Mixed-methods research reveals ICT usage significantly empowers refugees' understanding of their immigration rights, highlighting the importance of targeted training initiatives.
This study investigated the effect of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) usage on the realisation of refugees' immigration rights, focusing on the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in Uganda. Utilising a mixed-methods approach, the research combines quantitative data from 150 refugees and IOM technical staff with qualitative insights gathered through interviews. The findings reveal a significant positive correlation (r = 0.524, p < 0.001) between ICT usage and the empowerment of refugees to understand and advocate for their rights. Respondents reported that ICT tools, such as mobile phones and access to online resources, greatly enhanced their comprehension of immigration processes and facilitated communication with support organisations. Descriptive statistics indicate that the average mean score across various statements related to ICT impact was 3.806, categorised as "Agree." Notably, access to online resources was rated highest (mean = 4.10), emphasising the critical role of digital tools in navigating the immigration landscape. However, challenges such as digital literacy, language barriers, and socioeconomic factors were also identified, which may hinder effective ICT utilisation. The study underscores the necessity for targeted ICT access initiatives, tailored training programs, and community engagement to enhance refugees' digital skills. Recommendations for policymakers include creating a comprehensive framework for monitoring and evaluating ICT initiatives to ensure they effectively address the evolving needs of refugee populations. This research contributes to the understanding of how ICT can empower refugees, ultimately fostering better advocacy for their immigration rights in Uganda and beyond.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ronald et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: