Durable solutions for IDPs in protracted situations : Three Case Studies

In recent years, studies have been carried out, campaigns have been launched, and
considerable thought has gone into how to resolve protracted refugee situations.1
Academics and practitioners alike have grappled with the difficulties in finding solutions
for refugees who have lived in camps for far too long.

While millions of IDPs, like refugees, have languished in camps for extended periods of
time, protracted IDP situations have received virtually no attention from academic
researchers. There are important similarities in the impact of prolonged displacement on
the lives of IDPs and refugees, but there are also significant differences in their situations
– particularly when it comes to solutions. This paper begins by suggesting a definition for
protracted IDP situations and then discusses similarities and differences between
protracted refugee and IDP situations. The study then examines three case studies of
protracted internal displacement: Colombia, Georgia, and Darfur with a particular focus on the role of IDPs in negotiations to resolve the conflict, the involvement of key
international actors in influencing the situation on the ground and the possibilities for
durable solutions. While return is often the desired solution for both IDPs and political
actors, the paper argues that local integration and return should not be seen as mutually
exclusive alternatives. IDPs can be encouraged to build new lives elsewhere without
having to give up the possibility of eventual return when conditions warrant.