Sustainable integration of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Ethiopia: exploring intentions about post-conflict resettlement choices

Abstract

This article discusses the role of ethnic identity in triggering ethnic-based conflicts and the subsequent mass displacement of people from their habitual areas of residence to areas where people with similar ethnic identities are found. It also explores how ethnic identity shapes internally displaced persons’ (IDP) decisions regarding the choice of post-displacement resettlement situations–that is, return, local integration, or resettlement. The study relied on qualitative data collected using interview, observation, and case study methods from IDPs relocated to temporary camps in southern Ethiopia. Accordingly, the results of the study highlighted that all of the interviewees in this study expressed their intention not to return; instead, they preferred to be locally integrated into the host communities they perceive to possess similar ethnic identities. The findings of the study imply that the Ethiopian government should work closely with local authorities in the areas of host communities and other partners to create favorable conditions for IDPs’ sustainable local integration, including creating and expanding employment opportunities and providing land and other essential productive resources, as stipulated in the Kampala Convention.

Keywords:

• Ethnic conflict
• ethnic identity
• internal displacement
• internally displaced persons (IDPs)
• Kampala convention
• sustainable reintegration

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Grace Spencer, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK

SUBJECTS:

• Social Psychology
• Politics & Development
• Sociology & Social Policy

Introduction

Internal displacement is one of the most impactful human mobility experiences, both for the affected people, the host community to which the people move, and even for the people of the area from which the people have been displaced (Orendain & Djalante, 2021). According to a report by the World Bank (2021), by the end of 2019, there were approximately 45.7 million people internally displaced worldwide because of armed conflict, criminal violence, communal violence, and political violence. Sub-Saharan Africa has been one of the regions most affected by internal displacement, with armed conflicts, jihadist attacks, and communal violence being the leading causes of displacement (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre [IDMC], 2020). Moreover, Ethiopia has been placed as one of the top 10 countries with the highest number of IDPs, estimated at over 1.4 million by 2019 (World Bank, 2021). However, the country has taken the lead from Syria in the number of IDPs, with around 3.19 million people displaced from their habitual residence because of conflict (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies [IFRC & RCS], 2019). One of the largest conflict incidents that occurred in April 2018 between the Gedeo and Guji communities was responsible for the displacement of nearly one million people (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs [OCHA], 2018). In addition, the 2018 joint reports of the OCHA and the National Disaster Risk Management Commission (NDRMC) revealed that around 1 million people were displaced by the conflict around the border areas of the Oromia and Somali regions alone. Worku (2020) found that ethnic regionalization as an ideological tool for divide and rule, the legal paradox of constitutionally recognized rights, the longstanding ambition of ethnic cleansing, and policy-driven proscriptions of landholding rights are the root causes of internal displacement in Ethiopia. Therefore, it is clear that inter-ethnic tensions and recurrent conflicts over scarce resources are at the root of massive internal displacements in post-1991 Ethiopia (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees [UNHCR], 2021). Yigzaw and Abitew (2019) also found that conflict manifested in the form of ethnic tensions, regional political instability, and inter-communal violence has been the primary driving factor for internal displacements in Ethiopia.

According to Teferi (2012), the most notable post-1991 inter-ethnic conflicts observed in Ethiopia caused the internal displacement of millions of people, including the Silte-Gurage conflict, Wagagoda language conflict, Sheko-Megengir conflict, Anuak-Nuer conflict, Berta-Gumuz conflict, Gedeo-Guji conflict, Oromo-Amhara conflict, Borana-Gerri conflict, Afar-Issa conflict, and Oromo-Somali conflict. Aalen (2002) contends that the major causes of inter-ethnic conflicts in Ethiopia are disagreements over the possession and use of both arable and urban land, competition over grazing land or water resources, especially around pastoral areas, regional hegemony, access to state resources such as jobs, investments, and funds, and language policy in the administrative and educational sectors. Furthermore, Bekalu (2015) stated that the federal structure based on ethnic identity contributes to ethnic tensions and conflicts, widening the disparities among ethnic groups. Teferi (2012) adds factors such as inequitable distributions of economic, social, and political opportunities or competition for resources and political power to the causes of the recurrent ethnic-based conflicts in post-1991 Ethiopia, arguing that ‘ethnic conflict may not describe the conflicts based on ethnic differences because at least one party to the conflict will claim that its distinct ethnic identity is the reason why its members cannot realize their interests, why they do not have the same rights, or why their claims are not satisfied. As it turned out, ethnicity might serve as a cover for any other conflicts between any groups of people’ (Teferi, 2012, p. 68). Nonetheless, whatever factor might have caused it, forced displacement of people from their habitual residential areas results in adverse effects, especially on the most vulnerable segments of society, such as women, the elderly, children, people with chronic illnesses, and those living with physical disabilities.

