Giving Compass' Take:

• Ana Uzelac discusses how anti-refugee narratives in Lebanon have undermined aid efforts intended to support Syrian refugees. 

• How can funders effectively push back against anti-refugee narratives? 

• Learn about an asset-based funding framework for refugees. 

In the blistering heat of Lebanon’s long summer, many of the 1.5 million Syrian refugees hosted by the country have been squeezing in all the seasonal work they can. In order to pay debts and health bills, some accept exploitative work conditions and the humiliation of unpaid salaries.

Now that refugees are under increasing pressure from Russia and the Syrian government’s allies to return to Syria, some refugees in Lebanon are even wondering whether going back to whatever is left of home may be a better option.

This dire situation comes despite years of donor advocacy and billions of U.S. dollars given, pledged or lent to Lebanon to help support refugees. So why hasn’t this support improved refugees’ well-being in the country?

Our recent report for the Clingendael Institute found that erroneous narratives about refugees are damaging the effectiveness of aid. Based on over 50 interviews with people on all sides of the refugee crisis in Lebanon – from high-ranking government officials and businessmen, to donors, aid workers and refugees – we found that the stories we tell and accept may matter as much as the funding we commit.

Like a maze of leaky funnels, false narratives divert conversations about policies and funding away from protecting refugees and supporting their host communities. Ultimately, this undermines investment in the already controversial “protection in the region” agenda. Promoted by European countries, this prioritizes helping refugees in their home regions as an alternative to large-scale resettlement in Europe.

Read the full article about anti-refugee narratives in Lebanon by Ana Uzelac at News Deeply.