Refugees and Host Environments areview of current and related literature
For Deutsche Gesellschaft flir Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)
Thomas Hoerz Visiting Study Fellow Refugee Studies Programme University of Oxford August 1995
302838041T
Refugees and Host Environments Contents
Foreword Topic Summary F£ 0 ^
A1M.V^
1.
Setting the Stage: Themes, Definitions, Actors
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9
What are Refugee Hosting Environments? Refugee Hosting Environments and 'Environmental Refugees' The Concept of Refugee Camps and Refugee Settlements Pre-lnflux Environmental Problems Scarcity of Land Environment and Health The Time Perspectives of Actors The Role of UNHCR Environment and Security - Concerns of Host Countries
2.
Environmental Impact of Refugees - Putting Things Into Perspective
2.1 2.2. 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 2.3.8
Refugees - Exceptional Resource Degraders? Simply a Question of Numbers? Typical Environmental Impacts of Refugee Camps and Settlements Deforestation Loss of Grazing Land and Ground Cover Depletion of Fall Back Resources Degradation of Agricultural Lands Water Consumption and Water Pollution Solid Waste Threats to Protected Areas "Pull Effects"
Refugees & Host Environments
1
Thomas Hoerz
3.
Environmental Impact Assessments - Limits and Potential
3.1
3.3
The Difficult Task of Environmental Accounting - Who Bears the Costs? Measurements vs. Perception - Outside Experts and Indigenous Knowledge ElAs: Report or Process?
4.
Victims, Target Groups and Participants
4.1 4.2 4.3
Refugees and Local Population as one Target Group? Hidden Winners and Hidden Loosers Women 's Special Capacities and Vulnerabilities
5.
From Conflict to Cooperation and Participation
5.1 5.2 5.3
Environmental Conflicts and Resource Competition NGO - Host Government Cooperation Participation of Refugees and Local Population
3.2
ss 00 T CM ^ ^ ^ 6.
The Time Frame for Environmental Mitigation Measures
6.1 6.2
Before Mitigation Measures Start Setting Priorities in Crises
7.
The Role of Training
8.
Resource Protection and Income Generation
9.
Household Energy and Fuel Supply
9.1 Fuel Consumption Data 9.2 Energy Saving Devices and Methods 9.2.1 Improved Wood Stoves and Utensils 9.2.2 Solar Cookers 9.2.3 Haybox Cookers Kitchen Management 9.2.4 9.3 Fuel Supply Fuel Collection Support and Woodfuel from Camp Surroundings 9.3.1 Fuelwood from Plantations 9.3.2
Refugees & Host Environments
2
Thomas Hoerz
Acknowledgements
First and foremost I have o t thank the Household Energy Programme (HEP) of GTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit) for providing me the necessary support to undertake this research. This is in particular Dr. Agnes Klingshirn, who not only introduced me o t the field of household energy several years ago, but who provided valuable advice throughout my fieldwork and during the writing of the report and Dr. Petra Wagner , who supported the administrative side of the undertaking in a dedicated way. My colleagues in the field, namely Noel Chavangi, Muiruri J. Kimani and Charles 0. Nyandiga taught me more 'on the job ' than I could have got out of books. Mr. Reinier Thiadens of UNHCR/PTSS was generous with his time and advice and allowed me access o t crucial documents during the literature search. Ihave to also thank the whole staff of the Refugee Studies Programme in Oxford for providing me a unique and stimulating atmosphere, in particular Dr. Barbara HarrellBond and Sarah Rhodes. Last but not least I am indebted o t Louise Weighill who ironed out my English and gave me valuable advice in structuring this report .
I
•
GTZ Postfach 5180 65726 Eschborn Germany
Refugee Studies Programme Queen Elizabeth House University of Oxford 21 St Giles Oxford 0X1 3LA United Kingdom
Thomas Hoerz c/o GTZ - PAS P.O.Box 41607 Nairobi Kenya
9.3.3 Alternatives to Fuelwood Fuel Production on Site 9.3.4 9.4 The Food Basket Communal Organization 9.5
10. Shelter Construction and Fencing 10.1 Plastic Sheets, Beams, Poles and Thatching Material 10.2 Shade and Windbreak 10.3 Fences for Security
11. Water Provision and Sanitation 11.1 Water Purification 11.2 Latrines 11.3 Sustainable Water Sources
12. Afforestation and Area Rehabilitation 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7
Overriding Considerations: Development, Sustainability, Efficiency Tree Nurseries Compound Tree Planting Area Afforestation Rainfed vs. Irrigated Afforestation Area Rehabilitation and Erosion Control Protection Measures
13.
Environmental Education and Awareness Creation
13.1 Other Programmes as Entry Points 13.2 Refugees' Responsibility for Host Environments - Lessons in CPR Management
14.
Monitoring and Evaluation of Project Impact
14.1 Who 's Evaluating Whom ? 14.2 A Permanent Research Team
15.
Bibliography
Refugees & Host Environments
•
3
Thomas Hoerz
Foreword Researchers, Implementers and Policy Makers Working in refugee assistance is not a nine to five job and libraries in agency compounds are often somewhat limited in the critical 'refugee literature' they have in stock. Hardly anybody has time o t read in the field and nobody I know has been given sufficient time to familiarize him/herself by means of literature with the people, with victims, target groups and participants , the problem and the area to work in. Those who do have time to read, whose job it is in fact to read and reflect (I'm talking of researchers) rarely make decisions or are in a position where they facilitate participants ' decision-making. And, what is probably more important , they rarely have any budget responsibility. There seems to be an unhealthy division of labour in international refugee assistance: the implementers know nothing (means: haven't read anything), take action (and do it all wrong) while the researchers know it all (means: have read everything), do nothing (but criticise everything). On top of that is most research on forced migration not carried out in the countries with the gravest refugee problems. That leads o t local NGOs and locally employed aid workers (who are in the majority and usually in direct contact with refugees) having even less access to ongoing research in the North than expatriate workers. While division of labour has made modern societies - in some respects - so successful, division without cooperation cannot achieve anything, and cooperation is only possible when two preconditions are fulfilled: Firstly, the understanding that both 'sides' are pulling on the same string, share the same humanitarian concern; secondly, the institutional structure of a network of communication and cooperation between research and humanitarian assistance. Coming back from a two years' assignment in Somali refugee camps of Kenya, being confronted with the condensed wisdom of 25.000 documents in the Documentation Centre of the Refugee Studies Programme in Oxford I wished I had had three weeks 'sabbatical' in the library, reading and reflecting, before leaving to the field. The job I did would have been done better . Generalising my own situation I wish now, that refugee assistance agencies could give that kind of time to their staff and that there would be a facility within research and documentation centres to assist 'short term students' who are on their way to the field to read and to take some kgs of literature along. This literature review addresses researchers and implementers as well as that hybrid called policy makers. The latter are of special importance as it is their responsibility o t consult research and implementation and to formulate directions, guided by experience and theory. The intention is to give an overview with depth and the references to go n o it further reading for those who have access and time. Refugees & Host Environments
5
Thomas Hoerz
It was, however, not possible to abstain from injecting some of my own ideas, based on synergic effects of the consulted literature and on (limited) experience in the field. Relevance of the Topic The natural environment of refugee hosting areas - or better: the neglect of it - is not only a sad chapter in the annals of humanitarian aid, it is also a fascinating field for research and action. It is the area where, in contrast to the supply of 'survival needs', manageability as exercised by the humanitarian regime meets it's limits, unless lessons from development work learned in the 1980s are taken serious and new lessons in development work of the 1990s are kept abreast with. The natural environment can be the battlefield or the round table where refugees and the local population meet. Investments in the natural environment are often the only way of reasonable magnitude to provide refugees and impoverished hosts with labour and income. Conservation of natural resources is imperative, if secondary forced migration out of badly degraded lands is to be avoided. International borders will be increasingly closed for refugees for fear of resource depletion, if refugees and the aid agencies cannot prove that negative effects upon the environment are avoidable and even that positive environmental effects are a realistic scenario. And lastly, the frightening speed of environmental degradation around refugee camps, especially those with very large populations, are one of the strongest question marks behind the concept of refugee camps and settlements as the lead concept for refugee assistance if voluntary repatriation is not possible. This review deals admittedly with symptoms more than it deals with root causes. It will not contribute to mitigate any of the root causes of forced migration like war, persecution for religion, ethnicity or political opinion, displacement due to 'development' projects, drought or other natural disasters or the incompetence and irresponsibility of those who allocate resources. But as in medicine, symptoms can become a secondary disease in itself and medical help often needs to soothe symptoms immediately before or while addressing the underlying causes with long term therapy. There is actually very limited literature on eg 'stove dissemination in refugee hosting areas' or 'afforestation in refugee camps'. Providing literature of the corresponding development areas is thus an attempt to create links between the lessons learnt in development and the deficiencies refugee work is still facing. The supporting literature in each of this fields is therefore often not related to refugee situations and cannot claim to be exhaustive.
Refugees & Host Environments
6
Thomas Hoerz
Topic Summary 1. Setting the Stage: Themes, Definitions, Actors As a starting point the term 'refugee hosting environment' is defined by its biological, geographical, social, economical and medical implications as the 'livelihood environment' for refugees and local population. The scope of the report is reduced o t environments which received forced migrant populations as opposed o t those which could be labelled 'sending environments'. The report concludes that large refugee camps have clear negative consequences for the environment but that it is doubtful if self-settlement is a practical solution for most cases, therefore amore decentralised approach to organized settlements is proposed. Most of the presently refugee hosting areas have undergone environmental change in the past decades. Refugee influxes attract media attention and with it foreign funds and outside expertise . These inputs can be harnessed o t counteract not only present, but also past degradation processes. The availability of enough land to develop sustainable systems of human - environment interaction is in most refugee hosting areas not given. This requires additional efforts from host governments and aid providers. Health implications of environmental degradation can be fast onset and disastrous. It is therefore of paramount importance to include health concerns with a strong involvement of women in all stages of environmental programming. The time horizons of local and refugee participants and the planning horizons of aid providers cause problems for long-term planning and future-oriented action. UNHCR, as the main coordinating agency for refugee assistance needs to move towards a stronger role as a catalyst for environmental mitigation with the help of local, national and international development agencies and host governments. Refugee influxes pose a security threat to receiving countries partly because of the environmental degradation they cause. The assistance o t refugees and local population must therefore aim at both preventing destructive over-use and mitigating other sources of conflict. Host governments can assist in conflict mitigation by setting clear guidelines for environmental rehabilitation efforts in refugee hosting areas. 2.
Environmental Impact of Refugees - Putting Things Into Perspective
There is a number of reasons why refugees can be exceptional resource degraders. To which extend, depends largely on the kind of assistance and on the frame conditions which support or hamper their integration in a sustainable management of scarce natural resources. The environmental carrying capacity of arefugee hosting area is the underlying concept of the notion that refugee influxes cause damage simply by the (sudden) increase in population. But carrying capacities are not fixed, they depend on management and technology levels and on the level of other inputs into the area of concern. Refugees & Host Environments
7
Thomas Hoerz
Deforestation is one of the major effects of large concentrations of refugees. The structural reason for this is a demand of urban proportions coupled with a system of wood use and wood delivery which remains rural. An often underestimated effect of refugee influxes is the depletion of fall back resources, essential foodstuffs gathered from the bush to supplement refugee rations and inadequate farm supplies for the local population. The degradation of agricultural lands is mostly linked to inadequate plots for refugees in organised agricultural settlements. Depletion and pollution of water sources is one of the most direct environmental threats to the livelihood of both refugees and locals. Competition for water can lead to severe conflicts with the local population. 3.
Environmental Impact Assessments - Limits and Potential
Costing environmental degradation must be done by those who face the losses but needs to be facilitated by agency or government staff. Consistent costs of environmental degradation caused by refugee influxes can assist host governments in their claims for compensation by the international community. Environmental impact assessments which are based on the concept of livelihoodenvironment need to combine outside expertise and local knowledge to understand how environmental change impacts the life of local population and refugees. 4.
Victims, Target Groups and Participants
Even though refugees and local population are essential participants in environmental mitigation, both groups have individual characteristics and needs that must be addressed in a different way. Environmental degradation does not only have different impacts on refugees and local population, also within the two groups there are 'winners' and ' loosers'. Projects must therefore consider the socio-economic strata within both groups and address specific vulnerabilities while harnessing capacities of others to implement rehabilitation projects in the most efficient way. Women are the dominant actors in activities leading to environmental change and suffer first and most from environmental degradation and resource scarcity. Timeconsuming, voluntary participation of women in environmental activities is to be rejected as a rule, unless the effects have clearly an alleviating role for their daily life. 5.
From Conflict to Cooperation and Participation
The fear of conflicts over natural resources is one of the main reasons for host governments to press for environmental mitigation projects. NGOs which are providing relief assistance to refugees do not operate in a legal vacuum. Long
Refugees & Host Environments
8
Thomas Hoerz
lasting impacts such as environmental change can only be dealt with, if relevant government bodies are fully and actively involved. 6.
The Time Frame for Mitigation Measures
The most important decisions concerning refugee hosting environments are made while planning refugee camps or settlements. This refers to the size of the population to be settled and the corresponding availability of water, land, vegetation and to the refugee - host relationship. Planning mistakes to this end can often not be compensated later by environmental interventions.The protection of natural resources has in the initial stages primarily a life-saving task by protecting water sources and providing adequate sanitation. 7.
The Role of Training
All environmental mitigation efforts must contain training elements for the participants . This will enable the local population to play an increasing role in mitigation activities and continue the projects with less outside expertise . Acquired skills are among the most valuable 'portable ' assets refugees can derive out of mitigation projects. For both groups it is essential, that training leads directly to an improvement of their economic situation. 8.
Resource Protection and Income Generation
Many of the constraints refugees face, can be summarized under 'inadequate income'. Resource protection activities must therefore, wherever possible, be coupled with income generation for the participants . Income through wages paid by the aid providers are only a second-best solution. Stress should be laid on enhancing private enterprise, which makes optimal use of available natural resources. 9.
Household Energy and Fuel Supply
Reduction in the fuel consumption remains the most important indicator for a successful intervention in the household energy sector. Standardising the requirements to measure impact is an important step for a meaningful evaluation of projects' performance. Introducing energy saving devices such as improved stoves and utensils, windshielding, solar and haybox cookers is largely dependant on the situation on the ground. The choice of the model, the dissemination strategy and the modes of fabrication need to be carefully selected in order to gain maximum benefits. In refugee influxes it is often the speed of dissemination and the quick impact which plays a more decisive role than the long term economic sustainability. While stove programmes can embark on a wide range of experience and a number of success stories, solar stoves have not yet proven their viability in large scale programmes.
