Internal displacement globally has grown by over 110% in the past decade and is anticipated to double again by 2030. UNHCR commissioned a strategic thematic evaluation of its engagement in internal displacement situations, with the aim of generating evidence to strengthen its strategic positioning and operational approach in these settings.
© UNHCR/Sahat Zia Hero
UNHCR’s Commitment and Progress in Working in Situations of Internal Displacement
UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, has significantly expanded its engagement in situations of internal displacement over the years. As of 2022, the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) reached an all-time high of 71.1 million, making UNHCR’s role in supporting and protecting IDPs more critical than ever. While UNHCR’s primary mandate focuses on refugees, it was among the first organizations (in 1957) to acknowledge the need to address internal displacement as an essential step towards resolving refugee crises. The definition of IDPs- people who have been forced to flee their homes by conflict, violence, persecution or disasters but remain within the borders of their own country- is in fact modelled from the concept of refugees and can be traced back to the 1951 refugee convention.
The adoption of UNHCR’s 2019 “Policy on Engagement in Situations of Internal Displacement” set the tone for a more robust involvement in IDP contexts. This policy emphasized the agency’s commitment to protection, assistance, and long-term solutions for IDPs, in close collaboration with governments, partner organizations, and the displaced communities themselves. Since then, UNHCR has made significant progress in scaling up its operations in IDP settings, including expanding its protection interventions, improving access to essential services, and enhancing advocacy efforts for durable solutions. UNHCR’s partnerships with local authorities, civil society, and other humanitarian agencies have allowed it to extend its reach and catalyze broader support for IDPs.
Findings from the Evaluation
The evaluation provides key insights into the relevance, effectiveness, connectedness (with other actors), and coherence (with its own IDP policy) of UNHCR’s IDP operations. One of the main strengths identified was UNHCR’s ability to adapt operational strategies to specific country contexts, allowing it to respond flexibly to political, geographic, and security challenges. By employing a mix of community-based and localized approaches, UNHCR has managed to extend its reach and coverage of IDPs; facilitate state law and policy reforms in support of social protection and IDP inclusion; assist IDPs in obtaining critical legal documentation and Housing Land and Property rights; provide relocation and protection assistance in the case of forced camp closures; and initiate interventions that enhance social cohesion and integrated assistance to IDPs, host communities, and people at risk of displacement. These results speak to both the relevance and effectiveness of UNHCR’s approach in IDP settings.
Important gaps identified by the evaluation include the following: (i) a need to effectively link emergency interventions to those designed for people in protracted situations, and to strengthen predictability in climate-induced displacement settings; (ii) in mixed-situations, country offices need clearer guidance on balancing resource allocation between cluster coordination and operational delivery, as well as on the leadership and accountability expectations for country representatives in this dual role, (iii) lasty, the evaluation also notes serious shortfalls in UNHCR’s capacity to track IDP outcomes and how interventions such as advocacy and capacity building contribute to longer-term solutions and protection outcomes for IDPs. UNHCR’s strategies and approaches to promote the centrality of protection were adapted to operational and political contexts with a particular focus on measures to strengthen the legal and policy framework, as well as advocacy and support to Humanitarian Country Teams (HCTs). However, efforts to promote the ‘centrality of protection’ have been hindered by ambiguities around the concept and inconsistency in its application by other actors.
UNHCR’s contribution to solutions in IDP contexts is clearly anchored in its protection mandate and draws heavily on its technical expertise, legal doctrine and conceptual frameworks derived from refugee operations. Although it is widely acknowledged that IDP solutions fall primarily under the development agenda, UNHCR’s leadership was perceived by our partners to be instrumental in three areas: (i) law and policy reform, (ii) strengthening capacity for state and civil society actors, (iii) spearheading area-based approaches (ABA) – although even here, the evaluation cautions against engaging in ABA without a clear exit strategy, due to the high costs associated with service provision and care and maintenance.
