Updated October 2026: this post was first published in January 2020 to announce the study. We have expanded it with a summary drawn from the study’s executive summary.
Millions of refugees return to poverty, conflict and insecurity in Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria, and many of them go to cities. This study, commissioned by the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) in partnership with the International Rescue Committee, the Norwegian Refugee Council, ReDSS, the Durable Solutions Platform and the Asia Displacement Solutions Platform, and researched by Samuel Hall, asks what it takes for those returns to become (re)integration. Its starting point is that a narrow focus on the act of return has limited value for long-term planning, and that governments, agencies, communities and returnees themselves have been unprepared for what happens afterwards.
How the research was done
The team interviewed 102 key informants in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Jordan, Kenya, Somalia and at global level, held 21 focus group discussions, and developed 14 household case studies and four operational case studies. A review of more than 150 sources framed the analysis. The study draws lessons across the three countries rather than comparing them, and the executive summary does not report return figures for each.
Ten lessons, before, across and after return
The first group of lessons concerns what happens before people move. Who counts as a returnee should be defined more broadly than formal refugee status, and premature or forced returns avoided. Returnees need accessible, tailored and unbiased information so that their decisions are voluntary and they can sort out documentation. The quality of asylum matters too: the skills and social networks people build while displaced shape how well they do after return. Regional and tripartite agreements, which cover only formal refugees, should be widened and should include refugee representation.
The second group concerns borders and cities. Programmes should follow people’s mobility rather than stop at state borders. Local responses should put housing, land and property first, because access to housing shapes both the decision to return and what happens next. Urban and community plans should be integrated, with public-private partnerships considered for services; Mogadishu’s rental subsidy pilot is one example the report draws on.
The third group concerns what happens after return. Economic reintegration should be locally led and go beyond technical and vocational training, linking people to markets and social networks. Monitoring and data gaps after return need closing, so that the quality and impact of reintegration programmes can be judged. And the links between humanitarian action, development and peacebuilding in return settings need to be defined, with investment in services and infrastructure.
What the Global Compact on Refugees does and does not settle
The study sees the Global Compact on Refugees as a possible framework for a more structured approach to return from the start. It also names its gaps: the compact treats solutions as static, does not reflect how refugees’ goals change over time, and does not define the outcomes that return programmes should pursue. Early engagement and better preparedness help, the study argues, but they must not replace the sustained protection that refugee-hosting countries are obliged to provide.
Five commitments for sustainable (re)integration
- Allow phased, circular and staged returns, supported by cross-border programming.
- Make sure affected communities take a meaningful part in return and reintegration.
- Build reintegration into development planning, especially urban planning.
- Strengthen refugees’ and returnees’ social and economic position before and after return.
- Monitor reintegration outcomes and learn from them.
The report also calls on host states to commit more firmly to supporting reintegration.
To make the full report easier to navigate, it is available in parts: the full report, the executive summary and Part A: setting the scene, Part B: ten lessons learnt, Part C: conclusions and commitments and the annexes.
References
DRC, IRC, NRC, ReDSS, DSP and ADSP (2019). Unprepared for (re)integration: lessons learned from Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria on refugee returns to urban areas. Executive summary. Research by Samuel Hall. https://www.regionaldss.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Reintegration-Report-ES-WEB-2-002.pdf