Refugees & Host Environments
9
Thomas Hoerz
Improved kitchen management practices can produce considerable savings in a rather short time, training programmes to this end should be among the first activities in this field. Interventions in the supply of fuel range from small support schemes to major logistical operations: Supporting the prevailing mode of collection and therefore widening the collection radius by providing additional transport facilities. Agency-run collection or harvesting in the wider surroundings of the camp. Supplying fuelwood from plantations outside the refugee hosting area. Supplying alternatives to firewood like kerosene, charcoal or harvest residues. Producing fuelwood on site in intensive woodlots. Only a close discussion process with the concerned host government authorities and the affected population can decide on the option or the mix of options to select. The selection of the relief food basket and its processing can have quick effects on the fuel consumption levels. This involves close communication with the food providers and a provision of milling facilities. Communal organization of cooking and baking is a means of fuel saving with limited scope. Care has to be taken that traditional cooking customs are not violated but that communal cooking facilities, either run commercially or within self-defined groups, rather support the familybased cooking.
10.
Shelter Construction and Fencing
Beams and Poles, in addition to the usually provided plastic sheets will have to be, as a rule, imported from outside the refugee affected area. Cutting branches and stems for shelter construction is one of the most severe impacts during the initial stages of a refugee influx. Building material must therefore be among the priority relief items in an emergency. To sustain long-term refugee settlements, a production of poles on site should be considered. Shade and windbreak can be provided through trees near the homesteads of refugees. Shade trees form the initial link between refugees and afforestation activities. As a means of security and privacy, fences should, if possible, be planted by cuttings which later form live fences. 11.
Water Provision and Sanitation
The management of a sustainable sanitation system, with latrines as an integral component is a precondition for preventing the pollution of surface water and high standing groundwater. Outside expertise should mainly concentrate on training
Refugees & Host Environments
10
Thomas Hoerz
local sanitation specialists. The improvement of low-tech water sources can benefit greatly from the presence of refugees, if their labour and skills are fully utilised. Activities of this nature will also contribute to alleviate hostilities between refugees and local population. 12.
Afforestation and Area Rehabilitation
To ensure institutional sustainability, 'refugee afforestation' must not be implemented in isolation of government forestry services and non-governmental forestry activities. To render a tree planting programme economically sustainable, marketable tree products need o t be identified and promoted. Closely linked with this is the need to develop ownership systems for trees or reforested and rehabilitated areas. Compound tree planting is often the only 'private' tree planting activity that landless refugees can pursue. It is often the only tree planting activity which provides direct benefits like shade, windbreak, beautification and others for participants without access o t land. Area afforestation is the 'classic' way of planting trees and a fast, yet expensive way to rehabilitate degraded areas. Plantations for fuelwood, timber or fruits are more intensive undertakings than afforestation. Its aim is the efficient production of tree products. Markets other than refugee assistance agencies need to be identified to ensure continuation after the withdrawal of outside aid. Crucial for all kinds of tree planting is the protection of trees and planted areas, mainly against livestock. Fences are indispensable but need to be backed by clear and voluntary agreements of all inhabitants of the area. 13.
Environmental Education and Awareness Creation
Three main entry points for environmental education have been identified in refugee situations: primary and secondary school programmes, agricultural programmes and health education. Enhancing a feeling of responsibility for their host environment among refugees is an objective so far not mentioned and a yet unresearched area. Facilitating communication between refugees and the host population may contribute to a behavioural change. 14.
Monitoring and Evaluation of Project Impact
The participants among refugees and local population need to be closer involved in defining the objectives of a project, which forms the base for a meaningful evaluation. A mix of participants , project staff and outside evaluators can better ensure a fair evaluation than outside consultants. To ensure an ongoing evaluation and re-planning of environmental mitigation activities in a refugee hosting area, a permanent research team composed of local experts is proposed. This team can serve more than one project and can thus function as 'environment advisors' to all aid providers.
Refugees & Host Environments
11
Thomas Hoerz
Refugees & Host Environments
12
Thomas Hoerz
P [ ^n 1.
/ww^
Setting the Stage: Themes, Definitions, Actors
In this opening section key concepts necessary for the study of refugees and host environments will be explored. Within the literature common terms and definitions used by researchers and policy makers lack internal clarity as well as broad consistency. First step therefore is to define what is meant by 'refugees', 'hosts' and 'environment'. The section will also draw attention to some of the basic themes in any analysis of this top c i including the various classifications of forced migrant populations, the characteristics of differing forms of refugee settlement, and environmental problems in the refugee affected areas prior to the refugee influx. In the final part of this section I will clarify some of the key variables which affect the nature of the interaction between refugees and their host environments and which cut across all forms of refugee settlement and all forms of environmental impact of refugees. These include the availability of land, the health dimensions of environmental problems, the time perspective of various actors, the importance of the environmental situation prior to the arrival of refugees, and the roles of UNHCR and the host governments as the major decision makers on the ground.
1.1
What are Refugee Hosting Environments?
In an internal UNHCR discussion paper on refugees and environment Gurman (1991) provides a definition of the term 'refugee hosting environments': In the context of analysing refugee situations, the definition of " Environment" should therefore include direct and indirect physical and related social impacts. It should also recognize the interaction between local activities and impacts which may occur further away. Such a definition is, however, too general and abstract to be of practical use. A o it the more useful approach to defining involves the division of the term n following constituent parts : Biological / Geological: These are the natural resources at stake, such as soils, water, air, tress, bush, ground cover, agricultural crops, wild and domestic animals Medical: The relation between environmental change and physical well being of the inhabitants..
Refugees & Host Environments
13
Thomas Hoerz
Geographical: The area of direct interaction, which is often within one day's walking distance up to 15 km one way and the area of indirect interaction including downstream rivers, areas of food production, fuelwood harvesting and trading. Socio-Ecological: The kind of interaction which exists between refugees, local population and the natural resource base which include traditional regulations of resource use, rates of exploitation, conflicts and agreements over natural and renewable resources. Economical: The impact of environmental change on the income levels of refugee and host population, both in cash and in kind. As a precursor to any discussion of refugees and their interaction with hosts it is important to note, that the natural environment is only one aspect of the refugee hosting area and that environmental impacts of refugees are only a part of the impact refugees have on the way of life of their hosts (Helin 1991:8). They may also affect the labour market, the situation of human and animal health, the provision of education, communication and transport and many other fields. While this review is concerned primarily with the environmental impacts, it is essential to keep in mind that the interaction of refugees and hosts takes place within a broader spectrum of socio-economic factors. In her evaluation of refugees' environmental impacts, Jacobsen (1994:8) rightly includes the social implications of environmental degradation such as threats to pastoralists (see 2.3.2), threats to food security (see 2.3.3, 2.3.4) and negative consequences for rural women (see 4.3) . The negative social consequences are of special interest in this review. For the purposes of this analysis the environment is considered primarily a (longterm) livelihood-environment or even a (short-term) survival-environment for refugees and local population. More abstract features like biodiversity or conservation of wildlife which do not have necessarily short - and medium-term bearing on the livelihood of the affected populations are treated as secondary.
1.2
Refugee Hosting Environments and 'Environmental Refugees'
The most widely used document addressing the worldwide refugee situation, with statistics, country reports and specific articles is the annual World Refugee Survey (see here: USCR 1995). While exact statistics exist of official ly registered or crossborder refugees - over 16 million at the end of 1994, those refugees who are self settled, the internally displaced by war, persecution, ethnic violence, drought or other disasters and 'development' projects have not been and cannot be counted. Therefore, only approximate figures are available for these categories.
Refugees & Host Environments
14
Thomas Hoerz
McDowell (1995:30), summarising from various sources, provides the following figures: Cross Border Refugees Internally Displaced -" Environmental Refugees" Displaced by "Development" Projects
18.000.000 24.000.000 25.000.000 90.000.000
The distinctions between 'Environmental Refugees', ' Internally Displaced', ' Forced Migrants' and whatever other names are invented and re-invented, become more and more obsolete. Reasons for flight are manifold and usually interlinked. What those people have in common is their state of uprootedness, their powerlessness and their poverty . Conflict and natural calamities are so closely interlinked that, besides other reasons, the often used term 'Environmental Refugees' is, while widely used, of little help. For further discussion on the term 'environmental refugees' see McGregor (1993) and IOM/RPG (1992). In the absence of a better and more inclusive term, 'refugee' is used throughout for all forcibly displaced persons. Displacement caused by environmental degradation is described, among many others, in Bennet (1991), Black (1994b), Davidson and Myers (1992), Helin and Tamondong-Helin (1991), Jacobson (1988), Myers (1993) and Trolldalen et.al. (1992). For this report , 'environment' is as a migration receiving environment, with quite distinct problems and possible solutions from the sending environment. The target group however are not alone refugees in the narrow, 1951 Convention sense of the word: Existing definitions are only partly relevant for a discussion on the issue of refugees and environmental degradation, especially deforestation. It would be more appropriate if current working definitions could include the phenomenon of involuntary en masse movements of people. These abrupt migrations and settlements, principally in rural areas, cause a sudden and intense impact on the local environment, compounded by the fact that the majority of those who move tend to be poor and in urgent need of access to land, water, forest and pasture for survival. (Ghimire 1994:561) One group of the displaced who has so far received no attention regarding environmental degradation or related mitigation projects is the group of returnees. In an annotated bibliography on refugee repatriation (Fosseldorf and Madsen 1994) none of the 181 documents mentioned deals with environmental problems or environmental projects in the receiving (home) areas. Because of the lack of material, the UNHCR-initiated 'Quick Impact Projects' (QIPs) in returnee areas were not screened for environmental projects.
Refugees & Host Environments
15
Thomas Hoerz
Treating the 'classical refugees' according to the 1951 Convention as a separate group makes sense only insofar as the humanitarian regime is concerned. Refugee situations, notably those of refugee camps involve international and nongovernmental institutions whom to address is a major concern of this report . With considerable funds and media attention the refugee assistance organisations are often in a good position to channel funds and expertise into preventive and curative environmental projects.
1.3
The Concept of Refugee Camps and Refugee Settlements
am convinced that the transition from large camps to self settlement and integration will occur as a trend to smaller camps, more land for refugees, more developmental activities, more trading opportunities, so that in the end the contact surface between refugees and locals gets so big, that we have integration. It's like sugar and coffee, sugar lumps take longer to dissolve, (field worker quoted in Jacobsen 1995) The form of settlement is a crucial variable in the impact of refugees on the host environment. Even though many authors examine the question of organised vs self-settlement as two sharply contrasting concepts, the reality of refugee settlement represents a continuum of the following situation: Completely separate existence of refugees and locals ('closed camps'); in camps, but free to trade; in camps, but free to move and to trade; separate status, but equal opportunities with locals (eg agricultural settlements) and integration of refugees and refugee settlements , (after Smawfield 1994:16) In addition, every refugee situation consists of a mixture of spontaneously- or selfsettled refugees with those in 'organised' or controlled settlements, the former usually, at least for Sub- Saharan Africa , in the majority. If refugee camps are situated among poor hosts or if drought and famine places additional stress on the local population and relief measures for them do not function, it is not unusual to find locals among the refugee camp population. The only author who has examined the ongoing debate of organised vs spontaneous settlement explicitly from the standpoint of environmental impact is Jacobsen (1995), although Hansen (1990), Harrell-Bond (1986), Kuhlmann (1990, 1994) or McGregor (1993:166), among others, mention environmental considerations in their discussion concerning the different settlement patterns of refugees. These authors tend to reflect solely on the impacts of different settlement patterns. Little attention has been paid to how different settlement patterns affect or the feasibility, efficiency and sustainability of environmental mitigation projects and refugee assistance as a whole.
Refugees & Host Environments
16
Thomas Hoerz
The most common arguments in favour of camps and organised settlements suggest that efficient relief and delivery of services o t refugees is best ensured in this form. International assistance agencies might prefer organised refugee settlements, because of the convenience of operation. It is, of course, much easier o t reach 100.000 people living in a camp situation than a dispersed population over a large area. An additional 'pull-factor ' for agencies is the infrastructure facilities offered by camps: regular plane shuttles to the capital, secure water supplies, electricity and telephone connection and, last but not least, the media attention necessary for continued fund-raising. Those in favour of supported self-settlement argue that self settled refugees do not need as much relief support in the initial stages and will require much less support in the long run.They propose that the funds of humanitarian agencies should strive instead to strengthen existing infrastructure, enabling established o t assume institutions to deal with the refugee influx. It is dangerous, however, that self-settled refugees invariably need less assistance. Research conducted in Zambia showed that self-settled refugees are not better-off than those in camps if there is no clear policy and administrative mechanisms in place such as protection of refugees by the host administration and additional support from outside (Freund and Kalumba 1986:311). Kibreab (1993:336) addresses the frequent argument that refugees in camps do not engage in economic activities and develop a 'dependency syndrome'. Apart from the fact that humanitarian assistance usually cannot provide even for the minimum necessary for survival, he questions the stereotype that refugees stop working once their basic needs are fulfilled, as if refugees (and the poor for that matter) work only for their basic needs and have no other priorities and aspirations beyond them.
From C a m p to Refugee Affected Area Despite the continuing debate over self-settlement vs organised settlement, the formerly narrow approach of refugee centred assistance is widening o up t include abroader target area. Refugee assistance has for decades focused on 'camp and settlement refugees' as if the area in which they settle was free of human beings before, during and after the main influx and as if all the refugees live in camps and settlements. Although the level is still insufficient, more relief and maintenance efforts are now concerned with refugee affected areas. This new emphasis is apparent, at least regarding environmental concerns, by two of the three principal goals of the 'Interim Guidelines for Environment-Sensitive Management of Refugee Programmes' (UNHCR 1994a:2): to plan and implement refugee assistance programmes in such a way as to address the material and social needs of refugees, while avoiding a negative environmental impact in refugee hosting areas [added emphasis]; and
Refugees & Host Environments
17
Thomas Hoerz
to play a catalytic role in encouraging other agencies and institutions to address major environmental problems in refugee hosting and returnee areas [added emphasis].' The concentration on the camp or settlement approach continues to consider refugees as a transitory phenomenon. But 'avoiding the need for "deconcentration" into village settlements through early voluntary return is a self-deception based on hope not on realities' (Green 1994:5). There is no doubt that 'large camps aggravate environmental impact because of the high concentration of population per land area. Smaller groups spread more evenly throughout the receiving region impose less intense strains and enable better ecological recovery rates' (Jacobsen 1994:40). Even though the type and population density of refugee settlement determine to a large extent the environmental impact, it is clear that environmental considerations play only a minor role in the decisions on how refugees are to be settled. It is often host governments, who in their desire to have control over refugees and discourage their permanent settlement, insist on the camp or organised-settlement solution (see 1.9). This has become apparent in the 1994 refugee crisis of Rwanda, where neither Zaire, nor Tanzania nor Burundi allowed refugee settlement outside camps. Kenya has long insisted on maintaining Somali refugees in camps in remote areas in Eastern Province, and regularly threatens to expel them if the donor community 'misbehaves'. It is apparent that camp confined refugees make better pawns in the international power play for donor assistance, both for host governments and for aid providers. Despite the above elaborations on the form of refugee settlement desirable to minimize their environmental impact and maximize the efficacy of mitigation efforts , this study addresses issues as they are found on the ground. Every refugee situation, whether self-settled or in camps, has its own specific environmental impacts and requires unique solutions. It is, however, my hope that the environmental considerations discussed here will contribute to a rethinking of the initial and longer term international and national response to refugee influxes . Jacobsen (1995) outlines a possible development in refugee assistance, which could satisfy host governments, refugee assisting agencies and the concerned refugee and local populations: As in most things, the solution probably lies in the middle way and in the encouragement of trends in the right direction rather than abrupt policy changes. If organized [camps and] settlements cannot be eliminated they should be reduced in size and spread throughout the host community. In smaller camps [or better : settlements] administrators and relief agencies can do much to reduce environmental problems. Interaction between the refugees and local people, in the form of trade, sharing of knowledge and participation in community arrangements should be encouraged.
