The Long Road Home: Opportunities and Obstacles to the Reintegration of IDPs and Refugees Returning to Southern Sudan and the Three Areas
Publisher: Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG)
Author(s): Sara Pantuliano, Margie Buchanan-Smith & Paul Murphy
Date: 2007
Topics: Basic Services, Humanitarian Assistance, Land, Livelihoods
This in-depth study on the reintegration of internally displaced people (IDPs) returning to Southern Sudan and the Three Areas in the wake of the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) was initiated by the United Nations Mission in Sudan’s Return, Reintegration and Recovery Section (UNMIS/RRR), with the specific aim of informing future strategic planning on how best to support return and reintegration over the coming year. The study seeks to understand key determinants of sustainable reintegration and the role of different actors in achieving this goal. It focuses on key obstacles to, and opportunities for, successful and peaceful reintegration, paying attention to different interventions (implemented by federal and state governments, by UNMIS and by other international agencies), and the extent to which these have addressed obstacles or harnessed opportunities.
The study is being carried out in two phases. This first phase has focused on Southern Kordofan and Northern Bahr el Ghazal as representative states already experiencing high levels of return activity and generating important lessons for other areas. A second phase will be completed in late 2007/early 2008, and will extend into other geographical areas. This first phase has been funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), which commissioned the Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) of the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) to carry it out. ODI established a three-strong core team, all with extensive Sudan expertise. In-country, the core team was joined by seven local consultants and secondees from the government, UN agencies and international and national NGOs. Each of the Sudanese team members was recruited for their in-depth experience and knowledge of the return and reintegration process. This expertise was invaluable in setting up and carrying out the fieldwork, and for the preliminary analysis. The methodology for this study was based on the ‘Adapted Sustainable Livelihoods Framework to Support Analysis in Situ- ations of Conflict and Political Instability’, developed by HPG in 2003, building on DFID’s sustainable livelihoods framework (Collinson, 2003: 13). Thus, both data collection and analysis paid attention to assets, to livelihood strategies and to out- comes, especially of returnee households but also of resident households receiving the returnees. These issues were explored within the broader environmental, social, political and economic context, to take account of the institutions, policies and processes that have impacted on the return and reintegration process. Special attention was paid to the relationships between returnee and resident households, to any evidence of competition over resources and to potential points of further conflict. The work began with a review of relevant literature and documentation, a process that continued throughout the study. This included policy and programme documents on return and r eintegration, other studies on return in Sudan as well as assessments and data on the return process, recent evaluations and background documents on the areas of return to inform the contextual analysis. The major funding mechanisms for return and reintegration pertain in both states, and have been examined in greater depth in Southern Kordofan. The core of the study was based on fieldwork in selected case study areas in Southern Kordofan and in Northern Bahr el Ghazal. In Southern Kordofan the study team split in two, one travelling to the western Jebels (mountains) and one to the southern part of the state. The two teams visited a total of 15 villages in Southern Kordofan, as well as Dilling and Kadugli towns. In Northern Bahr El Ghazal the team visited 6 villages and Aweil town. In each village most of the information was collected through focus group discussions (FGDs), with village leaders, returnees (wherever possible divided into separate groups of men and women, and of youth), and resident members of the community.
To make maximum use of the time available the team would often sub-divide so that two focus group discussions were conducted at the same time. This was also useful in cross- checking and triangulating between different FGDs. The FGDs were based on common checklists to ensure consistency. Issues covered included: history of the conflict and displacement; details of the return process; details of reintegration according to how livelihoods had been re-established and the provision of services; issues of local leadership; and how policies, institutions and interventions had supported return and reintegration. Proportional piling (a technique developed for participatory rural appraisal) was used to understand different sources of livelihoods for returnees and residents.
In addition, semi-structured interviews were carried out with government officers both at state and local levels, with tribal leaders and with agency staff, again according to a common checklist. In Khartoum, meetings and interviews were conducted with federal government officers, donor representatives and UN and NGO staff.
The analysis was carried out as a phased process. A preliminary analysis of the fieldwork findings was done with the full study team, and the results were fed back in debriefing meetings in Kadugli and Khartoum. The core team then completed the analysis, accessing further documentation and submitting a first draft for comment in June 2007.
This report is written in three sections. The first section summarises the key findings and recommendations from phase 1. The second section presents the findings of the work in Southern Kordofan in more detail, and the third section does the same for Northern Bahr el Ghazal.