People that are forced to live away from their homes for five years or more – such as refugees or internally displaced persons (IDPs) – are said to live in a situation of protracted displacement. In 2018 it was reported that 78% of all refugees live in protracted displacement. This is a very challenging state. Most are vulnerable and highly dependent on external support from governments, NGOs or relatives. They also have insecure legal statuses and don't have the ability – or opportunity – to rebuild their lives because of scarce economic resources, the legal framework that regulates their lives or societies that don't welcome them. In many cases, they can neither return home nor move on to other countries, nor really integrate in the country of reception. We've been carrying out research that explores the experiences and solutions for protracted displaced populations around the world. Specifically, we examine the rules that dictate people's ability to work, where they live, options for family reunification, and access to accommodation, education and health care. We found that international and host country policies don't adequately address the challenges posed by forced displacement across the world.
In the quest for sustainable solutions to record global displacement, promoting displaced persons' self-reliance and supporting them alongside host communities in regions of displacement have become buzzwords in global and European policy discussions. But despite such pledges, TRAFIG research in Bukavu, eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) finds that internally displaced persons (IDPs) in urban settings are largely ignored and unassisted by the state and international humanitarian and development interventions - and are proactively seeking their own solutions. The lack of institutionalised assistance means that IDPs mostly depend on the solidarity of others to be or become self-reliant. In this context, networks are a particularly important source of support and include assistance with locating housing and finding a job in Bukavu and with maintaining and harvesting crops in communities of origin. However, even with the benefits that these connections can bring, IDPs face serious challenges related to their displacement and contend with multiple types of limbo, making it difficult for many to truly overcome situations of protracted displacement. Findings thus point to the need for policies and practices that support urban IDPs in the DRC by helping them nurture and leverage their networks to unlock opportunities.
This working paper is based on empirical research on translocal figurations of displacement in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It contains methodological reflections, central findings, and reflections on these findings. Drawing on the conceptual framework that was developed in TRAFIG working paper 1, this paper explores TRAFIG's central question: "How are protractedness, dependency and vulnerability related to the factors of local and translocal connectivity and mobility, and, in turn, how can connectivityand mobility be utilised to enhance the self-reliance and strengthen the resilience of displaced people?" The paper presents findings from the east of the DRC, where many internally displaced persons (IDPs) seek refuge in host communities. Findings show that prior connections with members in the host communities are usually within the domestic sphere and are important drivers for people's decision to flee to a specific place. In rebuilding their lives in displacement—and hence in their efforts to move out of protracted displacement and to become integrated—these contacts are often key to set in motion a 'chain of connectivity' that opens up new opportunities: One contact helps them to get in touch with the next contact. For IDPS, it is not so much the number of their connections that are important but the quality of these connections. A small number of vertical connections with socio-economically more powerful and/or better-integrated contacts can sometimes be more helpful than a large number of horizontal connections with people that are in equally vulnerable positions. When IDPs use mobility as an asset to become integrated, this mobility is mostly used to free resources in the community of origin and to capitalise on these resources in the new environment. In this way, rural resources become part of people's urban livelihood strategies. By introducing these resources in the city and thereby drawing on their translocal connections, IDPs enrich the local economy and at the same time become more ...
The Multi-Stakeholder Community Consultation (MSCC) is a participatory research tool that has been developed by the DR Congo team of TRAFIG and that will be applied in other countries in the course of the project too. By bringing together a mixed group of respondents (displaced, hosts, authorities, civil society), the tool is geared towards collecting additional insights through an interactive dialogue on intergroup relations, validating findings gathered through other methods, and jointly seeking solutions for problems that are identified by the participants. In this note we provide methodological guidance and share our experience of using the tool in the DRC. Other TRAFIG country teams, interested researchers and practitioners can learn from it and adapt it to their own needs.
This working paper is based on empirical research on translocal figurations of displacement in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It contains methodological reflections, central findings, and reflections on these findings. Drawing on the conceptual framework that was developed in TRAFIG working paper 1, this paper explores TRAFIG's central question: "How are protractedness, dependency and vulnerability related to the factors of local and translocal connectivity and mobility, and, in turn, how can connectivity and mobility be utilised to enhance the self-reliance and strengthen the resilience of displaced people?" The paper presents findings from the east of the DRC, where many internally displaced persons (IDPs) seek refuge in host communities. Findings show that prior connections with members in the host communities are usually within the domestic sphere and are important drivers for people's decision to flee to a specific place. In rebuilding their lives in displacement - and hence in their efforts to move out of protracted displacement and to become integrated - these contacts are often key to set in motion a 'chain of connectivity' that opens up new opportunities: One contact helps them to get in touch with the next contact. For IDPS, it is not so much the number of their connections that are important but the quality of these connections. A small number of vertical connections with socio-economically more powerful and/or betterintegrated contacts can sometimes be more helpful than a large number of horizontal connections with people that are in equally vulnerable positions. When IDPs use mobility as an asset to become integrated, this mobility is mostly used to free resources in the community of origin and to capitalise on these resources in the new environment. In this way, rural resources become part of people's urban livelihood strategies. By introducing these resources in the city and thereby drawing on their translocal connections, IDPs enrich the local economy and at the same time become more accepted and better integrated.