Internal displacement tends to exacerbate people’s vulnerability as they lose their livelihoods, homes, social networks, and access to essential services (IFRC & RCS, 2020; Yigzaw&Abitew, 2019). Their situation may worsen under circumstances in which they are displaced for many years and can neither return to their original homes nor find another place to rebuild their lives (African Union Economic, Social, and Cultural Council [AU ECOSOCC] & IDMC, 2010). Millions of IDPs still face significant challenges in their efforts to bring their displacement to a sustainable end (IDMC, 2020). Therefore, the state and other actors should work towards creating sustainable solutions for internally displaced persons (IDPs). The World Bank (2021) states that a durable solution can be achieved in one of the following ways: sustainable reintegration at the place of origin (‘return’); sustainable local integration in areas where internally displaced persons take refuge (‘local integration’); or sustainable integration in another part of the country (‘resettlement’). Moreover, the African Union (AU, 2012), under Article 11 of the Kampala Convention, requires states to promote and create satisfactory conditions for durable solutions in this regard, including voluntary and sustainable return, local integration, or relocation in safety and dignity. In doing so, the convention puts states responsible for consulting IDPs on their options for securing durable solutions to displacement to enable IDPs ‘to make a free and informed choice’ on return, local integration, or relocation and for ensuring their participation in ‘sustainable solutions’. Nevertheless, according to Ferris (2012), governments usually focus on the return of IDPs rather than on the other two solutions of local integration and settlement.

In their joint reports on the conflict displacement situation in Ethiopia, United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs & National Disaster Risk Management Commission (OCHA & NDRMC 2018a) indicated that the government’s primary preference has always been to encourage the voluntary return of IDPs. However, a report by a team from Refugee International who had traveled to southern Oromia and parts of the South Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples (SNNPs) region shows that the government was used to restrict the delivery of assistance, telling IDPs that they would only receive aid if they returned home (Yarnell, 2018). The framework for durable solutions explains that the extent to which a durable solution has been achieved relies on both the process that leads to the solution and the fulfillment of certain conditions (The Brookings Institution, 2007). Accordingly, while the process includes the provision of relevant information so that IDPs can freely choose their preferred solution and their consultation and involvement in the process of designing programs and policies, the conditions deal with a safe environment, access to documentation, restitution of property or compensation for property lost or destroyed, and access to basic necessities of life, services, and livelihood opportunities. Given that Ethiopia is among the countries in Africa that signed the Kampala Convention, every responsibility that the convention imposes on signatory states is also applicable to the government of Ethiopia.

It is believed that the actions of governments aimed at creating durable solutions for IDPs should be based on evidence regarding the choices of the IDPs about which ways they would like to be permanently settled (United Nations, 2019). According to the Danish Refugee Council (DRC, 2017), the process of finding durable solutions in Ethiopia is heavily government-led but lacks sufficient evidence to support policies and programs. Studies pertaining to the intention of the IDPs to return, be integrated into the host communities, or relocate to other areas of residence are lacking in Ethiopia. Hence, the purpose of this research is to explore the preferences of IDPs in selected areas of Ethiopia regarding alternatives to sustainable post-conflict resettlement patterns. Accordingly, it intends to seek responses for the following fundamental research questions:

1. What is the nature of the relationship IDPs maintain with the host communities in which they live after displacement?

2. How do IDPs prefer to be resettled after displacement (return to the previous area, integrate into host communities, or relocate to another location)?

Methods

Research design

Using a descriptive phenomenological research design, qualitative data were collected from purposefully selected IDPs in southern Ethiopia. Phenomenology is about the search for meaning, which seeks to explain the nature of things through the way people experience them (Grossoehme, 2014). It was used mainly because of its effectiveness in bringing to the fore personal insights, experiences, subjective interpretations, and perceptions of individuals from their own perspectives, and hence in challenging structural or normative assumptions (Lester, 1999; Pathak, 2017). Relying exclusively on a qualitative research approach, qualitative data were collected to identify the preferences of IDPs regarding alternative ways of permanently resettling in any of the host, previous, or other locations. Using the emic/insiders’ approach, the study identified the intentions of IDPs about their post-conflict resettlement choices, including their justifications, perceptions about the nature of relationships established with host communities, and their lived experiences as refuge.

Study site and selection of research participants

The focus of the study was on IDPs that were displaced from their habitual areas of residence in 2018, predominantly because of inter-ethnic violent conflicts in various areas of Ethiopia. Although the people who had then been displaced were dispersedly resettled to different areas of the country, we specifically focused on IDPs relocated to various temporary sites in southern Ethiopia, particularly in the southern part of Oromia (Bishan Guracha) and Gedeo areas, mainly depending on accessibility issues and the presence or absence of risks related to continued violence around the areas of displacement, among other factors. In addition, the areas were selected purposely because the highest incidence of displacement occurred as a result of ethnic-based conflicts around the border areas of Guji-Gedeo and Somali-Oromia (Jafer et al., 2022; OCHA, 2018; OCHA & NDRMC, 2018a), which have consequently attracted local and international attention. Accordingly, the researchers included four relatively large and two relatively small IDP sites in these areas. IDP sites were selected on the basis of camp size and number of IDPs residing in the camps during data collection, accessibility to transportation, and reduced risks of potential armed attack around the sites, among other things.

