In 2016, the Kalobeyei refugee settlement was created, just 3.5 kilometres from
the Kakuma camps in Kenya. In a departure from Kenya’s policy of not
allowing refugees to work, its aim was to provide self-reliance to refugees and
greater refugee–host interaction. But are refugee policies and programmes in
Kalobeyei really different from those in Kakuma? If so, what are the differences? And do these differences actually translate into different self-reliance
outcomes for refugees? Drawing upon a mixed-methods approach, we compare
aid models, self-reliance enabling factors and self-reliance outcomes between
Kalobeyei and Kakuma. After just 15 months, we find that self-relianceenabling factors—such the environment, assets, networks, markets and public
goods—remain similar across both sites and, in some cases, are better in
Kakuma. The major differences between the sites are in the aid model:
Kalobeyei’s cash-assistance and agricultural programmes. We find improved
nutritional outcomes and a greater perception of autonomy in Kalobeyei,
both of which may be attributable to differences in the aid models. These
findings have implications for how we conceptualize the institutional design
of self-reliance in Kalobeyei and elsewhere.