Brazil vs South Korea: Two Refugee Systems, Same Hidden Problem

When people imagine refugee life in South Korea, they picture modern facilities, clean housing, organized systems, and efficiency.

When they imagine refugee life in Brazil, they imagine struggle, improvisation, and overcrowded urban life.

Having lived as refugees in both places, our family discovered something surprising:

One system looks better. The other feels more human.
But both leave refugees stuck in the same place — unable to truly integrate into society.

Sher’s Experience on Jeju Island With Yemeni Refugees

On Jeju Island, Sher witnessed many Yemeni and Middle Eastern refugees who arrived during the 2018 crisis.

They were placed in:

• Clean facilities
• Structured housing
• Organized support environments

But they were also trapped.

Refugees were not allowed to travel to mainland Korea to seek work opportunities in cities like Seoul.

This created a dangerous situation:

They could only work for local Jeju businesses.

And local businesses knew this.

Exploitation Becomes Easy When Movement Is Restricted

Many refugees worked:

• Extremely long hours
• For very low pay
• With no real ability to leave or seek better opportunities

Even if exploitation might also happen in Seoul, at least there would be options.

On Jeju, there were none.

The system was clean, modern, and suffocating.

Brazil: Harder Conditions, More Human Space

In São Paulo, our family faced:

• Overcrowding
• Unsanitary environments
• Social pressure

But there was something Korea did not provide:

Human agencies that cared about family life, not just shelter.

Organizations like Caritas Arquidiocesana de São Paulo helped our family access a SESC São Paulo card.

That one card changed our quality of life.

With it, we could access:

• Swimming facilities
• Children’s play rooms
• Sports courts
• Gym facilities
• Free Wi-Fi
• Safe recreational spaces for families

And most importantly:

We were not pressured to immediately accept exploitative work just to survive.

Some agencies even provided three solid meals per day, giving families breathing room to think, plan, and recover.

The Same Core Problem in Both Countries

Despite their differences, both countries shared the same hidden flaw:

There was no clear pathway from refugee → integrated citizen.

In Korea, refugees were physically clean but socially trapped.

In Brazil, refugees were socially freer but environmentally strained.

In both places, refugees were left to figure out life alone after initial support.

What Integration Should Actually Mean

Real integration would include:

• Freedom of movement
• Protection from exploitative labor
• Access to recreation and family spaces
• A pathway to independence, not just survival

Brazil accidentally gets some of this right through human-centered agencies.

Korea gets infrastructure right but restricts freedom.

Both miss the final step: dignified independence.

FAQ

Are refugee facilities better in South Korea than Brazil?
Yes, facilities are generally more modern and organized, but refugees may face movement restrictions and labor exploitation.

What advantage did Brazil offer refugees?
Access to supportive agencies, family recreation spaces through SESC, and less pressure into immediate exploitative labor.

What problem exists in both systems?
A lack of a structured pathway for refugees to become independent, integrated contributors to society.