Forty IDPs (30 males and 10 females) in all sites the researchers visited during the period of data collection in March 2022 were interviewed. The age of participants ranges from 34 to 72. Consequently, while the research sites were purposefully selected, the size of the research participants was determined predominantly based on data saturation. In all selected IDP sites where the research team had easy access to the data, the team continued to interview an increasing number of people until the researchers were no longer able to find new themes.

IDPs still residing in camps were contacted during data collection that lasted two weeks in the southern Oromia and Gedeo zones. In addition, in the Gedeo zone alone, IDPs who had already been relocated to their original areas of residence were contacted in a small village called Deko located in wonago district of the zone, in addition to those that were not permanently resettled to the areas of either their choice or the choice of the government. The purpose of contacting the IDPs who had returned to the original area of residence was to situate the context in which they have returned and, most importantly, to assess the conditions in which they were surviving after return, including whether the [social, physical, and political] environment is safe; restitution of property or compensation for the lost property; and access to basic necessities of life, services, and livelihood opportunities.

Method of data collection

Three data collectors with a BA degree in social science were recruited and trained in the research, including its objectives, methods, ethical procedures, and instruments. Discussions about qualitative research and refresher training on data collection techniques and procedures to be followed during the interviews were also included in the training sessions. The authors of this article provided training and were involved in the data collection and coordination of fieldwork activities. Qualitative data were collected through interviews, observation, and case-study methods. An interview checklist, containing unstructured questions, was prepared to guide the interviews. The questions were prepared such that they could address the specific research objectives that the research intended to achieve, including: (1) the nature of the relationship that the IDPs maintained with the host community; and (2) their preferences regarding the various ways of being sustainably resettled, among other things. Interviews were the principal method of data collection used in this study. Intention regarding post-conflict resettlement mainly involves understanding the motives and desires of an individual IDP.

Issues pertaining to feelings about previous experiences (the context in which s/he was displaced), perceptions and reflections about the nature of relationships maintained with the host community, and, importantly, aspirations about resettlement require the researchers to collect in-depth data from an individual who is actually a participant in the process. This is because such experiences and aspirations are not something that a person shares with another person in the same social category. Therefore, individual interviews were found to be the most appropriate method for meaningfully understanding such internal drives and emotions. Data from interviews were substantiated with [non-participant] observations of the living situations of IDPs, including the facilities provided. In addition, the situation of returnees in Gedeo zone was taken as a case because of its unique attribute in the sense that returning to the original area of residence was uncommon during the study period of this research. Therefore, we wanted to observe the experience of surviving as returnee. Rather than as a standalone method, obviously, data from the case was collected using in-depth interviews and observations of the situation of returnees in terms of access to basic services and their perception of life before and after the return.

During field visits, the researchers first contacted the zonal, Woreda, town, and even kebele level administrations to access the IDP sites. Once access to the field was obtained, interviewees were informed about the purpose and rationale of undertaking the research and provided their oral consent. Data collectors approached the interviewees in a friendly manner and created rapport that helped maintain trust. Under circumstances in which easy access to the interviewees was not possible, the researchers also used guides and selected people who were knowledgeable about the site and had previous contact with the IDPs. Often, these people have been used as interpreters when the interviewers were unable to listen and respond to the languages of the research participants. Data collectors spent extended time with the interviewees before diving into the interview. All these have assisted in building rapport that helped to gain the trust of the participants. Participants were asked unstructured open-ended questions, followed by probes for detailed and further responses.

Method of data analysis

The audios recorded during the fieldwork were first transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were then translated back to English. We have followed Giorgi’s (1985) four analytical steps during data analysis. Accordingly, we first thoroughly listened to the full descriptions provided by the participants and observed their living situations to get a sense of their whole experience which was followed by reading the transcripts to identify and isolate ‘meaning units’. We then probed these meaning units through imaginative variation and finally integrated and synthesised the meaning units into a consistent statement of the structure of the phenomenon. The fact that both authors were involved in the coding of the data helped to ensure its credibility. The data were presented using narrations supplemented by direct quotes of the participants.

Ethical considerations

According to Wijk and Harrison (2013), the ethics of studies involving a vulnerable population should reflect, inter alia, the principles of confidentiality and ‘doing no harm’. Krause (2017) also noted that research ethics is more central in research on forced migration and with refugees, as they might have fled war, experienced traumatic events, and lived under precarious conditions in exile. Wijk and Harrison (2013) further argued that research proposals need to go before ethics committees for adjudication to ensure appropriate levels of accountability and provision for responsibility. For this purpose, the study was first evaluated and approved by the Ethics Approval Committee of Dilla University (DU-CSSH/2294/15), a university that is located close to one of the study sites. Research participants were first informed about the purpose of the research, including what role was expected from their side. They were also informed about their right to withdraw from the interview at any time of their choice. Both verbal and written consents were obtained from all research participants. In addition, a formal letter was obtained ahead of the field deployment from the college of social science and humanities at Dilla University asking for cooperation to be granted for the research team. Further, we have de-identified the names of participants during report writing. We have also provided the study participants refreshments during data collection and offered them approximately $1USD as a compensation of their valuable time invested during the interview.

