中的创收活动的思想基础。我们运用琼·特伦托（Joan Tronto）的政治或民主照料伦理学以及菲奥娜·鲁滨逊（Fiona Robinson）的批判伦理学的观点，对援助机构提出的难民经济“自力更生”的目标进行意识形态批评。我们证明，他们关于“依赖”和“自治”的基本假设，与津巴布韦的难民营政策一起，是创收活动缺乏可持续性的核心。我们进一步争辩说，所有关怀关系都具有不平等的权力关系，并且需要承认这一点，以便在实现商定的发展目标的伙伴关系中实现平等参与的共同承诺。此外，必须以一项政策承诺来取代自治和自力更生的意识形态，以促进相互依存，因为这是创收活动可以演变为可持续生计的本体论条件。我们建议，所谓的关怀伦理和激进的民主做法，应提供一个适当的框架，在其中重新考虑有关难民支持和做法的政策，以便为人类福祉营造一个关心的环境。自治和自力更生的思想必须以促进相互依存的政策承诺代替，这是创收活动可以演变为可持续生计的本体论条件。我们建议，所谓的关怀伦理和激进的民主做法，应提供一个适当的框架，在其中重新考虑有关难民支持和做法的政策，以便为人类福祉营造一个关心的环境。自治和自力更生的思想必须以促进相互依存的政策承诺取代，这是创收活动可以演变为可持续生计的本体论条件。我们建议，所谓的关怀伦理和激进的民主做法，应提供一个适当的框架，在其中重新考虑有关难民支持和做法的政策，以便为人类福祉营造一个关心的环境。