6. Concluding remarks

Likewise, it is important to improve the housing and mobility conditions of Syrian refugees in Jordan and Lebanon. In Jordan, the government attempted to channel all displaced Syrians into refugee camps, but exit from the refugee camp system was made possible through a sponsored bailout procedure. This led very large Syrian refugee populations to live outside camps in Jordan—an estimated 80 percent according to Lenner and Schmelter (2016)—which in turn led to tightened controls over camp residents and suspension of the bailout procedure in 2015. These regulations strongly curtailed the mobility of Syrian refugees residing in camps in Jordan. Meanwhile, for security reasons, the Lebanese government maintained a strong position against establishment of refugee camps. This decision was associated with widely different living conditions for refugees in Lebanon. Approximately half of the Syrian refugees in Lebanon lived in regular accommodations, whereas others lived in informal tented settlements and other precarious housing situations. Since this evidence was published in 2016, the situation of refugees in Jordan has improved significantly both in terms of the number of refugees that live in camps and with regards to their mobility.

Finally, improving the refugee governance framework in destination countries would also entail eliminating barriers that refugees face in accessing formal work opportunities. In Jordan and Lebanon, difficult access to the labor market led refugees to work in the informal sector as a highly exploitable workforce receiving low wages (Lenner and Schmelter 2016). It is therefore of utmost importance that host countries commit to facilitating formalized access to the labor market for refugees, while supporting employers who face increased fees and social security contributions by regularizing the refugee workforce. Jordan took some steps in this direction in 2016 by waiving fees and easing requirements to obtain work permits, yet most refugees continue to have limited access to the formal economy, because the number of work permits issued is very low relative to the size of the refugee population.

6. Concluding remarks

Adopting a governance-centered approach to the study of migration is crucial because it allows for a more-informed understanding of governance failures in origin countries and of the effects of migration policy in destination countries on migrants’ welfare.

The analysis provided in this chapter shows that governance matters for migration from the perspectives of sending and receiving countries. The chapter underscores the urgency for Middle Eastern and North African countries to improve governance in multiple dimensions, including restoring trust in economic institutions and improvement of their performance, ensuring higher levels of political freedom and civil liberties for citizens, maintaining political stability, and proactively engaging in the global climate change policy response. The chapter also highlights the important role that migration institutions in destination countries play in terms of better labor market integration for migrants, greater social cohesiveness and assimilation, and better migrant welfare.

Improving governance in origin and destination countries is beneficial not only for migrants and refugees, but also for origin and receiving countries. If governance challenges remain unaddressed in Middle Eastern and North African origin countries, the region is likely to experience even larger migrant and forcibly displaced flows (refugees, asylum seekers, IDPs). Given the region’s large population, destination countries’ labor markets will not be able to absorb these massive inflows, and people in the Middle East and North Africa are likely to face the consequences of internal forced displacement—leaving these countries unprepared to face these internal massive shocks. Better governance in destination countries would benefit migrants and refugees, who would have better labor market conditions and greater