Results

In the following sections, data configured according to the themes identified during data categorization are presented, along with their interpretations. Accordingly, the results section deals with the presentation and interpretation of data pertaining to the relationships that the IDPs established with the host community and, importantly, the intention of research participants regarding post-conflict sustainable resettlement alternatives. Our analysis indicates that the two sub-themes presented below are highly related in such a way that one determines and shapes the other. For instance, it can be argued that the nature of the IDP-host community relationship partly determines the intention of the IDPs to return to their previous areas of residence, to be integrated into the host community, or to relocate to another area.

IDPs-host community relationships

A mix of both cooperation and competition with regard to the relationship between IDPs and the host community has been found. Nevertheless, most research participants disclosed that there was a positive and harmonious relationship between the two groups under consideration. The most important finding in this regard is that the nature of the relationship between IDPs and the host community has been shaped by elements of social identities commonly shared by the two groups alike. Of all other elements of social identities, ethnicity was found to have played a dominant role in creating a sense of belongingness to the host communities among the IDPs. The following response of an interviewee (XX31, male, 46 years old) would better illustrates this situation:

God had a plan to compensate me with a better fortune that I was able to join my own people with whom I can speak the same language and can easily communicate with each other. As I go to the market places or walk through the town, I really feel free because I trust the people that they won’t attack me. When facing some problems, I also feel free to ask for help because I believe that we are one, and hence they do not hesitate to give me a hand.

The study also noted that the relationship between IDPs and host communities is characterized by mutualistic tendencies most of the time. Reciprocal exchanges of goods and services, including experiences of sharing common markets, grinding mills, ritual services in religious places, and transportation services, have been found to contribute to the smooth relationship between the two social groups.

We have a good relationship with the community living around our camp. We share common market places, shops, grinding mills, and often transportation. When we want to buy food items, such as grains, we go to the local market and buy the items from them. As we move from here to other towns in the vicinity, we use the same means of transportation. On their side, too, they often visit our village, especially in search of their lost cattle. In addition, it is known that people from Hararge (the area where they came from) are very well known for traditional medicines, particularly herbal treatments. Therefore, when they suffer from certain diseases, they come to our camp for treatment. Moreover, with the expectation and prior arrangements that someone will sell out food aids for cheap prices, few members of the local community come to our village during the days on which rations are distributed. (XX 36, Male, 45 years old)

However, research participants disclosed that there are situations in which membership in certain practices and rituals becomes closed only to the members of the IDPs. Among these are participation in various forms of self-help or community-based associations, such as idir that are reported to be restricted to members of the IDPs alone:

We are self-sufficient as far as other aspects of social relationships are concerned. For instance, we don’t join various forms of self-help associations, such as Idir. When someone dies in our community, we call one another and take the dead body to the burial place nearby. Upon return, we have a ritual that we contribute some amount of money and give it to the mourning family. (XX38, female, 46 years old).

Perhaps the limited size and homogeneous nature of the IDPs might have contributed to their being self-contained in this regard.

The relationship between IDPs and host communities has been influenced by patterns of competition over limited resources rather than cooperation for a common good. Few reports from the research participants revealed the tendency to consider IDPs as threats to the resources commonly shared with the host communities, including job opportunities: "The people in the current area of settlement do not have a positive outlook towards us. They insult us, saying “those brought by wheels," and do not want to recognize us as citizens. For this reason, we don’t feel free while walking in the town” (XX21, female, 72 years old).

IDP’s intentions of returning to previous areas of residence

The IDPs in our study did not intend to return to the areas where they used to be before the displacement. Most research participants who were living in relocation camps would prefer to be locally integrated into the host community in which they are currently residing.

I never want to return to that region again. How can I aspire to go back to an area where I lived for more than 45 years and gave birth to and brought up nine children but was finally considered alien and forced to suddenly leave for the mere reason that I am not affiliated with the dominant ethnic group!? I will continue to live here and will see what happens to me in the future. I know that I may face so many challenges when living with a little and decreasing amount of support, especially as an old woman, but it is God who lets a person survive. Why not even death? I would prefer to die here than go back to that area. (XX22, female, 60 years old)

There were numerous reasons justifying research participants’ lack of intention to return to previous areas of residence, the most commonly mentioned one being the loss of properties as a result of the conflict:

I have lost everything I had in the previous area of residence; my cattle, my house, my coffee farm, my grain farm, and my many other possessions have already been burned. The only thing I left with was my family and my own life. I have never been there after the displacement. Even if I intend to go back, how can I survive having lost all those things? Here, thanks to the government for building a house for us, at least I have a reason to live here. (XX19, male, 44 years old)

In addition to the destruction of one’s belongings, the loss of livelihoods, including the jobs IDPs used to earn regular income, has contributed to their lack of interest in returning to previous areas. Most importantly, interviewees perceived that the mass destruction of the properties belonging to members of minority ethnic groups has been done mainly because the victims did not have an ethnic identity similar to that of the offenders and that it was made intentionally to intimidate the minorities to leave the area.