Refugees & Host Environments
18
Thomas Hoerz
Just as refugees have access to local resources, so local people should be able o t benefit from the assistance provided o t refugees such as health care water. Community regulatory mechanisms and clean should be supported by host governments and international agencies when they play an environmentally sound role, and particularly when they also benefit refugees.
1.4
Pre-Influx Environmental Problems
Refugees are frequently blamed for [...] environmental degradation for which they are not solely or primarily responsible. (Jacobsen 1994:39) Every region of the world is undergoing some kind of environmental change, unfortunately in most cases these changes can be summarized as 'degradation'. McGregor (1993:164) stresses the fact that by far not all environmental damage in refugee hosting areas are caused by the refugees, and that the effects of fuelwood collection in particular can be heavily overestimated. The effects of violent conflicts in refugee sending areas can be damaging to the refugee host country, independent of refugee flows: 'In Malawi, border trade in natural resources (including firewood, timber, meat, honey and fish) had been sustaining certain resource -poor and over-crowded areas of Malawi. The war in Mozambique [...] has disrupted this trade and therefore imposed further stresses on these Malawian environments.' (Wilson 1989:87) Even in the absence of conflict, the ecological situation in refugee hosting areas is often acute before the arrival of refugees. Caminada (1992:5) estimated that for firewood consumption alone, three times the Mean Annual Increment (MAI) in woodstock of the area has been used by the local population prior to the arrival of Bhutanese refugees.
1.5
Scarcity of Land
If there is one thing I want to see before I die, it is good land for my children. I would like to see my children get food from the land and the animals getting fatter. I would also like to sit under a tree with good shade and chat to my friends. ("Homeland Refugee" quoted in Kruger 1991:52) One of the most important preconditions for an individual, a family or a community o t preserve the productivity of land is the possession of lasting and reliable rights o t it. These include ownership (private or communal), land use rights (contractual or customary), and/or the absence of competing claims of other parties (which is an unlikely situation in most refugee affected areas).
Refugees & Host Environments
19
Thomas Hoerz
For refugees this must be coupled with the option and the right o t stay, if not forever then for an extended period. Availability of land is a key factor governing the way refugees relate to environmental conservation. The size of plots allocated to refugees is crucial: the smaller the plots, the higher the risk of unsustainable exploitation. As the size of family farming lands gets smaller, fallow, terracing, contour bunding, intercropping with trees or fodder and the integration of livestock altogether becomes more unlikely. Secure access to land starts with a compound of reasonable size in the refugee camp which allows privacy, the growing of some vegetables and probably shade trees, and ends with enough land for a family in an agricultural settlement to allow for fallow, crop rotation, agroforestry and other practices to make agriculture sustainable and self-sufficiency viable (Woodrow 1989b:264). Many agricultural settlements should be treated as 'camps with a gardening component' and the agricultural produce be used to complement the distributed ration, rather than believing against all local experience that small plots can replace the organised food supplies. Jordan (1993:14) suggests for most agricultural settlements the term 'partial reliance' which should replace the self-deceptive term 'self reliance'. One of the important questions to be answered in designing land policies for refugees is identifying key individuals or key institutions responsible for land distribution (CARE/ODA 1994:44). Formal regulations are usually set by the department of the central government in charge of refugees or by the district administration. Informal regulations for temporary use of land, however, might be possible with local institutions like village elders or local party chairmen if they do not explicitly violate government regulations. In fact, negotiating access to land for refugees with the 'wrong' people can cause more problems than it solves: 'Setting up alternative structures of authority for land-related matters through the town chiefs undermines the authority of local landholders and may trigger disputes. [...] The resulting alienation of refugees from host communities, and competition between overlapping forms of jurisdiction and bases for claims are likely to make refugees' cultivation rights less, not more secure' (Leach 1991:17). Jacobsen (1995) points out an underlying problem of distributing land in refugee hosting areas: 'In much of the less-developed world, and particularly in many African host countries, access to productive land is the primary means of ensuring aliving [...]. Where land is ferti le and pest-free, it has generally been claimed and settled, or in some way "owned" by the local community insofar as it is governed by customary tenure regimes and other forms of property rights. Areas that are under- populated or uncultivated are usually this way o r f negative or positive reasons. Either they are not ferti le or plagued by diseases or they are being used for pastureland or forest reserve, or being left fallow as a part of a system of shifting cultivation'.
Refugees & Host Environments
20
Thomas Hoerz
The prevailing land shortage in many, albeit not all, refugee hosting countries undermines the argument that refugees are a 'blessing in disguise' (Daley 1993) or that refugees can act as agents of infrastructure development and capital inflow to underdeveloped (because underpopulated) areas. Even in countries like Sudan which had one of the most generous land distribution policies (partly because refugee labour played such a big role in agricultural expansion), land is no longer afree commodity in agriculturally productive areas. This development is demonstrated by Bascom (1993:336) who compares land holding among Eritrean refugees arriving in Sudan before and after 1975. Only 15% of the late arrivers o t nearly 60% among the own land (after 10 years of stay in Sudan!) as compared early arrivers. There are few countries left in the world where productive land has not become a scarce resource. A ranking of refugee receiving countries according to their availability of arable land per capita is provided in Dennis (1993:Annex 6) with data from World Resources Institute (1993). Host governments may be unable to provide land for refugees' self sufficiency simply because their own citizens do not have enough and conflicts over land could further destabilize the political situation. Waldron and Hasci (1995:31) give the example of the Somali settlement strategy, ta tl land to explain why many agricultural settlements are doomed to fail: 'The o allocation of land for refugee agriculture at this period was 2,975 hectares, and a limit of 10,000 hectares was established. [...] Even if all the land were developed through refugee use, it could provide less than 10 per cent of refugee food needs.' The situation is similarly desperate among forcibly displaced populations in the former homelands of South Africa . Not only was the land given to them usually of poor quality, the average land holding in the Thornhill Settlement, for example, was a bare 0.43 ha in a semi-arid environment. The number of animals was up to 23 times the recommended carrying capacity. A number of 61.000 displaced persons were expected to subsist on 21.000 ha of land (Kruger 1991:42,47,49). In her case study of Liberian refugees in Sierra Leone, Leach (1991, 1992) argues that aid agencies often misunderstand the negotiated access to land, and perceive ascarcity that does not exist. This can be the case, when relative to the local population small numbers of refugees settle in an area. But in most cases scarcity of land is one of the main hindrances for a sustainable integration of refugees in the receiving environments and one of the reasons for the structural inability of refugees to manage natural resources sustainably. Instead of 'availability of land', a more useful analytical tool is the 'refugee absorption capacity' of a potential host country or host area. Dennis (1993:18) discusses Refugee Absorption Capacity Indices based on the 1992-93 World Resources Data (World Resources Institute 1993).
Refugees & Host Environments
21
Thomas Hoerz
The index uses key parameters such as fertilizer use per capita (technology level) annual population growth rate (population stability) arable land per capita (land resources) annual water withdrawal per capita (water resources) cereal aid received per capita (food self-sufficiency) annual deforestation rate as % of total (forest conservation). Such indices on the national level are only useful to compare countries on their relative and 'theoretical' absorption capacity. The political will to host refugees and the environmental absorption capacity of the host area within a country play a much more decisive role. The national indices can therefore only be used for long term contingency planning. Host governments usually provide land based on considerations other than absorption capacity, such as closeness to the border to promote voluntary return or low population densities to avoid competition and resulting conflicts with the local population. But even if the host government does allocate a certain acreage to refugee households, in practice many refugees seem to receive less than allocated or nothing at all (Wijbrandi 1986, Kuhlmann 1994).
1.6
Environment and Health
The number of water taps per 1.000 persons is a better indication of health than the number of hospital beds. (H. Mahler, WHO quoted in Davidson and Myers 1992:39)
The effects of environmental degradation on the health of affected populations are of key underlying importance throughout most of the following chapters. Every effect of environmental degradation upon nutrition (eg 2.4.2 - 2.4.4) will inevitably result in changes of health status. The complex of household energy (9.), a central chapter in this review, is closely linked with the health of refugees, especially women and children. Deforestation (2.4.1) and the increasing scarcity offuelwood poses severe health problems to the collectors, again mainly women and children. Lack of appropriate shelter (10.1) leaves refugees' health vulnerable to climate, crime and psychological stress. Of particular importance are problems with water and sanitation (2.4.5, 11.). Lack of sufficient potable water and the absence of appropriate sanitation can lead to high mortality rates in overcrowded refugee camps and settlements. Education and awareness creation (7. and 13.) are among the promising activities to address environmental health problems and health related activities. One of the basic requirements for human health, a sufficient and balanced nutrition, is being permanently undermined by environmental scarcities. 'Food may be not cooked so often or as thoroughly and drinking water is not likely to be boiled when firewood is scarce' (Smyke 1991:45).
Refugees & Host Environments
22
Thomas Hoerz
The necessary vitamins, minerals and micronutrients which are not sufficiently contained in refugee rations must be derived from gathered fruits, roots, insects and other fall back resources. If they are depleted, malnutrition rates can be expected to raise and with it increased incidences of related diseases. For further reading on issues related to health, displacement and the environment see Cairncross and Feacham (1993), Kuntz (1990), Mears and Chowdhury (1994), OXFAM (1995), RPG (1991), Shiva (1994), Simmonds et.al. (1983), Sims (1994), Thomson (1994), UNHCR (1982, 1989), UNICEF (1986) and WHO (1992). This list is by no means exhaustive. The literature on refugee health, environmental health, public health, health education, vector control and all the other related fields is so vast that each topic merits a separate literature review. 1.7
The Time Perspectives of Actors
Environmental rehabilitation needs peace, security and powersharing more urgently than agricultural production because it requires a wider time horizon. Environmental rehabilitation is therefore more a political problem than anything else. (after Stahl 1990:147f ) The differing time horizons of various actors like refugees, humanitarian agencies, local population and host governments influence both patterns of exploitation and degradation on the one hand, and environmental protection and rehabilitation on the other hand. One of the reasons why refugees are considered by some authors to be 'exceptional resource degraders' is the short term perspective of their stay. As refugees see their stay as not only temporary but short -lived they see little benefit in employing measures o t conserve their environment. This is exacerbated by staying in unsustainable, provisional camps and settlements close to the border of their home country (Jacobsen 1994:12). Operating on annual budgets, UNHCR and many relief agencies are not well equipped to deal with long term rehabilitation measures. UNHCR has therefore developed the so-called trust funds whereby donors can donate funds which are earmarked for special projects over a certain period of several years. In this way, projects can even continue when the majority of refugees have moved elsewhere, but the local environment and its population still need environmental rehabilitation measures. Environmental projects in refugee hosting areas should by definition not be limited to a short period or even linked to the presence of large numbers of refugees. On the contrary, they 'could form the basis for further development activities, which could be included in bilateral and multilateral development programmes.' (Caminada 1992:2)
Refugees & Host Environments
23
Thomas Hoerz
1.8
The Role of UNHCR
With growing numbers of refugees crossing borders and even more rapidly growing numbers of displaced populations within borders, UNHCR is stretched to its limit. Pre-influx environmental degradation, unavoidable exploitation by refugees or the duty of preserving an already vulnerable and disturbed environment under the unfavourable frame conditions of refugee crises clearly overload any agency that is held responsible. Unfortunately, the current 'UNHCR Handbook for Emergencies' (UNHCR 1982) is 13 years old and the 'Interim Guidelines for Environment-Sensitive Management of Refugee Programmes' (UNHCR 1994a) still lack detailed substance. Analysts have tried to provide a framework for developing UNHCR's policy towards refugee hosting environments. 'Despite, or because of, rapidly escalating demands on the agency, UNHCR needs to move beyond its focus on refugee protection to become the lead agency involved in funding and design of environmentally-sound settlement of refugees. A phased, networked approach should be adopted in which UNHCR is the lead agency of a consortium of technical agencies, NGOs and national counterpart agencies that designs and implements pro-active environmental pilot programs' (Dennis 1993:49). Three phases for this proposed transformation are described: Phase 1 (1993 - 1995) strengthen environmental programming within UNHCR; identifying cooperation partners and technical expertise ; field-test environmental assessment methods; fundraising; consulting with refugees, local communities and national counterparts o t design participatory approaches; studying of previous resettlement projects; establishing a competitive UNHCR annual awards system; identifying a data base system to store physical information; Phase 2 (1995- 1997) issuing of training documents and rapid environmental assessment packages; setting up a global data base for areas of refugee assistance; initiating long term monitoring in camps and settlements; selecting of promising approaches to siting and sizing of refugee camps; implementing of environment rehabilitation projects in key countries;
Refugees & Host Environments
24
Thomas Hoerz
Phase 3 (1998 onwards) refining of assessment and monitoring methods; selecting and implementing a GIS (Geographical Information System) for all refugee camps and settlements; developing of national capacities o t de-emphasize role of UNHCR; continuing the commitment to a unified approach o t refugee assistance. (ibid:49 ,50) Jacobsen (1994:35) adds o t the above: 'UNHCR should develop explicit goals to which it will hold itself [and implementing agencies] accountable. [...] In addition, UNHCR should consolidate and publish practical "best practices" as guidance for its NGO and governmental cooperating partners.' Finally, UNHCR bears a special responsibility in encouraging host governments towards more sustainable and humane forms of refugee settlement, which in turn would be a big step forward in controlling environmental damage in refugee hosting areas (see also 1.4; 7.1 and Gurman 1991, 1992; Simmance 1987; Stevens 1993; UNCHS/UNEP 1994; UNHCR 1993). Unfortunately , in the latest 'UNHCR Directory of Non-Governmental Organizations' (UNHCR 1995) the environment is not listed as a separate sector of activity. It is distributed over technical fields such as water, domestic needs, sanitation, shelter , crop production, livestock, forestry, education and income generation. Although it is true that all these sectors have an environmental bearing, the absence of a separate category for the environment of refugee hosting areas indicates that the focus on the environment is as yet not strong enough, and that the need for coordination of the above fields, guided by the concern o t prevent severe resource degradation, has not been fully recognized.
