For those of us who haven’t seen a refugee camp in person, it’s hard to imagine the reality of what people who live there experience. Not all camps are created equally. Turkey and Jordan are prime examples of how refugee camps can differ.Living in Turkey’s Kilis Refugee CampWe start off with the Kilis Refugee Camp in Turkey, which was visited by a New York Times reporter back in 2014. On first sight, he thought the camp resembled a prison. No vegetation, high gates bar entry and barbed wire which tops the walls. Police officers and private security guards at the entry. When setting foot inside the camp, he notices something entirely different. Turkish workers were collecting garbage and keeping the streets clean. Other noticeable elements included as many streetlights as you would find in a suburban neighbourhood, a stable water supply, multiple well-crafted playgrounds and containers instead of tents which supplied housing for the refugees. Numerous schools were based in large buildings with spacious hallways and beautiful decoration. Kilis, who won a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, unfortunately, had unwelcoming news on April 19th, 2016: they’re full.Carol Batchelor, the U.N.H.C.R.’s representative in Turkey, said about these Turkish camps: “Turkey has taken the primary role and they’re very consistent. Any place you have 14,000 people living and living in that proximity, there are challenges. But these problems that exist in other camps are much less prevalent there.“Camps are places where it’s quite straightforward to provide services for people,” according to Anita Fabos, the former director of the Forced Migration and Refugee Studies program at the American University in Cairo. “The U.N. and humanitarian agencies are so good at providing resources.” Every day, the World Food Programme alone at the time operated an average of 5,000 trucks, 50 aircraft and 30 ships, as well as trains, river barges, mules, yaks, camels and donkeys.