Some other reasons that led the research participants to lose interest in returning to their habitual areas of residence were found to reinforce IDPs’ intention to be locally integrated into the host communities. The most important case was the sharing of similar social identities between IDPs and members of the host communities. The presence of such commonalities in social identities, especially ethnicity, seems to have brought a sense of feeling at home, resulting mainly from obtaining freedom of expression of one’s cultural identities among the IDPs that they reportedly lost in the previous areas:

Here, we have freedom and the opportunity to get some services. In my previous area, I had my own home and many other belongings, but I have never felt at home. Despite the many life challenges that I am currently facing here, I would rather sleep outside than return to that region. (XX1, male, 45 years old)

The presence and absence of sustainable livelihood options, including reliable employment opportunities, have been among the factors shaping IDPs’ decisions about resettlement. Under the circumstances in which the research participants were able to secure a job and earn regular income, we found that the IDPs intended to be locally integrated into the host communities. Moreover, it is important to note that such decisions were frequently made without compromising the hesitancy to return to previous areas of residence. The response of an interviewee (XX5, male, 55 years old) whom we contacted in a school compound where he was permanently employed as a guard reveals how employment reinforces intentions for local integration:

I don’t want to return to that area unless something like a miracle happens. I have already lost everything I had, including my precious job. Though not sufficient to meet the basic needs of my family, I have a job here, as a result of which I earn 1000 ETB per month. In the future, I am planning to plough, renting a piece of land from farmers around here. For that purpose, I will try my best to save some money from my little monthly salary. I also have some materials with my brother from the previous area that I am planning to sell to add to my future savings. When I start farming, as I always do when I leave for some social affairs, I will put my children here to look after the school compound; I don’t want to lose my current job. Working in both areas will improve my income, and therefore, I can better support my family. Other than this, I will never return to that area.

Most importantly, feelings of insecurity brought about by fear of potential attacks in previous areas of residence were also found to be among the factors influencing IDPs’ decision either to be locally integrated or return to previous areas of residence. This has occurred, especially among IDPs in the Gedeo area. Given that the victims and offenders in this situation lived in border areas shared by the two communities, the IDPs disclosed that they should go to the border areas where their coffee and grain farms are located. Nevertheless, although the IDPs were not interested in going to the areas from which they had been displaced, they should do it unwillingly to secure their livelihoods.

Honestly speaking, we are all not doing well here, except for a very few individuals who attempt some handcraft work as an additional source of income. Farming is not and has never been promising here. We are still forced to remain dependents both on the government and a world vision (NGO) for our basic needs. The fertility of the land is by far better there than here. So, I really wish I could return to my previous area. However, I am not able to decide and permanently resettle because the security situation there is still volatile. You know there is a proverb in our area that goes, “Someone who has once seen a snake would be terrified when seeing a rope!” (XX9, male, 42 years old)

Above all, the age and physical health situations of IDPs were among the factors influencing their lack of intention to return to previous areas of residence. Although the lack of intention to return to previous areas has been a common pattern among the IDPs, the need to be locally integrated into the host communities has been exacerbated by an increase in age: ‘I am now old enough, and my husband is even older than me; he is sick and is suffering from an age-related physical disability. We are so tired that we can’t move here and there again and again. We will stay here and see what God has planned for us’ (XX21, female, 72 years old). Accordingly, it was found that a lack of intention to return to previous areas was more common among elderly IDPs than among relatively young and adult IDPs, some of whom have shown somewhat lenient positions as far as the interest in returning to previous areas of residence is concerned.

Discussion

Internal displacement has multifaceted consequences for the lives of people who have been displaced from their habitual and built-up social environment, their families, the host community where they took refuge, and the entire society at large (United Nations Development Program, Global Cluster for Early Recovery, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Global Protection Cluster [UNDP, GCER, UNHCR, GPC], 2016). Among other problems, internal displacement causes an increase in crime rates and overcrowding of major public services, such as transportation, healthcare, water, and education (UN Peacekeeping, 2017). In addition, it increases the suffering of the most vulnerable segments of society, including women, children, the elderly, and people with physical disabilities (Hassen et al., 2021; Morales, 2018). Moreover, internal displacement affects the physical health, livelihoods, education, housing, basic infrastructure, and social life of people. Further, the financial resources needed to support the IDPs and the reduction in production due to the lost opportunity of engaging, especially the productive youth cause a heavy burden on the economy at the individual, community, and national levels (IDOM, 2018). Above all, because of internal displacement, households that have been displaced from their residence suffer a decrease in the standard of living and are forced to be dragged to a lower socioeconomic status (Hever, 2015).

In addition to the psychological effect it causes on IDPs, internal displacement also adversely affects mental health status (Ali Jadoo et al. 2019). Above all, the social disorganizing effects of internal displacement, though given little attention by both governments and the literature, are worth considering. Homes are broken due to the collapse of existing family ties. Often, couples are forced to get divorced or at least separated when either of the spouses are killed or prefer to stay while the other leaves. Family disintegration leaves children without parents, increasing their chances of exposure to child trafficking, sexual exploitation, and delinquency. Most importantly, the socializing and social controlling roles of the family will be lost when the family institution itself is put at risk (Brookings, 2008). A related study undertaken in Ethiopia (Abdisa & Likal, 2022) also found disintegration of family and community ties, lack of access to social services, high school dropout rate, discrimination and marginalization by the host community, and changes in gender roles and age-related responsibilities as the social consequences of conflict-induced internal displacement. Loss of employment opportunities mainly due to skill-labor market mismatch in host communities, and difficulties of balancing family responsibilities and childcare with the desire for employment and income, especially among women has also been reported (World Bank, 2017).