Internally within UNHCR, there are conflicting views on how we should/should not engage in solutions, some feel that the refugee concept of solutions is too narrowly defined to protection – that it conflicts with development programming, and that it requires an understanding of sustainable programming approaches that is either slowly developing or lacking within UNHCR. Another important finding relates to UNHCR’s contributions to inter-agency planning and coordination through evidence, data, and analysis. UNHCR has made significant investments in being a provider of data, but financial and human resource constraints persist. Limitations in data-sharing practices and a lack of monitoring of the intended use of data has also reduced the overall effectiveness of UNHCR’s data initiatives. UNHCR should seek to ensure synergies with other major data initiatives in IDP settings e.g. with IOM’s Displacement Tracking Matrix. UNHCR is strategically positioned as a key data provider in internal displacement situations; however, to maximize influence, it must address internal capacity challenges, and resource data and evidence processes adequately and predictably.
Concerning coherence internally, the evaluation found UNHCR to operate largely in line with its 2019 IDP policy. There are five areas however that need greater clarity to support policy implementation: (i) How to deal with competing priorities for scarce resources between the many roles the agency has and the very ambitious policy commitments, (ii) how to apply a rationale for equitable needs-based programming between different population groups, (ii) how to strike the right balance between being a ‘provider of last resort’ with the requirement to reinforce government responsibilities and hand over to development partners, (iv) how to Implement the policy provisions on ‘responsible disengagement’ & ‘solutions from the start’ and what this means for operations in protracted situations, (v) how to deal with differentiated approaches (and willingness) of the HCT and RC/HC in mainstreaming the centrality of protection.
💡IASC independent review of the humanitarian response to internal displacement
In response to the UN Secretary-General (UNSG)’s High-Level Panel on Internal Displacement (2021), the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) commissioned an independent review in 2023 of the humanitarian system in contexts of internal displacement. The review found that the system is slow to respond, is not joined up, overlooks IDPs’ specific needs and focuses more on internal processes than meaningfully engaging IDPs. The recommendations call for ensuring timely, joined-up responses, reorienting the humanitarian system’s approach towards meaningful empowerment of IDPs and ensuring protection is at the heart of the response. Furthermore, the review recommends a stronger focus on laying the groundwork for solutions, by improving system-wide efforts in urban areas and critical sectors such as education, livelihoods. The IASC review confirms the need for UNHCR to refocus its leadership and coordination efforts in inter-agency settings. In particular the agency’s role in supporting the RC/HCs office in advocating for the centrality of protection, in the provision of data, analysis, and supporting national statistics, as well as laying the groundwork for collaboration with development partners and finding lasting solutions for internally displaced people.
The Way Forward
The evaluation outlined eight recommendations for UNHCR to enhance its effectiveness and strategic positioning in IDP settings. In summary, the evaluation argues that UNHCR needs to address weaknesses in inconsistent policy implementation, capacity gaps in longer-term solutions-oriented programming, and tracking of outcomes for IDPs in critical areas such as advocacy and capacity building. The evaluation urges UNHCR to prioritize its core expertise in protection as a central element of its strategic positioning. By developing an explicit rationale to inform resource allocation and by establishing clear boundaries that guide operational decision-making outside its core areas of expertise, particularly in pursuit of durable solutions for IDPs.
The management response to the IDP evaluation acknowledges the value of the insights and broadly agrees with the recommendations to improve UNHCR’s engagement in IDP situations. UNHCR’s five-year strategic plan for internally displaced people (2024-2030) addresses the evaluation’s recommendations and lays out the foundation for UNHCR’s future work in IDP settings. It details the strategic shifts that UNHCR operations worldwide should adopt to advance this agenda. This includes: (i) a new prioritization blueprint to help guide operations in their decision-making, (ii) a new monitoring framework to enable contextualization and predictability, and (iii) programming principles to accelerate national ownership, community-led action, and sustainable programming. An implementation note provides detailed guidance for IDP operations on how to operationalize the strategic plan.