In Africa and Latin America, binding regional refugee conventions acknowledge “breakdowns in civil order”—including hunger and famine— as additional legitimate grounds (beyond the terms of the 1951 Convention) for a person to be recognized as a refugee. Regional instruments—such as the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (sometimes referred to as the Kampala Convention)—extend much of this protection to IDPs as well. This distinction between African and Latin American legal protection for refugees and the 1951 Convention’s definition is crucial. It means that an individual who flees famine in Somalia, for example, would be recognized de facto as a refugee in Ethiopia or Kenya, because all African states have signed and ratified the African Union’s Convention and the United Nations abides by this convention in Africa. In other words, under the 1951 Convention, this individual would not automatically be afforded refugee status.
Given their short-range movements and the disproportionate burden on host communities, food-insecure refugees and IDPs need to be assisted, if possible, in their regions of origin. Food security support may take the form of food aid, but this approach comes with a host of disadvantages, including the high cost of procuring and transporting foodstuffs, the potential for distorting local markets, and the difficulty of providing food in adequate amounts and variety to sustain populations over long periods of time. Other instruments are increasingly being used, including cash transfers or vouchers that allow people to buy what they need from local markets and employment generation schemes that enable people to earn incomes, thus preserving their resilience and reducing the risk of dependency. Such support can also—in the right contexts—help promote prevention before and recovery after disaster or displacement. These kinds of cash-based assistance are transforming food security programming, although careful assessment is needed to determine when local economic conditions are conducive to using cash and when they are not.
Assistance must also include safeguards for people’s ability to move and to find secure livelihood options in and near the places to which they are displaced. Evidence from Uganda suggests that when the displaced are able to move freely and are supported in securing their own livelihoods, they are more self-sufficient and can contribute more to local and national economies than when they are confined to camps and dependent on external assistance (Betts et al. 2014). The Ugandan government had provided farmland to refugees from South Sudan. This practice has raised challenges as the number of displaced people has increased and the availability of land has dwindled. However, the principle of supporting refugee resilience and livelihoods in open settlements remains an important one.
More broadly, regional development is needed to help support displaced people and combat hunger at the same time within the same populations. Such regional development can create thriving economies in host communities so that they support the resilience of the displaced. With increased economic resilience, people are often in a better position to move more safely. For those who are displaced, economic opportunities in regions closer to home may mean that they have a wider range of choices about where to go, and ultimately may be able to avoid the risks associated with irregular migration—often across longer distances.
Promoting economic and social development in areas and communities affected by displacement also requires engaging with governance structures, state policy, and civil society in ways that will necessarily help protect resilience at the individual, household, and community level and that will prevent the kinds of persecution, societal breakdown, and food insecurity that leads to further mass forced migration and hunger. This type of political engagement can be a challenge for assistance providers and donors, who have sometimes strategically side-stepped political issues, fearing that their access to populations in need may be compromised if they speak out on political issues. Remaining silent, however, risks helping perpetuate the circumstances that give rise to displacement.
Despite the focus on providing protection and assistance to the displaced in their regions of origin, there may, under certain circumstances, be a need to support some refugees outside the region of origin, such as when there is no prospect of return or the host country is unable to provide for the needs of the refugees who have sought asylum. Some hosts rank so far down on the Human Development Index that they are not able to care adequately for their own citizens, let alone for their refugee populations. In such cases, resettlement to a third country outside the region may be necessary for some refugees. Consequently, although willingness to resettle refugees has waned in recent years, it is still needed in many instances.