Aggregately, these all contribute to a nation’s political instabilities. Therefore, although previous experience has demonstrated that sustainably ending displacement is the key to avoiding long-lasting impacts of disasters on the well-being of both the people displaced and their host communities (UNDP, GCER, UNHCR, GPC, 2016), it goes without saying that finding a durable solution should be a priority for governments beyond the provision of daily needs at the place of displacement. For this to happen and the government’s durable solution policy and strategy to be effective, it is important that they be supported by empirical data pertaining to IDPs’ intentions regarding future settlement patterns.

IDPs have the right to make an informed and voluntary choice regarding which of the alternative durable solutions to pursue; hence, every decision that aims to create a sustainable solution for the IDPs should be made in a way that considers the intents of the IDPs and should allow them to actively participate in all processes that range from planning to implementation (DRC, 2017; UN, 2019). The study revealed that IDPs participated in our study do not intend to return to the previous areas. Instead, most research participants preferred to be locally integrated into the host community where they live during displacement. Consistent with the findings of our study, quantitative research conducted jointly by UNHCR-IOM-UNOPS-MoDM-KRJ (2007) among the IDPs in Iraq also found that the intention among most respondents was to be integrated into the host communities where they have been living during displacement. In addition, the findings of the same study revealed that the intention to be integrated into a third location was the least preferred alternative among the respondents. Moreover, in his study on the challenges and prospects of local integration among ethnic Amharas who have been displaced from the Benishangul Gumuz regional state and hosted in Sekela district, Worku (2020) found that integration into the host community was the only alternative as far as the roots that engender internal displacements are ongoing and remain unresolved in the region from which the IDPs were forcibly displaced. Furthermore, an intention survey conducted by OCHA and NDRMC (2018b) at four IDP sites in the East Hararge zone indicated that a majority of the IDPs prefer to settle within the host communities.

The absence of interest in returning to previous areas of residence among most IDPs in Ethiopia and elsewhere in the world has never been without adequate and justifiable reasons. For instance, the study found that the loss of one’s belongings as a result of the conflict, the loss of jobs and other sources of livelihoods, and feelings of insecurity as a result of continued violent attacks in the areas of displacement, age, and physical health status of the IDPs and members of their families were the major reasons for the research participants’ lack of intention to return to previous areas of residence. On the other hand, situations related to securing sources of livelihood, such as job opportunities in the areas of displacement and, most importantly, the sharing of similar social identities between the IDPs and the host communities, have been found to be the most important factors that motivate IDPs to prefer local integration. Indeed, the last points, especially those related to the sharing of similar ethnic identities between the two groups, are worth discussing. Our findings imply that the same situation that caused people to be displaced from their habitual areas of residence has, at the same time, reinforced the intention to be locally integrated into a host community.

Research and Evidence Facility (REF, 2018) argued that returns are shaped by the interplay between negative pressures in places of displacement and optimism regarding the potential benefits in places of return. The balance between these factors depends on who returns. Our study confirmed that most IDPs have the consciousness that they were forcibly displaced just because of their ethnic identity and hence hold the opinion that the best place where they can be better protected against similar damage is in the community with which they share similar ethnic identities. The factors causing displacement are also key considerations for people returning. The reestablishment of safety tends to top the list of conditions IDPs require to return to their location of origin, while the availability of services and economic opportunities and the ability to regain land and property also play important roles. In some cases, the increased well-being of the displaced in his or her host location may actually decrease the likelihood of their return to their habitual location (World Bank, 2021).

The need for local integration has been accompanied by the nature of the relationships that IDPs maintain with host communities. Most IDPs in our study revealed that the relationship between them and the local communities has always been characterized by cooperation, although a few cases of tension resulting from competition over scarce resources have also been reported. The presence of a sense of belongingness, mutual exchanges of goods and services, and sharing of public services such as transportation, marketplaces, and grinding mills have been among the factors that contributed to the smooth relationship between the two communities. According to the findings of a study conducted in three cities in Somalia (REF, 2018), a combination of factors, including geography, time, living standards, livelihoods, housing, and social ties, helps build a sense of belongingness among IDPs. The DRC (2017) maintains that local integration contributes to self-reliance for IDPs and local economic development. However, programs that aim to benefit IDPs should also target host communities. Over time, host communities that once welcomed displaced people with open arms may become less hospitable because there may not be enough food, water, jobs, schools, or hospitals to meet the needs of an increased population (AU ECOSOCC & IDMC, 2010). This implies that the presence of a cooperative relationship between IDPs and their hosts never guarantees that the same relationship lasts forever. For instance, Jafer et al. (2022) found that marginalization from participation in major socioeconomic activities, inequalities, and a lack of social integration were reported to threaten the social security of IDPs settling around Addis Ababa. Such scenarios may serve as ground rules for initiating durable solutions for IDPs.

