Solutions for displacement

The United Nations Secretary-General noted in the annex to his Decision No. 2011/20 that failing to put an end to displacement can result in increased and continued vulnerabilities, and can negatively impact hosting communities leading to serious economic, political and security implications for national authorities and populations involved. Refugee returnees and IDPs need durable solutions, that is, they need to work towards a situation in which they no longer have needs related to their displacement. Durable solutions are critical to the recovery and sustainable development of post-conflict countries, which requires comprehensive and effective recovery and development strategies and programmes (UNSG, 2011). It is important to note that finding solutions is a process rather than a specific endpoint.

Resolving displacement situations typically centres on finding durable solutions which can be achieved through:

1. Return (and sustainable reintegration). For IDPs, this typically means return to home or at least their home community/area. For refugees, however, repatriation is to the home country but not necessarily to the home community;
2. Local integration;
3. Resettlement, which for IDPs means relocation elsewhere in the same country, and for refugees, resettlement in a third country.

Often, resolving displacement situations in a given country involves a combination of all three solutions. When finding durable solutions, the main considerations include the voluntary nature of the solution; the rights, needs and legitimate interests of the displaced population themselves; and informed decision-making. (IASC, 2010). As IDPs in particular are increasingly located in urban settings, solutions may be entwined with broader trends of urbanization. If the internal displacement was caused by conflict or violence, peace agreements may include guidance on durable solutions. In the case of refugees, return is often a preferred solution (GCR, 2018). UNHCR, the host country, the country of origin and other States as appropriate assess the options and agree to the conditions (including preconditions) under which voluntary, safe and dignified returns take place. Similar arrangements are made regarding local integration. And for resettlement – which is limited to less than 1 per cent of the total number of recognized refugees in need globally – UNHCR prepares annual reports on projected resettlement needs as part of the annual tripartite consultations on resettlement.

 Just as needs, vulnerabilities and capacities among displaced populations differ, so the appropriate choice of durable solution may differ, too. Which option is best, or which options are feasible, will be influenced by a number of factors. These factors include the conditions in the place of origin (such as safety and security as well as the ability of a community to (re-)absorb populations), the risks of recurring disasters and the impacts of climate change, as well as the resources available to support the various solutions. For both IDPs and refugees in protracted situations, it can become increasingly difficult to return. For instance, children may have been born and raised, and may only know the host location. People may have grown accustomed to urban environments and acquired new labour skills and livelihoods. In other instances, there may be a lack of confidence that return offers the best solution, particularly in areas where climate change has affected agriculture.

It is important to factor in all communities to durable solutions by planning and implementing comparable and tailored support for other affected populations, such as host communities or those who remained in the place of origin. This is important because preferential treatment of either side, whether perceived or real, risks creating or increasing social tensions (IOM, 2016a). In this way, area-based approaches, which focus on addressing needs and vulnerabilities regardless of the group or category of persons or tied to a specific sector, can be useful in implementing durable solutions.

Intention surveys and needs assessments that also factor in communities help to assess options for durable solutions. Clear communication on the options available to solve problems, and on what assistance will be available, is also critical. Populations should be consulted and should participate extensively in the planning and management of the processes supporting a durable solution. This may require concerted efforts to ensure that participation includes persons who are potentially marginalized, such as women and people with special needs (IASC, 2010). It is recommended that these intention surveys be undertaken as joint initiatives between governments and humanitarian/development partners. Joint initiatives build trust, through transparency and accountability, particularly because they demonstrate that solutions are not being pursued in opposition to the desires and intentions of affected populations.

In cases when durable solutions for refugees are not achievable, States may consider creating or expanding complementary pathways for admission to third countries as an alternative to resettlement. These pathways are not a substitute for the protection afforded to refugees under the international protection regime, but should rather form part of a progressive approach that allows refugees to advance towards greater enjoyment of their rights while their international protection needs are being met. They also serve as an important expression of global solidarity and international cooperation and a contribution to more equitable responsibility sharing (see Humanitarian border management).