1.9
Environment and Security: Concerns of Host Governments
To my knowledge, the environment of refugee hosting areas or environmental damage by refugees does simply not exist in host governments' legislation or policies regarding refugees and I doubt, that forced migration is mentioned in the legislation focusing on the environment. From the environment point of view, refugees are settled in a legal vacuum. (Beyani 1995)
Participants in a refugee conference in Arusha stated as early as 1976 that 'in the context of contemporary African politics, practically every refugee situation is a matter of direct concern to the security of the country involved and that any debate on organized versus non-organized settlement is largely academic in as much as it is o up t the host government to decide how and where refugees are to be settled.' (quoted from Wijbrandi (1986:3) (see also 1.3).
Refugees & Host Environments
25
Thomas Hoerz
The security threat posed by refugees to their host countries was analyzed with a focus on Sub-Saharan Africa by Jacobsen (1993:214ff). Based on research by Choucri and North (1990), she differentiates between three types of security threats o t sending and receiving countries: The Strategic Dimension: these are threats to the ability of a country to defend its territory militarily. Examples in recent history are refugee camps which are used for preparing an invasion to Rwanda. Environmental considerations are not relevant here. The Regime Dimension: threats which endanger a government in its ability to defend itself against opponents from within its territory. If environmental degradation reaches severe degrees, this will add to the discontent of marginalized groups and raise general criticism against the government's refugee policy. The Structural Dimension: this addresses the capacity of a government to balance population and resources like food, water, land and services. This is the locus of environmental considerations for a host government. A structural threat to the government, with or without an environmentally induced component can lead to a regime threat.
Host Government Legislation
It is important here to draw attention to the point of intersection of environmental law and refugee policy of host countries. As the environmental impact of refugee camps and large settlements has become more obvious in recent years, two main lines of interest emerge: First, do environmental laws take into account situations of forced migration or mass movements of populations? Secondly, do refugee (settlement) policies take into account the possibly adverse environmental impacts and their consequences for the refugee hosting areas? Even though host governments are aware of adverse environmental impacts of refugees and the newspapers are full of articles describing how camp surrounding areas turn into deserts , the 23rd Ordinary Session of the OAU Coordinating Committee on Assistance to Refugees in Africa does not mention environmental implications (OAU 1993). That is the more surprising, as environmental degradation is one of the areas where quantifiable costs for the host country are occurring but for which they are usually not compensated (see 3.1). Refugee legislation, which sets clear standards regarding the environmental impact and regarding (obligatory) mitigation measures can be an important lever to ensure more consistent and swift action.
Refugees & Host Environments
26
Thomas Hoerz
This is not intended to put additional pressure on UNHCR, but o t provide the organisation with a basis for fundraising and lobbying. Additionally, it is not only the right, but the duty of any government to protect its citizens from life-threatening conditions as found in many refugee hosting areas. Such demands can again bring to the attention of the West that receiving countries in the South carry a burden compared to which that of the North is marginal.
Refugees & Host Environments
27
Thomas Hoerz
2.
The Environmental Impact of Refugees Putting Things into Perspective
Refugee movements impact the environment of both sending and receiving countries. Negative impacts in the receiving country are dominant, as environmental degradation is usually linked to a (sudden) increase in population. The opposite, however, is possible but has been little researched. The sudden reduction of population in Rwanda, for example, will most likely lead to a breakdown of the labour intensive terracing structures which sustain agricultural production. The breakdown of social order in refugee sending areas, partly caused by the absence of stakeholders, will affect the CPR management system and deprive the agro-ecosystem of its protection. Rangelands, without the appropriate grazing pressure, may be taken over by bush vegetation. This reduces not only grazing for animals but can result in negative repercussions for ground cover and soil stability. These effects in sending areas, even though they exist, will not be dealt with in this report . 'The Impact of Refugees on the Environment: A Review of the Evidence' (Jacobsen 1994) is so far the most comprehensive paper on the issue and provides a substantive list of related literature. An environmental impact assessment (EIA) for Rwandan refugee camps in Tanzania, designed as a model for future research on the issue is provided by CARE/ODA (1994) and goes far beyond the specific situation it examines.
2.1
Refugees - Exceptional Resource Degraders?
Answering such a question with a straight 'yes' is not only premature but dangerous. Already countries with formerly open-door refugee policies like Tanzania are increasingly hesitant to accept refugees. This is, among other reasons, due to the fear of accelerated stress on the environment. The specific impact of refugees on the environment is a function of factors described in other chapters (see 1.3 - 1.9, 4., 5.) and the quality of mitigation measures (6. - 14.). A summary of the reasons why refugees can be considered exceptional resource degraders is given below (Jacobsen 1994:12, Leach 1992:44): Refugees belong to the poorest of the poor in developing countries. Their lack of resources forces them to exploit the environment without being able to invest in its productivity (8.).
Refugees & Host Environments
28
Thomas Hoerz
ii
iii
iv
vi
vii
viii
Refugees lack incentives to engage in sustainable resource management; this relates to ownership of land and uncertainty of the duration of stay (1.3, 1.5, 1.7). Refugees are often not familiar with the local environment, its potential and vulnerability, sustainable harvesting and exploitation are often not understood fully (2.3.2 -2.3.4). Refugees, if settled separately from the local population or if their numbers are relatively high compared with the locals', are not controlled by the traditional common resource property (CPR) management systems (1.3, 5.3, 13.3). The complete or part break-down of social authority among uprooted populations make it difficult to maintain previous regulations or develop and enforce new regulations (2.2). A frequent situation of insecurity due to hostility from local populations, bandits, proximity to borders with ongoing military conflicts or hostility of the host country's police or army forces lead to a reduced radius of exploitation and therefore to even more extreme degrees of overuse in relatively small areas around camps or settlements (5., 9.3.1). Refugees transport essential goods like water, firewood and thatching material mostly on foot. The scarcity of carts or motorised transport also reduces the off-take area, a radius of 15 km is frequently quoted (9.3.1). Unlike economic migrants, refugees move into areas not because of the availability of arable land or employment opportunities and regardless of the state of the natural resource base.
'However, it can be argued that refugees [and other forced migrants] are no more or less exceptional resource degraders than other rural people or economic migrants. Refugees' ecological and economic impact depends in large par t on the response on those who assist them in the host community and on the negotiated relationship that develops between them and their hosts (added emphasis). The host-refugee relationship is often conflict-prone and competitive, but it can also be cooperative and beneficial to both groups' (Jacobsen 1994:14). Le Breton (1994:5) adds that 'the environmental cost to the host country, although high, must be viewed in the context of the multiple benefits gained through the hosting of refugees. It should not be presented as an excuse for turning refugees away. The onus must be on the international community o t ensure that host governments are not left o t pick up the pieces unaided.' So far, positive environmental impacts of displaced populations on the host environment have not been described. One may suppose that negative impacts are more helpful in creating attention and in raising funds. It is important o t stress that adverse environmental impacts occur 'automatically' in a situation of mass movement, while positive impacts need a concerted eo frt of all actors . The positive impacts described below are therefore all linked o t some kind of assistance from outside the refugee hosting area.
Refugees & Host Environments
29
Thomas Hoerz
While measures to this end have yet to be fully implemented, they are not unrealistic. Potential measures focus on: Training and Know-How: Refugees and locals, who participate in training programmes can enhance their skills and knowledge for environmentally relevant activities like range management, eco-farming, erosion control, afforestation or improved household energy practices. Refugees can, apart from their manpower, contribute from experiences made in their country of origin. Fund Raising : Through refugee assistance, links to potential partners for longterm development and long term environmental protection projects can be tied. Coordination and Communication: Lessons learnt in planning, organizing and evaluating can be adopted by the local population for an improved environmental management system, even after refugees have left the area. Physical Structures: If planned and erected for long term use, structures like water sources, live fences, afforestation plots, rainfed woodlots, tree nurseries or stove production workshops can remain to deliver environmentally sound products. It is here the responsibility of the host government to insist on the long term designs of such structures. Thus far, host governments have not tapped the environmentally positive potentials of refugee assistance. Referring to the environment, the guiding question should not only be 'what resources do refugees deplete or even destroy', but also 'what positive impacts of the refugee influx are realistic and how can we facilitate their achievement'.
2.2
Simply a Question of Numbers?
The question of population density is closely linked with the concept of carrying capacity of a region or ecosystem. This concept has been criticised for its static view, implying that the carrying capacity of a certain area in animals or human beings is cast in stone. Ornas (1990:117), referring to pastoral lands, suggests that 'instead of the one-way answer what carrying capacity is, there are several viable combinations of the three factors: people, animals, pasture,' to which I would add two more factors: the level of technology and the quality of the management system. The environmental impact of refugees is not simply a function of the numbers alone but of the numbers in relation to other parameters. Below are some guiding questions which help to put the relevance of numbers or static carrying capacity into perspective by leading to a more comprehensive understanding of the situation.
Refugees & Host Environments
30
Thomas Hoerz
Which areas do refugees influence directly, which indirectly? What is the population density in these areas? What is the ratio of local population : refugees? Have the refugee hosting areas been (relatively) overpopulated before? What is the level of technology the refugees and the local population are using for environmentally relevant needs like agriculture, household energy, shelter, fencing and sanitation? What is the quality and magnitude of environmental mitigation efforts by aid providers in relation to the affected population and area? To which extent are traditional CPR management systems still working? Could new, revised CPR management systems be developed or to which extend are they working? An example to demonstrate the importance of CPR management systems as opposed to population density is provided by Leach (1992:45,46) in her analysis of the influx of Liberian refugees into Sierra Leone. Whereas some largely depopulated areas in Liberia lost nearly all their oil palms due to indiscriminate felling, the relatively overpopulated refugee hosting areas in Sierra Leone could maintain the strict ban of felling productive oil palms. In forest areas of Central America, where civil war has urged ten thousands of peasants to flee their farms, arestriction in the rate of deforestation has been observed. Utting (1993:41) attributed this to the general insecurity preventing logging companies and commercial farms to operate in the area rather than to the lower population densities These two examples illustrate, that the impacts of changing population densities on the environment are highly situation-specific and can only be understood in relation to changes in other frame conditions like security, social cohesion and government authority. For further reading on the concept of carrying capacity, see UNFPA (1991).
2.3
Typical Impacts of Refugee Camps and Settlements
In the following chapters a typology of impacts of refugee camps or settlements is offered. They do not follow any particular order of importance or occurrence in time and even though deforestation (2.3.1) is by far the most often mentioned impact, it can not be clearly separated from degradation of range (2.3.2), depletion of fall back resources (2.3.3) or degradation of agricultural lands (2.3.4). Water consumption and water pollution (2.3.5) come towards the end of the section, even though in an emergency water related problems often rank first in urgency. Solid waste (2.3.6) and threats to protected areas (2.3.7) seem to be of lesser concern. The impacts of spontaneously or self-settled refugees are not dealt with here, unless they arrive in large numbers into relatively small areas.
Refugees & Host Environments
31
Thomas Hoerz
The impacts of a dispersed self-settled refugee population can be assumed to be comparable to those of the local population, at most aggravated by the higher population densities. It is areas where refugees form a significant part of the population and receive special attention by assistance agencies where special policies for refugee hosting environments need to be developed. Areas with a dispersed population of self-settled refugees require an intensification of ongoing resource protection projects and initiation of long-term environmentally sustainable development that takes the special needs of uprooted parts of the population into consideration. Below an overview is provided with the cumulative inputs of CARE/ODA (1994) and Dennis (1993), listing potential environmental impacts of refugee camps or refugee settlements. Forest Related Impacts Increased cutting of live trees for building material, fencing material, charcoal ando rf sale to urban markets. Depletion of dry wood can lead to use of green wood as fuel. Increased competition over forest resources like roots, mushrooms, fruits, insects, rodents and others. Traditional management systems of trees and forests can deteriorate. Official forest protection can be overwhelmed. Reduced forest cover leads to increase of soil erosion by water and wind. Range Related Impacts Overgrazing by refugee animals or herds attracted by refugee related infrastructure. Reduction of range by fencing in large areas for agency compounds, afforestation schemes and by camps and settlements. Reduction of range by expansion of agriculture. Deterioration of range for browsing animals by timber harvesting, gathering of fencing material and fuelwood. Garbage and chemicals pose threats to livestock health. Loss of ground cover exposes soils to wind and water erosion. Agriculture Related Impacts Fallow periods are shortened due to higher demand on land, cheaper labour, or ignorance of agricultural practices. Lack of knowledge on the side of refugees lead to destructive farming practices. Deforestation in the region threatens fields by wind and water erosion. Unsuitable hillsites are cultivated. Support of agencies ('occupational therapy') leads to unsustainable or harmful practices.
Refugees & Host Environments
32
Thomas Hoerz
Water Related Impacts Over-use of surface and sub-surface sources by refugees, their livestock and agencies. Contamination of surface water and shallow wells by human and animal faeces, detergents, pesticides and other chemicals. Siltation of surface water collection structures due o t overuse of banks, loss of ground cover and vegetation loss in catchment area. Long-term depletion of aquifers, lowering of ground water table. Increase of dependency on fossil fuels to obtain water. Discouragement of herd movements by provision of reliable water sources.
2.3.1 Deforestation The theory that a widespread fuelwood crisis threatens the developing world is now generally discredited, although local shortages do exist and need to be addressed in consultation with those experiencing them. There is, however, considerable concern about a global loss in forest cover. This is often expressed in terms of a "deforestation crisis", in which deforestation refers to forest clearance of any type [...]. Each scenario has a different environmental impact, as well as differing consequences for local people; it is important to distinguish between them. (OXFAM 1995:583) In refugee hosting areas, deforestation is the most frequently mentioned environmental impact of refugee camps and settlements (Dennis 1993:31 and Jacobsen 1994:39). Virtually all of the documents dealing with refugees' impact on the environment stress on this area (eg Caminada 1992, CARE/ODA 1994, Finkel 1994, Jordan 1993, Ketel 1994a, 1994b, UNHCR 1994a). Astudyof the United States General Accounting Office (GAO 1991) mentions deforestation as a major impact in four out of six country reports . Whereas studies confirm that most (but only most) rural people do not cut live trees down for firewood (Joseph 1990a, Dewees 1989, Leach 1992:41), the situation in refugee camps, settlements and partly in areas of spontaneous refugee settlement is different: the Malthusian 'population shock' takes place, leaving no time to balance population densities and carrying capacities in terms of household fuel or to adjust cooking and eating patterns to scarcities. Large numbers of the population have to construct shelters, erect some kind of fencing and build kraals for their herds, if they managed to bring them from home. In terms of fuel and other wood related needs, a refugee camp is a combination of urban-size demand and rural technology levels. This refers to: The fuel type; rural areas use predominantly low-grade fuels such as wood, harvest residues or animal dung; urban areas or income classes within urban areas tend to switch to higher grade fuels from charcoal to kerosene to gas to electricity or use a combination of those.