Evidence shows that most governments favor the return of IDPs to their previous areas of residence and often compel IDPs to do so, given the socio-economic and political costs associated with internal displacements and the need to provide IDPs with continued support. Nevertheless, the political focus on return underlines the necessity of monitoring return situations to ensure that conditions exist for return to be sustainable and that national authorities have not used return to give the impression that an internal displacement situation has been addressed (Birkeland, 2009). In addition to the fact that activities of returning IDPs must be voluntary (UNHCR, 2021), it is also essential that the government work not only to check that there are enabling situations for IDPs to return but also that continuous tasks in the form of follow-ups are undertaken in post-return periods to ensure that returnees will not be displaced again. For instance, in this study, although the IDPs around the Gedeo zone have already returned to their previous areas of residence, they have reported that they are living in the worst situations. Due to the infertility of the land where they resettled after displacement, returnees revealed that they were suffering from food shortages brought about by a lack of sufficient agricultural production. In addition, they should travel long distances to fetch water to access health care, including basic reproductive and maternal health care services.

Further, there were no means of diversifying income and other alternative sources of livelihood under the circumstances in which agriculture, the main economic activity practiced by the returnees, has failed to provide a sufficient yield to sustain life. We have noted that most research participants are forced to leave in a dependency situation, waiting for food aid from the government and other potential NGOs. This is partly the result of the absence of good planning practices from the government, which were supposed to be made prior to returning the IDPs into their previous area of residence. In a national validation workshop for the Durable Solutions Strategy and Plan of Action for Refugees, IDPs, and Host Communities held in South Sudan (UNHCR, 2021), it was agreed among the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) member states in East Africa and other stakeholders that the key priorities of governments should be the creation of a secure and safe environment, access to justice in areas of return, peaceful coexistence and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, provision of basic services, integration support including livelihoods aimed at reducing food assistance dependency, improved employment and other income-generating activities, and strengthening government institutional capacity. However, for many Ethiopian IDPs, this order was not over. Returning home, families were essentially internally displaced in their areas of origin and forced to seek shelter at new collective IDP sites within their villages (UNHCR, 2020). Moreover, forced eviction undermines local integration by eroding living standards, livelihoods, and a sense of belonging among IDPs and others living in informal settlements. For this and other reasons, especially when a consensus has been reached in consultation between the government and IDPs to return to their former areas of residence, the ability to reclaim assets left behind during displacement is a key determinant of returns for IDPs, although sustainable returns will ultimately depend on improvements to rural security and livelihoods (REF, 2018).

Observations at some sites where IDPs have been integrated into host communities, especially in the Oromia region, revealed that there are variations and inconsistencies in the way different regions respond to the IDPs as far as durable solutions are concerned. Although IDPs hosted in most areas have received little attention, most of whom are left in precarious situations of substandard housing, insufficient aid of basic necessities, lack of pure water, problems related to access to healthcare facilities, and no means of income generation, there are a few areas where IDPs integrated into their host communities have been relatively better taken care of. Most IDPs continue to live with host communities, many of which were already vulnerable prior to displacement. The remaining IDPs live in overcrowded, substandard collective centers. The lack of adequate shelter and basic health services increases vulnerability to disease outbreaks and protection risks (OCHA, 2018). Above all, it is important to emphasize that any alternative durable solutions to the IDPs cannot be sustainable unless measures that dry up the problem from the source are taken mainly by the government. Efforts to achieve durable peace are important for finding durable solutions for IDPs. To sustain their intended impact, all attempts to return IDPs to their previous areas of residence, integrate them into the host communities, or relocate them to a third area that demands sustainable peace. UNHCR (2021) confirms the last statement, arguing that durable, sustainable, and dignified solutions to IDPs will not be possible without real peace.

Conclusions

Conflict-induced internal displacement causes a heavy burden on the individuals, households, or communities that have been displaced from their built-up environment, not to mention the various problems it brings to the host community. Although IDPs deserve adequate support in areas of displacement, such support does not provide lasting solutions. This calls for governments, in consultation with IDPs, to work to provide IDPs with durable solutions. From the experience of failed imposed returns, it has been agreed that any form of durable solution should be based on the will of the IDPs. IDPs participated in our study did not intend to return to their former residential areas and the most preferred alternative to durable solutions was integration to host communities. While fear of risks of potential violence, loss of property and means of livelihood, and age and physical situations of IDPs were the main reasons for the lack of interest in returning, a sense of belongingness due to the similarity of ethnic identities with the host communities and securing livelihood sources in areas of displacement were the factors contributing to IDPs’ increased interest in integrating into the host communities.

The findings of the study imply that the Ethiopian government should work closely with local authorities in the areas of host communities and other partners in order to create favorable conditions for the IDP’s successful local integration, including creating and expanding employment opportunities, providing land and other essential productive resources, improving housing situations, and protecting the basic rights of IDPs in the areas of displacement as stipulated in the Kampala Convention. Moreover, continued discussions should be held with the host communities about IDP-host relationships and the mechanisms for improving such relationships. Above all, in addition to improving the security situations of the areas from which the IDPs have been forcibly displaced and compensating for their lost properties, the government should also consult IDPs on the possibility of returning to their previous areas of residence.

