value of properties in Jerash makes the sale — or rental — of properties there insufficient to cover expenses elsewhere, such as in Hitteen, and the limited opportunities ex-Gazans have historically had to register properties outside camps posed additional hurdles and insecurity. Furthermore, networks of family and friends play a key role in supporting Jerash families, with a significantly higher proportion of households reporting receiving financial or in-kind assistance from relatives in Jordan than residents in the other camps. Interviews suggest that, with limited access to national social safety nets, social networks of family and neighbours within Jerash camp itself provide a ‘safety net’ to residents. Moving to a location with weaker support networks was presented as a significant risk. Thus, as amongst other camp refugees (Khawaja and Tiltnes, 2002), there is often a strong desire to leave the camp but not the camp’s community. Over the last decades the Government of Jordan has taken steps to improve the living conditions of ex-Gazans. Access to free schooling, treatment in public hospitals at the rate of uninsured Jordanians, and, most recently, the opening of ownership rights and the extension of identity documents’ validity all positively impact upon ex-Gazans’ lives and opportunities. Nevertheless, ex-Gazans’ status and their particular location in Jerash camp continue to intersect to exacerbate their poor socio-economic conditions. With few opportunities in the local labour market to compensate for their legal status and little cash coming in from outside the camp, residents describe a hand-to-mouth existence, precariously pooling and balancing scant resources, with little chance to improve their living conditions. ‘Just getting by’ Ex-Gazans in Jerash and other refugee camps in Jordan 127