Journal of Social Development in Africa (1986), 1, 101-110 
Book Reviews 
Charles P. Gasarasi, The Tripartite Approach to the Resettlement and 
Integration of Rural Refugees in Tanzania. Research Report No 71, The 
Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, Uppsala, 1984. 
All those concerned with the problem of refugees would be interested in 
reading this lucid account of the strategy undertaken by Tanzania in respect of 
the resettlement and integration of refugees, by Tanzanian researcher Charles 
P Gasarasi, a lecturer in Political Science at the University of Dar es Salaam. 
Gasarasi evaluates the refugee problem initially from a continental 
perspective, pointing out that the number of refugees in Africa has been 
estimated at over 5 million, which represents roughly half of the world's total. 
He indicates that although the majority of African states have ratified 
international conventions relating to the protection of refugees, the principle of 
'burden-sharing', enshrined in the 1969 OAU Convention, where member 
states are expected to assist one another in dealing with refugee problems, has 
on the whole been sadly neglected. We may view this inhospitality generously 
as does Gasarasi and other writers such as Kibreab (1983) who notes that 
hospitality - which is a function of 'resource availability' (1983:83) - is 
inconceivable in a state of poverty. Alternatively we may see this as an 
example of indifference and inhumanity on the part of many African 
governments which have failed dismally to meet their responsibilities and 
indeed have created this problem in the first place. Partly as a result of this lack 
of co-operation, host governments have had to seek aid from a variety of 
voluntary non-governmental agencies and from appropriate UN bodies. 
In this context Gasarasi explores the Tanzanian experience of coping with 
refugees and in particular the tripartite arrangement made between the 
Government of the Republic of Tanzania, the office of the United Nations 
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Lutheran World Federation/ 
Tanganyika Christian Refugee Service (LWF/TCRS). Tanzania has had an 
extensive experience of influx by refugees since 1959, principally from Zaire 
and Burundi, although refugees have also arrived from Rwanda, Malawi, 
Mozambique, Uganda, Kenya and South Africa. The Tanzanian record in 
dealing with these refugees presents as certainly one of the best in Africa, as
102 Book Reviews 
not only has Tanzania generously welcomed its refugee population, but has 
actively encouraged the integration of refugees through economic self-reliance 
- and in tens of thousands of cases the granting of Tanzanian citizenship. In 
recognition of his exceptional services to refugees, President Nyerere was 
awarded the prestigious Nansen Medal in 1983 (REFUGEES, 1983:13). 
Gasarasi traces the involvement of the tripartite partners with refugees, in 
particular highlighting the large financial contributions made by the two nongovernmental 
partners (for example, UNHCR spent US$ 11.5 million in 
sponsoring rural refugee settlements in Tanzania between 1963 and 1979 - 
Gasarasi p 23). On the other hand he points to the Government's contribution 
in granting refugees free land on which to settle (10 acres of agricultural land 
per family), free primary education, health services and assistance to build a 
new home in a rural refugee settlement. A major factor facilitating this process, 
as noted by Gasarasi, concerns the availability and ease of allocation of land 
(ie through state grant rather than purchase), which has meant that Tanzania 
has the ability to afford such generosity - unlike many other African countries. 
In particular he emphasises the inestimable value of granting asylum to needy 
people. 
This tripartite approach has developed since the initial Memorandum of 
Understanding was signed in May 1964. Gasarasi notes the early conflicts 
which emerged between the partners which he views as reflecting a covert 
struggle for power. This mainly concerned the disbursement of funds with the 
two non-governmental partners seeking a greater degree of control over 
expenditure by government. Lack of mutual trust, different terms of reference 
and conflicts of interest have also contributed to a breakdown in communication 
at various times between the operational partners. Other problems concern 
such factors as poor planning in the allocation of land for the settlements which 
led to several disastrous failures in the early years. Despite these initial 
difficulties and continuing conflicts of interest, Gasarasi assures us that, with 
the increasing experience gained by the partners, more positive results of an 
incremental nature have developed over time. 
The question of participation by refugees in the setting up and running of the 
settlements is also considered. Earlier settlements did not consider this 
dynamic, but in the more recent settlements both refugee participation in 
planning projects and local people's knowledge of the area concerned have 
been used to beneficial effect. However, Gasarasi is critical of Tanzania's 
Refugee Control Act (1965) which he feels is responsible for the creation of 
authoritarian' Settlement Commandants' who have often developed antagonistic 
relations with the refugees. 
Gasarasi indicates, through good use of tables, details of expenditure and 
sales production which highlight the relative success of the policy of
Book Reviews 103 
encouraging refugee settlements to take their place in the national economy. In 
addition a wide range of skills and services are provided through refugee cooperatives, 
which have developed a local economy for the settlements. 
Recently many of the earlier settlements have assumed the status of ordinary 
Tanzanian villages, either through voluntary repatriation or, in cases where 
this was not a possibility, the mass naturalisation of refugees. 
Gasarasi emphasises that other African countries hosting refugees would 
greatly benefit from this tripartite experience and believes this deserves wide 
dissemination. I would endorse his view, with the reservation that the 
development of this co-operative approach requires a particular set of 
favourable circumstances to facilitate this process. In addition it seems evident 
tha the different terms of reference of the operational partners inevitably 
creates a degree of mistrust between them. However, we should bear in mind 
that in all likelihood these three agencies will need to develop a modus 
operandi in coping with refugee problems in any case. Other countries apart 
from Tanzania have experimented in a similar way, with one implementing 
donor agency working hand in glove with both Government and UN agencies 
such as UNHCR. Although beset with difficulties, a tripartite approach may be 
the only way to work towards the provision of effective co-ordination and 
planning for refugees in the long term. 
Reviewed by N Hall, School of Social Work, Harare. 
References 
KIBREAB G 1983 Reflections on the African Refugee Problem: 
A Critical Analysis of Some Basic Assumptions. 
Research Report No 47, The Scandinavian 
Institute of African Studies, Uppsala. 
Sweden. 
REFUGEES 1983 Refugees Magazine, Office of the United 
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. 
Public Information Section, No 5, Dec 1983. 
13-18. 
Zimbabwe National Family Planning Council. Zimbabwe Reproductive 
Health Survey 1984. Harare, June 1985. 
The Zimbabwe Reproductive Health Survey (ZRHS) Report is written with 
clarity and principled simplicity. These are important attributes for a 
pathbreaking report in the field of fertility in Zimbabwe. The ZRHS was 
conducted between July and October 1984, and the sample is comprised of 
2 574 women aged 15-49 of whom two thirds are rural residents. 
The report consists of eight chapters. The first chapter provides the 
historical, socio-economic and demographic backdrop on which the study