Refugees & Host Environments
33
Thomas Hoerz
The stove type; if firewood and charcoal are used, city dwellers adopt improved stoves faster than rural populations. This is because indoor cooking is more widely used, cash income levels are higher and fuel is fully commoditised. In rural areas fuelwood is more often a free good, the dominant stove technology is the three stone fireplace. The supply system; urban areas have established supply channels, which exploit fuel from a large area. Motorised transport , leaving the city with manufactured goods often return with charcoal, a fleet of donkey- or oxcarts are engaged in satisfying urban demand. For refugee camps, the fuelwood is usually carried on foot, thus limiting the exploitation radius to not more than 15 km one way. Like other forest resources, wood for construction, fencing, craft or fuel are gathered not only for home use, but also to sell on the open market. Such practices are often the only way to earn cash income without threatening survival as by selling food rations (Jordan 1993:10). In areas with scarce resources and high numbers of refugees compared to the population, the rise in wood prices follows a sharp increase in demand. But with low opportunity costs for collection on the side of the refugees, the contrary is also possible: 'Changes in Malawian fuel-use are also contributing to the deforestation resulting from the war in Mozambique and the refugee influx. Refugee wood vendors have led to an effective fall in the price (value) of wood, and Malawians reported a consequent increase in fuel use as a result.' (Wilson 1989:89). In a study carried out in Sudanese refugee settlements in Uganda, Jordan (1993:4) stated that the reduction of tree cover could mostly be attributed to bush clearance for crop cultivation and charcoal production. In one settlement he estimated 12.000 m3 of annual consumption of wood for charcoal production, as opposed to less than 5.000 m3 for firewood consumption, of which the bulk was dead wood (ibid:9). Anotablefactor is the economic relations which develop under conditions of fuelwood scarcity and different degrees of access and control. McGregor et.al. (1991:81) reports of refugees collecting fuelwood for locals against payment and paying fees to collect for their own needs. While this can create valuable income generation opportunities for the able bodied among refugees and locals, those who are not strong enough to work or have other pressing demands on their time (such as single mothers with small children) usually suffer from the commoditization of formerly free wood resources. The speed with which deforestation can occur around camps is illustrated by Waldron (1995:34): 'By 1981, when most of the refugee camps had been established for three years [...] both refugee women and residents of Bender village were walking an average of 12 kms from the camp region to find relatively unexploited sources of firewood. [...] By the mid-1980s, most of the firewood was brought into these camps, and probably all the refugee camps in Somalia, by donkey cart or truck.
Refugees & Host Environments
34
Thomas Hoerz
Kibreab and others testify [...] that it was stripped of vegetation for a 40-km radius from the camps' (ibid:45). For further reading, especially on the interrelation between fuelwood needs and deforestation, both with a wide range of case studies, see Foley et.al. (1984), Leach and Mearns (1988) and Munslow et.al. (1988).
2.3.2 Loss of Grazing Land and Ground Cover
Degradation of range in refugee hosting areas can have severe impacts on the livelihood of local livestock keepers. Besides that, loss of ground cover may be a more important cause of soil erosion than deforestation. Jacobsen (1995) mentions three main ways this can happen: First, refugee camps are placed in dry season areas due to seemingly low population densities and the availability of water. Secondly, animals of refugees pose additional pressure on the grazing aggravated by the fact that they are kept stationary near the camp. Thirdly, land use practices of refugees (agriculture) might clash with prevailing land use practices (pastoralism) (see also Unruh 1993). The additional pressure of refugees' livestock has been described but never quantified in environmental impact assessments of refugee hosting areas. This might be because of methodological problems in measuring degradation of grazing lands. The ground cover changes, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, dramatically with the seasons and with the drought cycle and a short term consultant can only have a snapshot impression of the degree of degradation. Le Breton (1994:10) describes a rather unusual impact of refugee presence: '...the grass cover of the area has improved enormously due to the reduction in woody species competition.' This can be the case, where refugees bring only small numbers of livestock with them and/or where the additional water supply to refugees does not attract large herds from the local population. One must be careful, however, not to overestimate such positive effects. Under certain climatic and topographic conditions they can be reversed in the long run by an increase in erosion. Lassailly-Jacob (1994:13) reports on other positive impacts of bushclearing as encountered in the Ukwimi settlement of Mozambican refugees in Zambia, which was acknowledged by local farmers; the threat of livestock , especially cattle by Tse-Tse flies was greatly reduced and the incidence of game destroying the fields decreased. For further reading see Scoones (1988), an annotated bibliography on 'Sustainable Pastoralism in Africa'. On questions of ownership and control over grazing lands see Lane and Moorehead (1994).
Refugees & Host Environments
35
Thomas Hoerz
2.3.3 Depletion of Fall-Back Resources It is as simple as that: If refugees would have to rely solely on the rations they receive, they would die. (Henry 1995) Bush products (or forest products, fall-back resources, wild or gathered resources) are often the only way for refugees to complement their rations, which are not only monotonous, but also inadequate in micro-nutrients and vitamins. They can be gathered sometimes free of charge sometimes against collection fees or exchanged against rations. Ken Wilson, whose study on Mozambican refugees in Malawi contains the best case study in this field, notes: ' For refugees, lacking significant land resources of their own, it has proven to be a major source of food. Gathered resources include a large range of plants with edible leaves, tubers, fruits etc., mushrooms, a variety of insects, fish, rodents and larger game ' (Wilson 1989:51, Spitteler 1993:11). Bush products need not necessarily contribute significantly to the calorific intake but form a main part of refugees' relish, making the monotonous rations more attractive and help to maintain calorie intake, especially of elderly and sick people. The local population relies on wild or forest resources in times of scarcity of agricultural subsistence products, often during the ' hungry period' before the harvest. Some of these bush products are by no means free to be collected by everyone. Wilson (1989:52) identified four different types of land ownership among the local population with varying restriction in regard to bush resources. But restrictions vary also between the resources, eg some trees might be restricted, but their fruits not (see ibid 1989:53,54 Table 8: Access rights to wild resources and a list of commonly gathered products in the following pages, see also 91-93). It is difficult and probably harmful to separate the over-utilisation of fall-back resources from the problem of deforestation. Many of the utilized plants, mushrooms, insects etc. can only survive in the specific microclimate of forest or bush (Wi lson 1989:90). In a Zambian refugee hosting area, tensions between refugees and local population arose not so much because of the competition over fall-back resources, but over the gathering practices, which were considered unsustainable: refugees commercialised the gathering of these resources and used bush fires to collect rodents and insects with less effort , but at the same time destroying a great deal of the same resources including vegetation (Lassailly-Jacob 1994:9- 12) (see also 5.1). Aliteraturereview and on the issue of fall- back resources, with a wealth of information is provided by Scoones et.al. (1992) for further reading. It contains 942, mostly annotated references and a useful geographic index. See also Bardhan (1993); Campbell (1987); McGregor et.al. (1991) and Ostrom (1990).
Refugees & Host Environments
36
Thomas Hoerz
2.3.4 Degradation of Agricultural Lands
In agricultural refugee settlements, the biggest contributor to the degradation of agricultural lands seem to be the insufficient size of family plots o t practice rotation or fallow (see 1.5). This is aggravated by the fact that land distribution is rather inflexible i.e. a certain number of acres is given regardless of the family size or the quality of soil. (Lassailly-Jacob 1994:10, Christensen 1985:87). Lance and Lewis (1987:4) reported from Eastern Sudan that plot sizes were so small that the settlement refugees had to be resupplied with full rations after the first harvest failure. One wonders then if in this case the straight camp approach with some agriculture o t supplement the rations would not have been a more reliable solution for refugees. The sufficiency of plot sizes given to refugee families can be determined by a variety of factors including: Rainfall in terms of mean annual amount, distribution over the year and reliability from year to year. Soil quality like water absorption capacity, nutrients, organic matter, workability and topography of the land. Other climatic conditions like mean temperature and temperature extremes, wind, etc. Prevailing pest control problems like insects, fungi, weeds, game. Existing and potential marketing channels; if urban cash markets are accessible, smaller plots for more intensive horticulture may be sufficient. Family size and number of members able and willing to do farmwork. Terms of trade of agricultural products against essential industrial products. Integration of animals including the question of sources of fodder, procedures of dung use and animal draught. It is obvious, that the 'right' plot size is determined by such a complex framework of factors, that the decision cannot be placed upon a consultant or an agricultural officer. It must be the outcome of a thorough discussion process with those who have the experience of generations, namely the local farmers. In areas, where refugees can use land by means of sharecropping or leasing this has led to the expansion of total acreage under cultivation and thus o t a reduced fallow and/or intensification of cultivation, the latter even more when relatively cheap refugee labour made this attractive (Wilson 1989:88).
Refugees & Host Environments
37
Thomas Hoerz
2.3.5 Water Consumption and Water Pollution
Host governments tend to settle refugees or place refugee camps in areas of low population densities. In most countries, except for those, where current or previous insecurity has caused the indigenous population to leave their homes, low population densities reflect low eco-agricultural carrying capacities, specifically the lack of water (Harrell-Bond 1994:6). In most camps visited, human excreta disposal and waste water drainage system seem to be the two main factors which [...] favour the transmission of diseases (Rakotomalala 1990:2).
The provision of water in sufficient quality and quantity as the most important precondition for the refugees' well-being is a matter of common sense. As an aspect of the environment, water both in quantity and quality is the top priority of the survival environment for refugees and local population starting from the first days of a refugee influx . Water and sanitation are given comparatively little room in this survey, as they are largely technical areas which are covered by the publications of specialised agencies such as CARE, OXFAM and UNICEF. Yet, and this is difficult to understand, there is ample evidence that camps and settlements are still opened without ensuring the water supply first (CARE/ODA 1994; Harrell- Bond 1994; Jacobsen 1995; Demeke and Lemma 1993, Rakotomalala and Male 1993). The immediate danger in such situations is less an environmental issue but lies in the immediate threat to human survival. Neefjes (1995) reports of hundreds of lives lost in Tanzania because the transfer of Rwandan refugees was ordered several days before pumping installations had been completed. Besides this immediate danger to refugees, there is also an immediate environmental threat to the local population. When large numbers of people are undersupplied with water, they will turn inevitably to existing water sources or stocks which had sustained a small population, but are now overwhelmed and exhausted or polluted within short periods. Depletion of existing ground water resources for too high numbers of refugees in the long run is common and poses a threat to the livelihood environment of the local population more severe in its impact than any other slow onset impact. Traditional water sources like shallow wells, pans or dams can be connected to the ground water. The provision of pumped water, even though convenient in the short run can threaten these sustainable low-tech water sources. Failure to sustain asecure water supply will inevitably lead to a secondary migration of the local population. The only solution to this problem is contingency planning for those areas likely to receive refugee influxes with clear indications of the water supply potential. This needs to be translated into ceilings of refugee numbers which can be settled in the specific area.
Refugees & Host Environments
38
Thomas Hoerz
Water provision in problem areas which simply do not have sufficient water reserves will inevitably meet natural limits. Trying to solve the situation by providing water with tankers is both wasteful and dangerous from a health point of view. Besides that, frequent breakdowns of lorries and fuel shortages tend to cause an undersupply for refugees. Demeke and Lemma (1993) report , for example, on the plight of Somali refugees in Eastern Ethiopia, who survived for two years on five litres of water per capita per day. Water pollution, in contrast, is manageable given the commitment, participation , expertise and time (Nembrini and Etienne n.d.). The cholera epidemic in Goma 1994 has shown again that this is far from common practice. Pollution of rivers can have negative effects far beyond the refugee hosting area. Rakotomalala and Male (1993:10), for example, report on latrine buckets being emptied in rivers which poses a serious threat to downstream populations for an unknown distance. As water supply, sanitation, health and the environment are so closely interlinked with tasks of site planning, the question of coordination of the various agencies is vital to concentrate scarce resources on priority areas and to balance water provision, water purification, sanitation and environmental health education in the most productive way (Rakotomalala 1990:2, Nembrini and Etienne n.d.:3) (see also 1.6, 11. and 13.)
2.3.6 Solid Waste
Insufficiently managed solid waste usually does not pose as immediate a health risk as lack of sanitation. But over time, unmanaged waste will attract disease vectors like rats and insects. One result which should not be underestimated is the depressing effect a filthy environment can have on the residents of a camp or settlement . In densely settled urban refugee camps like Gaza it is the lack of proper garbage disposal systems which causes major concern (UNRWA 1993:69, Benyasut 1990). In RAPPORT (1991:7) a 'border camp cleaning up programme' in Eastern Turkey is described, with costs of US$ 257.000, as 'a minimal gesture of reparation to the local villages. It does not replace the trees and bushes used by the refugees for firewood during their stay and the question of who assumes responsibility for the long-term restoration of the environment, and what can be done in order to prevent or minimize the impact of other such influxes - even in emergencies - still need o t be addressed'. Frequent complaints among herders in refugee hosting areas of Kenya relate to the proliferation of plastic bags littering camp surroundings and several kilometres around them as the bags are carried by strong winds. Cows and goats eating these bags often die from a blockage of the intestines.
Refugees & Host Environments
39
Thomas Hoerz
In humid regions, plastic particles which reach surface water can cause death of fish, larger plastic pieces can accumulate in soil and waterways and impede the functions of these ecosystems (Dennis 1993:27). Containers which hold rainwater such as plastic boxes or tins can be breeding grounds for malaria vectors. Dennis (1993:27) proposes the use of biodegradable containers or containers of high value which can be reused or sold. Thinnner plastic bags can be collected and reused, eg for insulation material in construction or in haybox cookers (see 10.3.3). Generally, as in industrialized societies, avoiding garbage is better than disposing of it. In urban areas of the developing world recycling systems are often highly diversified and effective. Exploring urban markets for the recycling of solid wastes from refugee camps can form an income generation activity, provided that transport costs make it feasible. Proper disposal of solid waste, as do all environmental activities, needs the combined input of expertise (how to dispose), participation (problem identification, voluntary clean-ups), education (in schools, for adults) and income generation (professional garbage collectors) for success.