Recommendations

The findings of this study and other related studies have made it clear that IDPs that were displaced as a result of ethnic-based violent conflicts in Ethiopia do not intend to return to their previous areas of residence. Instead, they prefer local integration to other durable solutions as far as post-conflict sustainable resettlement is concerned. Therefore, subsequent policies and strategies of the government in finding durable solutions for IDPs in Ethiopia should primarily focus on creating favorable circumstances in which the target groups can be sustainably integrated into the host communities. The most important concern that the research participants raised during the interviews was the lack of employment opportunities in the areas where they took refuge. We were able to understand that there were attempts by the government, such as lending IDPs 20,000 Ethiopian Birr¹ as start-up capital for each household head to enable them to engage in small business activities, including promises to grant land for building workshops, according to reports of IDPs hosted in the Oromia region. However, it has been disclosed that IDPs’ spirit of starting a business has failed because of the lack of other favorable conditions to begin the work, as a result of which most IDPs have spent the money they borrowed from the government on consumables. Yasukawa (2020) concluded that the poor living conditions experienced by IDPs living in various settlements in Ethiopia and Somalia not only undermine their progression towards durable solutions but also have serious implications for host communities.

Once it is understood that IDPs do not intend to return, follow-up activities should be conducted to enable their successful integration into the local community. One way of achieving this, as the findings of this study suggested, is by creating new employment opportunities so that they become self-sufficient and get out of the dependency syndrome. In addition, by helping IDPs regain their productive capacity, the government can enable them not only to change their lives but also to contribute to the national GDP. Otherwise, letting IDPs sit idle with little life-saving ration support no doubt leaves them to be potential targets of conflict entrepreneurs that are likely to mobilize them at any time for their political interests. The absence of employment opportunities has been exacerbated by the fact that IDPs have not been fully socialized with local communities. This affects the size of their social capital and their likelihood of competing with local community members in search of locally available jobs. Above all, the lack of employment opportunities may contribute to an increase in crime rates and other complicated social problems². Hence, both the local and federal governments, in collaboration with other stakeholders, should respond to such employment needs in addition to facilitating land for workshops and other market areas for IDPs interested in business. The other related concern that requires relevant policy attention and that facilitates the process of local integration is the improvement of facilities, including houses, water, and healthcare facilities, around the areas where IDPs took refuge. In most areas we observed, IDPs live a miserable life with substandard houses, inadequate healthcare facilities, and a lack of pure water. These concerns should be addressed as part of undertaking the task of local integration.

The reestablishment of law and social order in areas where IDPs have been forcibly displaced should be the other priority of the government. This study indicates that the fear of continued violent attacks has been one of the reasons for IDP’s lack of intention to return to previous areas of residence. The task of restoring and maintaining peace in those areas, however, should be undertaken side by side while consulting the IDPs on the possibilities of returning. In addition, such efforts should be accompanied by restituting the lost properties. Above all, successful activities pertaining to returning IDPs and finding durable solutions require certain structural changes in the current federal system.

Finally, this study showed that sharing similar social identities, especially ethnic identity, plays a significant role in shaping decisions pertaining to post-conflict resettlement. IDPs’ consciousness that ethnic identity was the main cause of their displacement has reinforced their preferences for local integration within a society with which they share similar ethnic identities. Further research should be undertaken at the national level with a focus on the intentions of IDPs that have taken refuge in host communities that are not related to them by ethnicity or other elements of social identities.

Limitation and suggestions

The study could have benefited from a mixed-methods approach, where the qualitative data would have been supplemented with quantitative data. Given the study’s complete reliance on the qualitative methods, including relatively large number of participants to statistically determine what percentage of the IDPs studied would prefer which of the alternative durable solutions (return, integrate, or resettle) was difficult to achieve. This has also affected the generalizability of the study’s findings. In addition, although the data for this study was collected from the largest IDP sites at the time, undertaking a national level study by incorporating the perceptions and experiences of IDPs with diverse ethnic and other characteristics would have been beneficial to better understand the issue.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Bewunetu Zewude

Bewunetu Zewude studied Sociology at Addis Ababa University. He has rich experience in teaching, advising, and examining undergraduate and postgraduate students of higher education institutions in Ethiopia. In addition to consulting social affairs, he has always been undertaking studies on the health and wellbeing of children, youth, women, and other vulnerable groups in Ethiopia. He has also published several articles in peer reviewed journals.

Getahun Siraw

Getahun Siraw is a senior lecturer of sociology at Dilla University, Ethiopia. He is dedicated to teaching and mentoring students while also conducting cutting edge socio-logical researches. His research interests are in important societal issues, with public health, gender, marginalization and iDPs attracting his attention and has published several research findings.

Notes

1 The exchange equivalence of 1 US $ during the period of the study was 42 Ethiopian Birr.

2 During the interviews, IDPs have reported that most males, including male household heads and able-bodied youth, have already migrated to other towns and remote rural areas in search of job opportunities. Some also have disclosed that they do not even know the whereabouts of their sons and husbands who left home to seek jobs.