Across the world, 16 million refugees and an unknown number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) experience long-lasting conditions of economic precarity, marginalisation, rightlessness and future uncertainty. They live under conditions of protracted displacement. Policy solutions often fail to recognise displaced people's needs and limit rather than widen the range of available solutions. This report brings together the central findings of the TRAFIG project's empirical study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Tanzania, Jordan, Pakistan, Greece, Italy and Germany. We engaged with more than 3,120 people in our three-year project. Our analysis centres around five factors that shape conditions of protracted displacement: 1) governance regimes of aid and asylum, 2) social practices and livelihoods, 3) networks and movements, 4) intergroup relations between displaced people and hosts, and 5) development incentives and economic interactions. We present multiple findings on each of these themes. Moreover, this report addresses gender and classbased differences and mental health related challenges in constellations of protracted displacement as well as political dynamics that impact on people's own responses to protracted displacement. Overall, our research shows that refugees, IDPs and other migrants by and large find protection, shelter, livelihood support, a sense of belonging and opportunities to migrate elsewhere through their personal networks. These networks often stretch across several places or even extend across multiple countries. While they are not a panacea for all challenges, people's own connections are an essential resource for sustainable and long-term solutions to their precarious situation. They must not be ignored in policy responses to protracted displacement. Understanding the needs and the local, translocal and transnational ties of displaced people is the foundation for finding solutions that last.
This working paper explores the governance of protracted displacement across global, regional and domestic levels in the context of the project "Transnational Figurations of Displacement" (TRAFIG). The multiple contemporary crises that have led to forced displacement show not only the limits of a tight definition of 'refugee', but also highlight the gaps in international protection frameworks. A significant number of those forcibly displaced are in protracted displacement situations. This paper is an effort to make sense of the legislative and policy frameworks of protection that apply globally, regionally and domestically, and the way in which these frameworks facilitate or hinder solutions for people in protracted displacement. We evaluate how these frameworks contribute (directly or indirectly) to resolving or creating protracted displacement, assess how they contribute to relevant policy developments and identify engagement trends and (unintended) effects. Along the way, we also draw comparative insights across different global, regional and domestic levels, including eight different countries that host large groups of displaced people and are the focus of the TRAFIG project: Greece, Germany and Italy in Europe; Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Tanzania in Africa; and Jordan and Pakistan in Asia. We explore some selected gaps in the current systems of governance of displacement, while concentrating on three key perspectives: governing protection, exercising rights and accessing services, and mobility and transnational dimensions of displacement. We conclude with ten key messages regarding the shortcomings of the current governance system of displacement. They highlight the need for stronger stakeholder collaboration, integration of global and local policies, enhanced focus on IDPs, investment in progressive regional policies, redesign of EU policies to avoid promotion of protracted displacement, greater ownership of processes and resources, de-politicisation of displacement policies, alignment of durable solutions with development-oriented interventions, realisation of the development potential of refugee integration. They also focus on mobility and translocal connectivity as a fourth durable solution to protracted displacement.
This working paper explores the governance of protracted displacement across global, regional and domestic levels in the context of the project "Transnational Figurations of Displacement" (TRAFIG). Themultiple contemporary crises that have led to forced displacement show not only the limits of a tight definition of 'refugee' but also highlight the gaps in international protection frameworks. A significant number of those forcibly displaced are in protracted displacement situations. This paper is an effort to make sense of the legislative and policy frameworks of protection that apply globally, regionally and domestically, and the way in which these frameworks facilitate or hinder solutions for people in protracted displacement. We evaluate how these frameworks contribute (directly or indirectly) to resolving or creating protracted displacement, assess how they contribute to relevant policy developments and identify engagement trends and (unintended) effects. Along the way, we also draw comparative insights across different global, regional and domestic levels, including eight different countries that host large groups of displaced people and are the focus of the TRAFIG project: Greece, Germany and Italy in Europe; Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Tanzania in Africa; and Jordan and Pakistan in Asia. We explore some selected gaps in the current systems of governance of displacement while concentrating on three key perspectives: governing protection, exercising rights and accessing services, and mobility and transnational dimensions of displacement. We conclude with ten key messages regarding the shortcomings of the current governance system of displacement. They highlight the need for stronger stakeholder collaboration, integration of global and local policies, enhanced focus on IDPs, investment in progressive regional policies, redesign of EU policies to avoid promotion of protracted displacement, greater ownership of processes and resources, de-politicisation of displacement policies, ...
This working paper explores the governance of protracted displacement across global, regional and domestic levels in the context of the project "Transnational Figurations of Displacement" (TRAFIG). The multiple contemporary crises that have led to forced displacement show not only the limits of a tight definition of 'refugee' but also highlight the gaps in international protection frameworks. A significant number of those forcibly displaced are in protracted displacement situations. This paper is an effort to make sense of the legislative and policy frameworks of protection that apply globally, regionally and domestically, and the way in which these frameworks facilitate or hinder solutions for people in protracted displacement. We evaluate how these frameworks contribute (directly or indirectly) to resolving or creating protracted displacement, assess how they contribute to relevant policy developments and identify engagement trends and (unintended) effects. Along the way, we also draw comparative insights across different global, regional and domestic levels, including eight different countries that host large groups of displaced people and are the focus of the TRAFIG project: Greece, Germany and Italy in Europe; Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Tanzania in Africa; and Jordan and Pakistan in Asia. We explore some selected gaps in the current systems of governance of displacement while concentrating on three key perspectives: governing protection, exercising rights and accessing services, and mobility and transnational dimensions of displacement. We conclude with ten key messages regarding the shortcomings of the current governance system of displacement. They highlight the need for stronger stakeholder collaboration, integration of global and local policies, enhanced focus on IDPs, investment in progressive regional policies, redesign of EU policies to avoid promotion of protracted displacement, greater ownership of processes and resources, de-politicisation of displacement policies, alignment of durable solutions with development-oriented interventions and realisation of the development potential of refugee integration. They also focus on mobility and translocal connectivity as a fourth durable solution to protracted displacement.