2.3.7 Threats to Protected Areas
Wherever applicable, traditionally protected areas should be identified and their continued protection supported by spreading the information and providing additional means of protection (see Le Breton 1994:56).
One of the camps of Goma, Zaire, was placed in the middle of a National Park which is under special UNESCO protection as a World Natural Heritage. This shows a clear lack of communication among the planners and policy makers. ' Lack of information and poor coordination among the related government ministries [!] have sometimes led to the establishment of refugee sites in or near to specially protected areas' (UNHCR 1994a:6). Kimani (1994:2) reports of regular encroachment of refugees in the Virunga National Park just five kilometres away from one of the camps. This happened usually before sunrise, when rangers are not yet at work. Leach (1991:18) questions the threat to wildlife in Sierra Leone by refugee communities, especially regarding the gun hunting of large mammals. The latter contributed only 2% of the animal protein intake whereas trap-hunted crop pests like rats, cane rats and monkeys made up for the bulk of hunted animals. Threats to elephants, large antelopes and rare monkeys could more likely be attributed to the abundance of weapons and the reduced control over trophy hunters, this being rather an effect of the ongoing civil war and the state of insecurity than the presence of refugees.
Refugees & Host Environments
40
Thomas Hoerz
Whenever possible and, at the latest, immediately after the emergency phase has been overcome, refugees must be settled sufficient distance from protected areas to prevent authorities from having to make the difficult decision o as t whom or what should have the priority: wildlife or human beings.
2.3.8 "Pull Effects"
Refugee settlements, especially large camps, can have a pull-effect on the local population. Kenyan camps at the Somali border were estimated to host one third Somalis of Kenyan nationality. For drought victims the camps were, in the absence of famine relief, often the only option left for survival. These 'drought refugees' add o t the pressure on natural resources posed by the other refugees. The same holds true for Nepal: 'With the establishment of the camps and opening of roads, local people moved into the camps and the nearby forest areas, leading to additional population pressure on the limited resources and increased deterioration of forest and pasture lands.' (Caminada 1992:5)
Refugees & Host Environments
41
Thomas Hoerz
3.
Environmental Impact Assessments - Limits and Potential Refugee impacts and assistance should be evaluated in terms of costs and benefits for all interest groups - refugees, hosts, governments, donors and agencies. (Zetter 1995b:34)
While 'the World Bank [and most of the other international and bilateral organisations] issued a directive calling for environmental assessment (EA) of all lending operations' (Helin and Tamondong-Helin 1991:5), the major organisations dealing with refugee assistance carry out only ex-post facte analyses: environmental impact assessments (EIA) which do not necessarily result in the required follow-up action. The lack of pro-active EAs is understandable for sudden, unforeseen emergencies like the Rwanda crisis. Yet it is not unrealistic for potential host countries to examine the possible environmental impacts of refugees (and the resulting effects for the local population) for certain areas in close proximity to the border. Such contingency planning could focus on priority areas like settlement policy, water, fuel, accessibility by road and air and protected areas. Carried out in close cooperation with the potential host country, political acceptance of selected areas would be ensured and valuable time gained during the onset of an emergency. The Programme and Technical Support Section (PTSS) and the Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs , both of UNHCR have produced a substantial number of ElAs (eg Caminada 1992, Ketel 1994a, 1994b, Finkel 1994). Unfortunately UNHCR does not have the resources to freely distribute these mission reports , so their circulation remains limited.The 'Manual for Environmental Surveys and Studies' (UNHCR 1994b:7) provides a useful, yet brief overview on ElAs in the various stages of refugee assistance:
ii iii iv
Emergency Environmental Reporting Environmental Survey on Establishment of a Refugee Site Environmental Monitoring during the Site Operation Phase Environmental Studies for the Special Projects
The fields of investigation include: Vegetation and energy supply (note the presumed interrelation and the negligence of other reasons for deforestation!) water resources soil conservation in the surrounding area protection from sand and dust storms flood and erosion control endemic diseases and parasites latrines and sewage household wastewater solid waste collection and disposal.
Refugees & Host Environments
42
Thomas Hoerz
A comprehensive attempt to set standards for future ElAs in the form of a 'Rapid Environmental Appraisal' was the CARE/ODA (1994) mission to Rwandese refugee camps in Tanzania. A checklist of 'Potential Environmental Impacts of the Inflow of Refugees' is provided in ibid, Annex B. A well written and informative but rather conventional EIA for Sudanese refugee hosting areas in Uganda was produced by Jordan (1993) on behalf of UNHCR. An outstanding EIA of Mozambican refugee hosting areas in Zimbabwe was conducted by Le Breton (1994) during the final stages of the biggest repatriation operation ever undertaken by UNHCR. First, it is a final analysis, examining the disastrous results of a prolonged stay of refugees. Secondly, it uses a 'combination of ecological and social research techniques' (ibid:5) which goes beyond simply asking questions, but organises extensive village meetings using methods of participatory rural appraisal (PRA). And thirdly, the proposed rehabilitation measures have a clear livelihood approach: 'The conclusion is that any rehabilitation programme must account for the future needs of the local communities, and aim o t meet these, rather than attempting a simplified habitat restoration. The emphasis would therefore be placed on introducing systems of improved woodland and rangelands management' (ibid:5). Dennis (1993:20) suggests an 8-point outline of rapid environmental assessments and quotes from UNHCR (n.d.a:3) a set of 'common problems associated with assessments'. One is the failure to involve local communities and refugees (both men and women!); another is the failure to organize a multi-agency approach ot assessment (local centres of competence, refugee representatives, NGOs, government and the UN system) and finally the poor timing of assessment (too early, too late, only one visit when multiple visits are required). So far, nothing substantial has been written for guidance on how to (and how not to) conduct environmental appraisals for refugee situations, except the UNHCR Manual (UNHCR 1994b). We therefore still rely on manuals which were not written for situations of forced migration. In development work, for large-scale technology projects as well as for rural projects, guidelines for EIA have been developed which need careful translation for adaptation to refugee situations (see for example Ahmad and Sammy 1985; Nabasa et.al. 1995; Neefjes 1993 or ODA 1992).
3.1
The Difficult Task of Environmental Accounting: Who Bears the Costs?
Environmental accounting is concerned with 'translating the value of environmental goods and services into the common unit of money, so that they can be compared with each other and with other non-environmental goods' (Markandya and Richardson 1992:8). Basically, environmental economics are trying to develop one yardstick - there are others as well - to express or quantify damage or loss.
Refugees & Host Environments
43
Thomas Hoerz
To do so, two approaches are common: First, to attach a current market price to an environmental good. Often environmental change has to be translated into commercially quantifiable units like loss of yields, additional labour input etc. Secondly, the affected population is asked to value losses of natural resources or environmental change by means of questionnaires, interviews and appraisal sessions (Markandya 1992:142). To my knowledge, nothing like that has ever been done in a refugee hosting area, even though expressing losses in monetary terms, based on consistent valuation methods, could constitute a powerful message. Instead, ElAs often give a 'guesstimate' of the costs incurred by environmental degradation or aspects of it: ' ... an immediate cost burden to Tanzanian villagers of the order of US$ 10 million has been estimated for 1994 alone [...] massive loss of trees and the loss of 3.000 mt of food (including maize seed) have been estimated at US$ 1.3 million.' Green (1994:2) It is often difficult to identify the source or the methods by which these cost estimates were arrived at. It is important , however, to determine who will bear the identified environmental costs. Is it the nomads? Those with many animals or those whose herds no longer exist? Is it the men or the women? The big families or rather the singles or small families? Is it possible at all to attribute costs to a certain group or is it the society as a whole who has to face the loss? The same question is to be asked for possible benefits: whose business booms with the arrival of refugees? Who gets the jobs and who loses them? For example, in areas of Tanzania hosting Rwandan refugees, 'by far the greatest on-going cost burden will be carried by women and girls in terms of additional workload in re-planting crops, collecting wood fuel and water. A total workload of 5,000 woman years per year has been estimated, [...]. Most gains came from employment with relief agencies, banana trade and bar sales to refugees, services and house rents to the expatriate community. [...] Banana and beer sales are predominantly the preserve of men (as are all the tree crops in this region) and it is possible, that these benefits might fail to accrue to women household members. Additionally, most relief agency employees are men.' (Green 1994:4,5) There is a developing body of literature on ways of measuring the monetary value of the environment or of its degradation. The key question here is the point of view. A government forester will have a totally different yardstick to assess the losses incurred by the presence of a refugee population in terms of forest loss, than a local farmer or a consultant of an assistance agency. As in any other field of environmental and developmental intervention, without close involvement of the affected populations the analysis will be distorted and not of great value. For further reading in the field of environmental economics, see for example Barbier (ed) (1993); Bromley (ed) (1995); Pearce and Turner (1990); Winpenny (1991).
Refugees & Host Environments
44
Thomas Hoerz
3.2
Measurement vs. Perception Outside Experts and Indigenous Knowledge Experiences have shown clearly that there are advantages to methods that are flexible rather than rigid, visual rather than verbal, based on group rather than individual analysis and that compare rather than measure. (Chambers and Guijt 1995:5)
All too often , models used to quantify degradation are simplistic, single issue related and not locally adapted. For example fuelwood consumption (based on questionable guesstimates or one-day measurements) is often translated into hectares deforested (Black 1994:108, Leach 1992:43), ignoring the gathering of dry wood, the changes in collection radius, the adaptation in fuel consumption and developments on the fuelwood market (Dewees 1989:1161). The loss of trees, for example, can be precisely measured and described by foresters. A comprehensive analysis of the situation, however, needs to go beyond the description of effects caused by a refugee influx and to design activities to counteract those effects. Environmental change and rural livelihood form a complex interactive system that we hardly begin to understand. So far, we rely on o t complement what we have measured. the perceptions of affected populations As an entry point, we need: Adescriptionof the effects of (natural) resource degradation on the poorest people [and other social strata of the population]. Adescriptionof the effects of poverty on (local, natural) resources. Adescriptionof traditional (local) resource management practices [and their dynamics]. (Neefjes 1993:12) 'Rural people view environmental impact in terms of a loss of their own resources, rather than as threats o t planetary well-being' (Jacobsen 1994:39). It is the disparity between the EIA of a short time consultant and the assessment of a series of meetings of local elders and women regarding the environmental impact of their 'guests', that makes the difference between 'measured' and 'perceived' impacts. Sensitive expertise could be defined as giving all affected groups a voice, especially those who are usually not heard. Neefjes (1993:7) condensed this approach in the question 'what resources are important for you', which can ultimately only be answered by the various social strata, by men and women of the affected population. The understanding of local knowledge systems regarding the environment is vital in all stages of the project cycle. An example of such knowledge systems for drylands in Africa is given in Nyamir (1990). Key questions for an EIA in a refugee affected area include: what were the most pressing ecological and natural resource related livelihood or development problems in the area before the arrival of refugees? Are they related to increasing o t lack of population densities? Are they related to poverty? Are they related
Refugees & Host Environments
45
Thomas Hoerz
control over these resources? If one or more of the latter questions can be answered with yes, it can be assumed that the influx of refugees further aggravated the problems and has severe impacts on the well-being of refugees and the livelihood of the local communities.
3.3
ElAs: Report or Process?
One EIA in the beginning of an emergency, on which all subsequent planning and implementation is built, is clearly insufficient. UNHCR (1994b:4) suggests that 'collection and assessment of environmental information should be conducted at several significant phases of refugee assistance operations, in order to anticipate and prevent environmental hazards. [...] The reporting and assessment requirements relate to the emergency phase, the selection and design of refugee site and subsequent site management, including care and maintenance and local settlement programmes.' The undertaking of successive ElAs are definitely a step forward. But even a ' Rapid Environmental Appraisal for Refugee Situations' as suggested and described in detail by CARE/ODA ( 1994:69-77) involving the hiring of consultants, carrying out the field research, report writing and using the assessment to lobby for funding, will take months before findings can have an impact by being translated into action. Thiadens (1995) remarks that 'in a refugee situation where immediate action is to be undertaken to mitigate environmental degradation, the time spent on baseline studies, research and planning should be kept to a minimum. Some of the surveys may have been too academic and overlap existed between various surveys.' An initial emergency environmental reporting which is 'a process of quick field observation and subsequent consultation with environmental/forestry authorities of the host government, to assess any imminent threats [...] and to identify immediate natural resource needs such as firewood and shelter material.' (UNHCR 1994a:5) is indispensable. The emergency survey will be useless if funding procedures are not flexible. Each refugee situation should have an environmental emergency fund which allows to translate initial findings into an emergency response. Subsequently, a research team could take over to institutionalise continuous monitoring and assessment of environmental problems. Such a permanent focal point would be able to feed back and discuss findings with the implementing agencies, local or refugee initiatives or government departments (Harrell-Bond 1994) (see also 14.2).
Refugees & Host Environments
46
Thomas Hoerz
4.
Victims,Target Groups and Participants Language is powerful . The terms used to refer to people affected [...] reveal attitudes about them. Aid agencies have called them "victims", "survivors", "recipients", "clients" and the "target population". Each of these terms implies different things. [...] However, all imply that the aid giver is the active party . No one ever develops anyone else. People and societies develop themselves. External agencies can help, but the people who live in the situation must take ultimate responsibility, and they gain the advantages or suffer from the mistakes of their, and donor's action. They are, fundamentally, the "participants", not just in projects or programs, but in development. (Anderson and Woodrow 1989:61)
When choosing to concentrate on groups within potential participants it is important to ensure that the most vulnerable groups benefit most. But the betteroff groups might have capacities which can be successfully harnessed to bring an assistance project to a sustainable level, thus benefitting all participants . They can act as role models, contact persons with potential donors, the early adopters of new technologies or even providers of capital (Anderson and Woodrow 1989:64). Aframeworkfor analysing capacities and vulnerabilities is provided in Andersson and Woodrow (1989:9-25).
4.1
Refugees and Local Population as one Target Group ?
