SUMMARY
More than a year since the start of the on-going conflict in South Sudan, over two million individuals have been displaced, including over 500,000 refugees, and an estimated 1.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs).1 In December 2013, political disagreements within the ruling party sparked violence in Juba, which quickly spread to other parts of the country. Civilians were targeted throughout the country based on their location, ethnicity and gender, with hundreds of thousands fleeing their pre-crisis homes in search of safety.2 The mass displacement that followed was rapid and chaotic, with thousands fleeing to the bases of United Nations peacekeeping forces (UNMISS) in search of protection; others forming spontaneous sites in areas perceived as safer; and the vast majority fleeing to rural areas “in the bush”.3 While the security situation has somewhat stabilised during recent months, the total number of internally displaced persons continues to increase due to on-going localised shocks, and relatively few returns have been witnessed to date.
Developed by REACH and funded by the European Commission's Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department (ECHO), this study examines the profile of displaced persons in ten Protection of Civilians (PoC) sites and informal settlement sites in the six most conflict-affected states: Central Equatoria, Jonglei, Lakes, Unity,
Western Bahr el Ghazal and Upper Nile. Based on primary data collected through household level surveys, complemented by information from key informant interviews, community group discussions, and secondary data, this report addresses the need for a broad review of internal displacement in South Sudan over the past year, and examines the current situation and intentions of IDPs, many of whom have been displaced for over a year.
The population of the assessed sites was found to be young and predominantly female, with a high proportion of single headed households. Most families were displaced as a direct result of the crisis, the majority reporting the destruction of their homes and assets due to conflict, and many families becoming separated as a result of displacement. While many families fled due to insecurity, the most commonly reported reason for choosing a displacement site was the presence of humanitarian aid. Having seen their homes and assets destroyed, IDPs had few resources and were in desperate need. The majority of IDPs had arrived at their displacement sites from rural areas, many travelling long distances to the site by foot. Most had been engaged in rural livelihood activities, such as agriculture, or tending livestock prior to the crisis. Households from urban areas were found to be more likely to seek refuge in PoC sites than in informal settlements. These households had higher levels of education, and were more likely to be employed in salaried or skilled work prior to the crisis.
Over a year on from the start of the current crisis, protracted displacement is becoming a reality for many IDPs.
Significant humanitarian assistance has been provided to improve the situation within displacement sites, but conditions remain challenging, with the majority of sites still failing to meet emergency standards for overcrowding, and access to basic sanitation, healthcare and education. Despite this, when asked about their intentions in a number of possible scenarios, a significant proportion of IDPs reported that they would stay at the same site even if humanitarian assistance were to stop — this was reported by the majority of households in five of the ten sites assessed. The only scenario in which IDPs overwhelmingly reported that they would return to their pre-crisis or ancestral homes was “if peace comes to South Sudan”, indicating that an end to the conflict is seen as a precondition for return for most displaced families. In spite of this, some returns have been recorded, notably from Mingkaman informal settlement site to the surrounding areas. Possible reasons for this include a range of interconnecting factors, which should be explored further to better understand the conditions needed for future returns.
While the situation appears to be stabilising in some parts of the country, the number of internally displaced persons continues to grow.4 IDPs in displacement sites have ongoing humanitarian needs that will be further complicated by the approaching rainy season. Meanwhile, IDPs outside major displacement sites, who are often dispersed across large areas accessible only by air or by foot, may face even more precarious conditions and are in desperate need of humanitarian assistance. While little is known about this population as a whole, this assessment includes information about IDPs in eight “hard-to-reach areas” in Jonglei, Unity and Lakes States, to highlight the humanitarian situation of some of these IDPs, and the lack of comprehensive information about their needs.