• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Learning
  • E-Bulletin

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
    • Supporting economic development
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Poverty & wellbeing
    • Social protection
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Rights-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • M&E approaches
    • Indicators
    • Learning
Home»GSDRC Publications»Preventing conflict between refugees and host communities

Preventing conflict between refugees and host communities

Helpdesk Report
  • Oliver Walton
October 2012

Question

Provide examples of good practice/programmes in preventing/addressing conflict between refugees and host communities

Summary

This report includes programme examples from 13 countries. It highlights three main types of programme designed to tackle tensions and conflicts between refugees and host communities:

  • Integrated humanitarian and development programmes – these seek to balance assistance to both refugee and host communities, or integrate services provided to them.
  • Conflict resolution programmes – these encourage workshops, discussions or regular meetings between both communities.
  • Environmental management programmes – these seek to improve the management of environmental resources in order to promote co-operation and reduce tensions.

The literature on good practice in this area is patchy and there are few general studies that address these issues directly. However, one of the main barriers to effective programming has been donors’ tendency to separate humanitarian assistance for refugees from broader development assistance.

The literature also notes the importance of:

  • providing both humanitarian and long-term development assistance to both refugee and host communities
  • advocacy and host government policy
  • unintended positive consequences of conflict resolution and refugee-hosting area programmes – building social relationships
  • potential unintended negative consequences e.g. of income-generation and environmental management programmes
  • participatory approaches
  • in-depth analysis
  • inclusive, open, flexible and long-term processes.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID

Related Content

Cross-border pastoral mobility and cross-border conflict in Africa – patterns and policy responses
Conflict Analysis
2022
Interaction Between Food Prices and Political Instability
Helpdesk Report
2021
Trends in Conflict and Stability in the Indo-Pacific
Literature Review
2021
Gender, countering violent extremism and women, peace and security in Kenya
Helpdesk Report
2020
birminghamids hcri

gro.crdsg@seiriuqne Feedback Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2022; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2022; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2022