Most refugees in the camps are idle. [...] Men try to fill their time with talking, playing games and sometimes drinking. The boredom leads often to misunderstandings and conflicts between refugees. [...] Projects to give refugees the opportunity to get engaged in some sort of activities are recommended. (Caminada 1992:8) Cliched views of refugees like the above are prone to divide refugees and locals into two distinct groups. On one side the refugees who don't know what to do all day, being provided with all they need, on the other side the local population, struggling to survive by their own means and being robbed of their resource base by the presence of refugees. Many authors stress that the local population must be fully integrated in the environmental projects and other activities undertaken by the aid providers. There is an inherent danger in this objective related to the uncertainty of the refugees' future. Whereas the local population can benefit from training programmes provided for the refugees, the hosts' situation demands a more future-oriented and long-term strategy. Whether it is setting up a stove production unit, erecting erosion control structures or planting trees in rehabilitation sites, refugees cannot possibly have the same stake in these undertakings as the local population, unless there is a strong that they will be allowed o t settle where they are. Refugees & Host Environments
47
Thomas Hoerz
o t integrate all possible As much as environmental projects should strive participants , it would be self-deception to expect both groups being equal in their response to various components of the programme. Refugees might judge what a o t its 'portability ' or opportunities to earn income, programme can offer according whereas the local population will judge a programme for what it can contribute here and now to achieve practical and lasting results. Levelling project approaches o t suit both refugees and local population can mean not taking full advantage of capacities of the local population and forgetting one of the major vulnerabilities of rf projects refugees, namely the state of uncertainty they are in. The challengeo o t include refugees and local working in the field of environment would be population in all the undertakings of the project while tapping their different capacities and addressing their specific vulnerabilities.
4.2
Hidden Winners and Hidden Losers
Not all groups among refugees and local population suffer or suffer in the same way through environmental degradation and the depletion of CPRs. Assumptions which ignore the complexity of socio-economic conditions such as: '...since the camp is perfectly homogeneous with neither social hierarchy ...' (Kamara 1992) are less than helpful in understanding capacities and vulnerabilities. Chambers (1986) aptly phrased the title of his excellent article 'Hidden Losers? The Impact of Rural Refugees and Refugee Programs on Poorer hosts' (added emphasis). Some of the key aspects of his argument include refugee centrism: the humanitarian agencies working in refugee affected areas are more concerned about refugees than hosts, in the case of UNHCR by mandate. Refugee literature widely neglects the situation of poorer and more vulnerable hosts (ibid:246). The main reason, why refugees might be welcomed is their offering comparatively cheap (farm) labour. But in the last decades arable land has become an increasingly scarce resource, while unskilled labour is abundant. The losers in o t complement such a scenario are poorer locals, who rely on seasonal labour insufficient farm returns (ibid:250). If refugees receive food rations, their opportunity costs for labour are lower, enabling them to undercut the already low rural wages (ibid:251). The depletion of CPRs like firewood, water, bush resources etc. affects those more who are less mobile, have more cash and generally rely more on these resources for survival. (ibid:253) The better-off among the hosts can benefit from the presence of refugees. Donkey cart and truck owners make good business when distances to collect firewood increase. Those with money are in a better position to 'negotiate' with forest authorities, if access to forests is restricted. Those with larger herds can employ herders to move the animals out of the affected areas. Those who own private water sources like dams, pans, shallow wells or even boreholes can make profit from water scarcity.
Refugees & Host Environments
48
Thomas Hoerz
4.3
Women's Special Capacities and Vulnerabilities
For a woman living in a rural area of a developing country awareness [of environmental degradation] comes forcefully and in concrete terms - when she notices that she has to walk further each day to get firewood, that it takes more time and effort to get water because so many sources had dried up or were too polluted to use. She would not have to be very old to remember that it was not like this when she was young. (Smyke 1991:44) How do we design and implement projects that integrate women and acknowledge the differences between men's and women's economic and social roles in ways that support the development of everyone's capacities? (Anderson and Woodrow 1989:66) The dominant role women play in using or overusing natural resources and their importance as participants in alleviating negative environmental impacts is a theme that runs through all considerations of environmental impact of refugees and corresponding mitigation efforts . Their role in defining the core problems and designing appropriate activities should be as prominent as their participation during implementation. As gatherers of bush products, fetchers of firewood and water, responsible for cooking and the well- being of children and often builders of shelter there is hardly any aspect of environmental concern, in which women do not play a key role. In addition women form the majority of the affected population in most refugee situations. Increasingly, the literature focuses on refugee women as not a 'special', but as the major target group of refugee assistance (Forbes Martin 1991; Refugees 1995). Refugees and the environment attracted the interest of research and policy makers only in recent years. Under the somewhat misleading heading of 'ecofeminism', researching the interrelation of women and the environment, a number of widely cited books were published (eg Braidotti et.al.1994; Dankelman and Davidson 1988; Rodda 1991; Shiva 1989, 1994; Sontheimer 1991). But there is not a single publication so far, which focuses specifically on refugee women and their relation to the host environment. An unpublished paper of Mutambuki (1995), titled 'Refugee Women and the Environment: Continued Marginalization' is a first attempt o t close this gap. The fact that women play this major role does not necessarily mean that they are automatically major participants in environmental projects. There are many pseudo-practical reasons why women may not find themselves among the beneficiaries of employment or training opportunities : The literacy rate is usually lower among women then among men (Davidson and Myers 1992:6); foreign language skills tend o t be found among men; men's skills are more geared towards the cash economy, while women 's productive capabilities are usually destined for home use.
Refugees & Host Environments
49
Thomas Hoerz
In addition, there is the important 'bias of policy makers and aid workers, who continue to consider the male-headed household as the norm, even where female headed households predominate' (Hall 1990:93). The author therefore argues that 'a more effective strategy clearly entails, as a first step, identifying women refugees as the primary target group (added emphasis) (ibid:94). But the other extreme is also possible where, like in many development projects, well-intended activities without an income component may overburden women. Identifying basic capacities such as time for additional activities among the different groups of women is an important first step to involve women in a realistic way. From a project policy point of view, clear guidelines referring to women when selecting 'beneficiaries' can be a further step to ensure women 's participation : An overall quota for women in the total number of participants ; women should never be automatically excluded from any project activity; priority for single mothers; priority for woman graduates of adult literacy and numeracy classes. (after Smawfield 1994:38) The intrinsic danger of 'women-centred policies is over-generalisation which leaves no room for individual and sensitive approaches. Women are often defined as a single target group or even 'minority ' group, whereas men are divided into more meaningful categories such as nomads and urban residents, skilled and unskilled, literate and illiterate etc. In some cases 'Concepts of vulnerabilities were found to be applied indiscriminately so that able- bodied women and widows were lumped together with the aged, disabled and handicapped, and their energies channelled into traditional, marginal and unproductive welfare activities' (ECA 1984, quoted in Hall 1990:92). Few authors strive to understand the life of refugee women as a whole but concentrate only on certain aspects of it like 'health', 'sexual violence' or ' income'. Forbes Martin ( 1992) and the unpublished thesis by Gosling (1992) are exceptions. The latter was exploring the daily life of refugee women in Zambia in a case study; one feels tempted to conclude that research should more often be driven by genuine interest, even curiosity and compassion than by the strive to gain deep insight into narrow issues. Oxfam has recently published a range of readers, the 'Oxfam Focus on Gender Series'. Interesting, as an introduction to the field of refugee women and environment are 'Women and the Environment' (Reardon 1993), 'Women and Emergencies' (Walker 1994) and 'Women and Conflict' (O'Connell 1993).
Women and Environmental Health AWHO report from 1984 estimates that women who cook on open fires in closed rooms are inhaling as much benzo-a-pyrene (a carcinogen) as if they smoked 20 packs of cigarettes a day. Exposure to the smoke and toxic gases of cooking is probably the most serious occupational health hazard known today. (Smyke 1991:47)
Refugees & Host Environments
50
Thomas Hoerz
Due to their domestic responsibilities women often have a closer relationship to the environment leading to a more intensive exposure to environmental scarcities and hazards. Sims (1994) provides an anthology for environmentally induced health hazards for women in the developing world, albeit without special reference to refugee women. Another WHO publication on environmental health is dealing explicitly with 'Indoor Air Pollution from Biomass Fuel' (WHO 1992), one of the gravest health hazards in the developing world, causing upper respiratory infections which are a major killer of infants. Being overburdened by the tasks of cuing for water and carrying fuelwood over long distances can lead to serious health problems of women and girls. Fuel carriers in Ethiopia, for example, 'suffer from frequent falls, bone fractures, eye problems, headaches, rheumatism, anaemia, chest, back and internal disorders and heart failure' (Rodda 1991:88). Women in Somali refugee camps in Kenya listed snakes and scorpions, sunstroke, dizziness and vomiting after return from fuel gathering trips as the major health hazards which added to the problem of violent attacks (see below). The fact that five to six million children are dying every year in developing countries from diarrhoeal diseases alone (Sontheimer 1991:119) indicates the direct and strong interest women have in improving standards of environmental health. In refugee camps waterborne diseases still take a high toll in almost all emergencies. The dominant role women play in the provision of water and the role they should play in the planning and management of water sources and environmental or basic health programmes is elaborated in chapter 1.6, 2.3.5 and 11. For further reading see Cleaver and Elson (1995); Davidson and Myers (1992:40); OXFAM (1995:688ff); Rodda (1991:51,129); Sontheimer (1991:119).
Women Victims of Violence Aspecificproblem in some refugee hosting areas is the exposure of refugee women to sexual violence by other refugees, the local population, combatants or ex-combatants from both sides and even members of the local police or army. Rapes of Somali refugee women in Kenya and women in Rwandan refugee camps have reached horrifying dimensions. In situations of uprootedness, breakdown of social norms and the violent climate created by war, refugee women are in a specially vulnerable situation. This can be related to environmental issues: Many of the rape cases happen while women are outside the settlements in search for firewood or other forest products (Omaar and de Waal 1993:13ff; Musse 1994:17ff). Whether sexual violence is the expression of environmental conflicts between refugees and locals has not been established, but cannot be excluded. During the collection of firewood, other bush products and water women also run a higher risk of walking into mine infested areas, especially in areas close to the borders (Forbes Martin 1991:8).
Refugees & Host Environments
51
Thomas Hoerz
Where the fear to do so denies them access to certain areas, the already difficult task of gathering free goods becomes even more desperate. Measures described under 9.3.1 'fuel collection support ' can contribute to reducing exposure to sexual violence and mines outside the camps. Violent attacks on refugee women at night within the camp areas are frequent in the anonymity of large camps. Creating smaller units by means of hedges is a way to reduce ambushes on refugee dwellings at night which also involves positive environmental side effects. A fenced area can be closed at night, patrolled and strangers can be identified (see 10.3 'fences for security').
Refugees & Host Environments
52
Thomas Hoerz
5.
From Conflict to Cooperation and Participation If the Sudanese [refugees] are to be protected, it is essential to make every effort to ensure that the project serves as a bridge between the locals and the newcomers. (Harrell-Bond 1994:27) "The only communication we have with the Sudanese is money." a frustrated Eritrean refugee quoted in Bascom (1993:330)
Understanding patterns of conflict, cooperation and participation is a precondition for any intervention concerning the host- refugee relations. Every refugee situation will be different and generalisations are at best useless but mostly harmful. Certain variables and factors, however, emerge regularly which can assist in analysing the situation on the ground. A number of authors have written extensively on refugee - host relations and the patterns of interaction arising (eg Bascom 1993; Black and Robinson (eds) 1993; Black 1994; Chambers 1982, 1986; Harrell-Bond 1986, 1994; Kibreab 1990; Leach 1992; Kuhlmann 1990, 1994; Rogge (ed) 1987; RPN 1994; ) (see also 1.3).
5.1
Environmental Conflicts and Resource Competition
An environmental conflict is a conflict caused by the environmental scarcity of a resource, that means: caused by a human-made disturbance of its normal regeneration rate. Environmental scarcity can result from the overuse of a renewable resource or from the overstrain of the ecosystem's sink capacity, that is pollution. Both can reach the stage of a destruction of the space of living. Conflicts caused by physical, geopolitical or socio-economic resource scarcity are not environmental conflicts but traditional conflicts of resource distribution. (Libiszewski 1992:6) One of the three priority objectives of the newly formulated environmental policy of UNHCR is 'to avoid conflicts / disputes over the sharing of vegetation and other natural resources by refugees and the local community , which could jeopardize the continuing use of land as a refugee site' (UNHCR 1994:9). The problem is recognized: many of the hostile acts between refugees and local population are a result of diminishing renewable resources or, as discussed below, a result of frustration over the destruction of CPRs. But resource competition does not only threaten smooth operations of a refugee camp, it can endanger the livelihood of thousands of local people. The securing of the livelihood of the host population should be among the top priority objectives of refugee assistance. Pekny and Martone (1993) talk explicitly of the human right o t an intact environment. To ensure this, the right of affected communities to participate in planning, decision making and implementation must be ensured (ibid:17).
Refugees & Host Environments
53
Thomas Hoerz
Among others, Lassailly-Jacob (1994:18) has questioned the ecological reasons of such conflicts and has pointed out that it was mostly the planning and implementing mistakes by agencies, which created resentment. Kamara (1992:12) reports , that under extreme fuelwood scarcities in Sierra Leonean refugee camps, 'confrontations with land owners for wood' was by far the dominant fuelwood supply constraint. Generally, environmental reasons only contribute to violent conflicts, which are based on socio-economic, ethnic or political reasons (Libiszewski 1992:11). Percival and Homer-Dixon (1995:4) agree in view of the Rwandan crisis in 1994: 'these [environmental] scarcities contribute to violence only under certain circumstances'. 'In fact, the basic causes of conflicts are not unequal distribution of, or the access to renewable resources. These are secondary problems dependent on the major sources of conflict, namely the anthropogenic degradation of air, water and soil / vegetation. Not the "common goods", but the "common bads" are the casus belli, and increasingly so' (Bachler 1994:2). In accordance with this, Lassailly-Jacob (1994:12) argues that it is not so much the competition over scarce resources which is reason to conflict, but grievances over their unsustainable use or even their destruction like lighting bush fires to catch rodents and insects. Caminada (1992:5) reports that whereas fuelwood collection did not cause any friction between refugees and locals, the (illegal) cutting of timber for sale led to regular confrontations. The link between environmental- or resource degradation and conflict is poorly researched for refugee hosting areas. But typically enough, case studies of ongoing environmental conflicts seem to concentrate on those areas which are major producers and receivers of refugees, notably the Horn of Africa and SubSaharan Africa in general. Two series of publications are interesting for a wider discussion on environmental conflict. First 'The Project on Environment, Population and Security' (Homer- Dixon et.al. 1995a, 1995b; Gizewski and Homer- Dixon 1995, Percival and Homer- Dixon 1995). Secondly the 'Environment and Conflicts Project' (Boge 1992, Libiszewski 1992, Suliman 1992, Hafiz and Islam 1993, Bachler 1994). Boge (1992) provides a useful analytical framework, not only for academic discourse on the topic, but also as a tool to develop field research methods in areas of potential environmental conflict. Bennet (ed) (1991) provides a number of case studies written by Sahelian writers. They deal with environmental conflicts in Sub-Saharan Africa , including a chapter on displacement (ibid:113). The conclusion for refugee situations are complex, but could be condensed in two hypotheses:
Refugees & Host Environments
54
Thomas Hoerz
1.
In situations of (violent) host - refugee conflict, environmental grounds for conflicts are possible or even likely. These can be in most cases related to refugee - induced degradation of the environment rather than to competition over natural resources. Assistance in mitigating environmental stress can therefore be part of the conflict resolution strategy.
2.
Environmental causes for conflict have usually only a trigger effect. To avoid environmentally induced conflict, environmental mitigation activities are not sufficient. They must be coupled with additional measures of conflict resolution.
5.2
UNHCR - NGO - Host Government Cooperation
The following preconditions are necessary for fruitful cooperation between UNHCR, NGOs and host governments: A mutual understanding of the goals, ie the wellbeing of refugees and local population in the host area, the capacity of the host government and UNHCR to coordinate or at least monitor ongoing activities and, above all, clear arrangements between all three parties concerning spheres of responsibility and accountability. In a situation like Goma, Zaire, where 76 NGOs 'compete' for refugees, a crumbling government cannot play any significant role, nor can UNHCR even pretend to be able to effectively coordinate and monitor the situation (USCR 1995:11). But in many countries it is clearly the lack of communication (or the will to communicate) which excludes host governments. Refugee camps and settlements are all too often regarded as 'autonomous zones' governed by the aid providers. The field of Government - NGO relation is both complex and controversial with problems not restricted to refugee situations (see also McKay and Gow 1990). Environmental mitigation, especially if the livelihood of the local population is at stake, goes beyond the concern of refugee assistance. On the international level UNDP, UNEP, and others are or should be involved. This could be in the form of funds (for development oriented activities from UNDP, for clearly environmental projects from UNEP and so on.). The same applies to host government ministries. Involvement of the forestry authorities is indispensable, if a forestry component is planned, the Ministry of Education must be consulted for including environmental education in the curricula of refugee affected areas etc.. (see also German 1986). An example of a promising approach is the RARP (Refugee Areas Rehabilitation Programme) in Eastern Nepal, where over 86.000 Bhutanese refugees live in eight camps situated in remote but densely populated area. The programme explicitly does not only concentrate on environmental rehabilitation, but includes school-, roads- and water schemes.
Refugees & Host Environments
55
Thomas Hoerz
Central government, local authorities, the communities, international agencies and local NGOs form a network to implement small scale projects (UNHCR n.d.b). In the refugee hosting areas of Western Tanzania (Kagera region) an Environmental Task Force was set up and is operating along an Environmental Action Plan with the participation of UNHCR, implementing agencies and various Ministries concerned with environmental protection and rehabilitation (Environmental Task Forces for Ngara and Karagwe Districts 1994) . According to CARE/ODA (1994:43) this model is appropriate for coordinating environmental activities. The question though remains open, to which degree and by what means the local population and the refugees have access to planning, decision making, implementation and evaluation. The Refugee Participation Network No. 17 (RPN 1994) contains a range of articles concerned with participation and coordination (see Bennet 1994; DeWolf 1994; Hasci 1994; Needham 1994). Refugee Participation Network No.19 (RPN 1995b) focuses on the delicate relation between NGOs and host governments (see AdiinYaansah and Harrell-Bond 1995; Bennet 1995; Brabant 1995; Duffield 1995; McDowell 1995 and Zetter 1995a.
5.3
Participation of Refugees and Local Population
Too often uprooted people have to tolerate help that robs them of their right to selfdirection, afraid to speak out lest they should lose the material aid on which they depend for survival. [...] The collective capacity of violated people to become part of the solution to their problems is not only an indispensable resource but also an indispensable right. (DeWolf 1994:4) Refugee participation probably has got the worst ratio of rhetoric to reality of any concept in the refugee field. (Forbes Martin and Mends-Cole 1992:11) DeWolf (1994:4) points out that the PARinAC (Partners in Action) initiative of UNHCR is only dealing with the two outer layers of a complex system with the displaced and host populations in the centre. Meaningful participation includes the 'centre' - the refugees and the local population - then the 'inner layers' - the local NGOs and churches, the host government and economic networks - and finally the 'outer layers' - UNHCR and international NGOs. Refugee participation must not be seen merely as a more efficient means o t implement the policies of the humanitarian regime. Participation is an end in itself and the precondition for meaningful rehabilitation of uprooted populations because ' in many refugee situations, individuals and communities must [, as a priority,] act to rebuild social networks, economic structures and patterns of political expression and representation, often in adverse circumstances' (Black and Robinson 1993:9).
Refugees & Host Environments
56
Thomas Hoerz
Participation with all the associated requirements of gender sensitivity (see 4.3), ownership of projects and sustainability (see 12.1) are commonplace in development work (though not always practised). Projects implemented for refugees still lack this understanding, they are largely proposed, planned, implemented and evaluated for them, not with them. One only needs to look at the projects structure diagrams to realize that refugees or local population or local authorities simply do not exist in the hierarchy (eg CARE 1987:6). Aliteraturesearch with the terms 'refugees' and 'PRA' (Participatory Rural Appraisal) revealed that in refugee assistance this term does not exist, at least has it not found its way into refugee related publication. There is a dire need for projects working in refugee hosting areas to catch up with the developments in participatory methods of the last five years. To do so, see for example Chambers (1992), Leurs (1994) or Mukherjee (1993). Refugee participation , besides all its benefits, can pose an inherent threat to host governments in two ways. First, if 'guided participation ' is felt to be used by political groups to further their goals, host governments can view that as a security threat, in particular if good relations with the refugee sending country are at stake. Secondly can 'refugee organization and participation [be] seen as an opportunity to further longer term goals. It is the latter view of part icipation that worries host governments, and there is little support among them for increasing meaningful participation ' (Cuny 1987:2) (see also 1.9). In the management of refugee settlements and for projects in refugee hosting areas, approaches of the 1960s are still in use: 'refugee assistance programmes are the last bastion of the ultra-paternalistic approach o t aid and development. It is hard to think of another area where the blinkered nonsense of the "we know what is best for them" approach survives so unchallenged' (Malloch Brown quoted in Needham 1994:17). One means to ensure refugee participation could be the creation of refugee counterparts to senior and junior agency staff (dark and Lewis 1987:18). For further reading on issues of refugee participation see Black and Robinson (eds) (1993); dark (1987); Cuny (1987); Harrell-Bond (1994); Rogge (ed) (1987); RPN (1994). The above list is by no means exhaustive; hardly any document on any technical field leaves the importance of refugee (or host population) participation unmentioned but there is a lack of clear descriptions of successful attempts to turn this imperative into action.
Refugees & Host Environments
57
Thomas Hoerz
Academic discourse remains here, like in other areas of research, in the position of criticising without a genuine effort to provide simple and practical models for a solution. As a necessary second step after analysis and critique, action research with all involved actors to develop models of communication and cooperation is needed. One way to achieve this can be the creation of 'environmental fora ' to be initiated in refugee hosting areas. These fora can be official bodies, under the participation of refugees, local population, NGOs and UNHCR, probably chaired by agovernment official and need to work closely together with the research team as proposed in 14.2.
Refugees & Host Environments
58
Thomas Hoerz
^©F£ 00
6.
^©70@1
The Time Frame for Environmental Mitigation Measures Disaster preparedness experience indicates, that it is information and knowledge, rather than physical commodities, which need to be stockpiled. (Zetter 1995b:41)
Early environmental engagement would make a significant difference in a refugee hosting area. If activities were undertaken as soon as refugees arrived, encouraging local population and refugees to participate actively, the effect of the refugee influx on the host environment could not only be reduced, but possibly made a positive one. The effects of timely and sustained efforts could be felt for years after the repatriation or settlement of refugees in terms of skills acquired, environmental management structures reinforced, and physical (infra)structure provided. Unfortunately , funds for environmental projects are usually limited to tackling the problems of immediate and utmost importance . Decision makers are forced to set priorities in time (what first?) and in direction (what foremost?). The following chapter provides some basic ideas on setting the right short term priorities which also keep a long term perspective in mind.
6.1
Before Mitigation Measures Start
It has been found that deliveries of aid [and investments made in assistance delivery infrastructure!] have a tendency to reinforce the likelihood that a refugee camp will stay where it is, whether or not it is in a safe and otherwise appropriate site. Thus it is [...] important that environmental assessment be done as part of contingency planning or as part of emergency needs and resources assessments. (Dennis 1993:23) The most important decisions affecting the refugee hosting environment are made before refugees actually settle: The selection and design of refugee sites should reflect the environmental considerations' (UNHCR 1994:6). In the following pages of the guidelines the author refers to availability of vegetation, its protection in and outside the settlements and special problems related to forest reserves, national parks and other specially protected areas. Surprisingly, the question of the s/ze of camps and settlements is not dealt with. The population density - or changes in it is not in itself an adequate indicator of threat to the environment (see 1.3 and 2.2). But situations like Dadaab, Kenya where the population has risen from an initial 4.000 to approx. 120.00 since 1991 (Thiadens et.al.1995:2) or Kagera, where an
Refugees & Host Environments
59
Thomas Hoerz
influx of at least 350.000 refugees within few weeks led to a refugee to local ratio of at least 5 : 1 (CARE/ODA 1994:i) indicate severe pressure on natural resources by sheer force of numbers. In the planning of a refugee site environmental considerations alone cannot be the deciding factor. Recommendations like that of Finkel (1994:15) to limit camp populations to a maximum of 15.000 inhabitants with a minimum of 30 km distance between them are certainly justified on ecological grounds, but are over simplistic. Availability of land, the host government's concern about security, logistical constraints and the costs of setting up the infrastructure are arguments against such an approach which need serious consideration. But a clear statement in the UNHCR Interim Environmental Guidelines (1994), underlining the need to avoid settlements with very high numbers of inhabitants, is conspicuous by its absence. UNHCR, as the responsible agency for site-planning has certainly learnt from past mistakes and is moving in the right direction. While it was still possible in the 1980s to submit planning recommendations that did not contain any environmental consideration whatsoever (eg Schelhas 1986) in planning documents of the 1990s refugee hosting environments have their place (eg Wahning 1991). However, in the case of Ifo, one of the camps at the Somali border of Kenya, environmental recommendations did not lead to the required action. An area of several km2 was completely stripped of vegetation by the contractor's bulldozers and the suggested forestry project intended to mitigate the environmental damage took 2 years to materialize. This case indicates a severe communication problem between researchers, policy makers and the implementers of programmes and projects since a number of authors had alerted the assistance community to the environmental impacts of refugees by the mid 1980s (Chambers 1986:253) or even having put these impacts on top of their list of priorities (Simmance 1987:9). The economies of scale applicable to industrial production do not apply to humanitarian assistance. Research which compares the costs of more dispersed, smaller refugee camps vs concentrated, large camps, allowing for costs of environmental degradation and additional health and security costs would be a first step in convincing host countries and humanitarian agencies of this.
6.2
Setting Priorities in Crises
Environmental health must have first priority in the first weeks of a massive refugee influx (see 1.6, 2.3.5, 11.). At the same time immediate needs in terms of natural resources (cooking fuel, shelter material etc) and their availability in the surroundings or on regional markets need to be assessed (UNHCR 1994a:2). If the surroundings do not contain any buffer stock of dry wood and reasonable amounts of trees for shelter poles, providing relief items like cooking fuel and shelter material is imperative not just for environmental reasons but in order to save lives.
Refugees & Host Environments
60
Thomas Hoerz
The next step would be to address the ongoing environmental damage which is of an irreversible nature. The thinning out of large forest areas or the depletion of dry wood in increasing circles is not a cause for immediate alarm. But the clearcutting of steep hillsides is often impossible to repair. Indiscriminate cutting of fruit trees in the local village by desperate refugees can cause hostility which will last for years. Repairable damage can wait if limited resources demand priorities. If resources are immediately available and the environmental destruction contained, preventive measures are of course more efficient and considerably cheaper in the long run. The basic thrust of the [UNHCR] guidelines is that increased efforts should be made to anticipate and prevent environmental hazards, rather than have to deal with problems that subsequently arise through remedial action' (UNHCR 1994:3). In an effort to address these twin concerns, CARE/ODA (1994:vi,50) suggest two different stages of implementation for Rwandese refugee camps, namely 'recommended short term mitigation measures' and 'potential mitigation measures'. 'Inside' Potential and 'Outside ' Support One general aim in environmental mitigation efforts is making the best use of the available resources in a given host environment. This will be sufficient only in those refugee situations where the number of refugees is relatively small compared to the local population, or where the natural resources have been underutilised to a large extend, or where the management of natural resources by means of new technologies makes it possible to use existing natural resources in amore efficient way. Most refugee situations, however, are characterized by an environment which has already been under stress due unsustainable modes of use by the local population and which now has to carry a considerably increased population. In such situations optimizing the use of natural resources will not be sufficient to halt rapid degradation. Additional supplies to relieve the depletion of natural resources need o t be included in the support package. Goods like fuel and building material must be imported from other, more productive areas. Stimulating sustainable production in these areas may be a positive side effect of this export of materials. There is, however, a danger of depletion of resources in other fragile environments by unsustainable mining. Mobilizing the human potential and introducing more appropriate management systems and technologies by providing training and facilitating communication between all actors are vital components of all outside support interventions. Too often the urgency of a refugee situation means that the development of human potential is sidelined in the name of speed. While this is understandable and sometimes even necessary in the initial stages of an emergency, one has to be careful not to let this mind-set dictate the form of intervention in the next stage.
Refugees & Host Environments
61
Thomas Hoerz
7.
The Role of Training You Zimbabweans let us learn how to do the labour but you kept the planning to yourselves. We know how to dig latrines, but we don't know how to site them in relation to water points. You gained experience from our situation as refugees which should have been ours. (Mozambican returnee quoted in DeWolf 1994:7) Refugees represent potential human resources which should not be ignored by aid agencies. They contribute to their own well-being in addition of that of their host communities while in exile, and could be better equipped to contribute meaningfully to reconstruction of their countries of origin on their return home. (Yvette Stevens, UNHCR/PTSS in Smawfield 1994:9)
o t make compromises in the In designing assistance projects planners need continuum between project income generating activities with no training component and training programmes which do not generate income (Smawfield 1994:13). Projects whose aim is environmental rehabilitation and resource protection have an additional task; they have to weigh and balance three objectives in order to gain maximum benefits for their participants . These objectives are environmental protection and rehabilitation, knowledge and skills enhancement and income generation in the short and long term. Every project workingo rf environmental rehabilitation must explicitly include 'training' and 'income generation' in the project's objectives, as has been done in the cases discussed in CARE (1987:5,24) and Hoerz (1994:8). It is hardly recognized that training can be an effective measure in an environmental emergency situation such as in the Rwanda crisis. The most immediate effect to mitigate the felling of trees was not by means of improved stoves, but by mass training of women in energy saving cooking practices and building protected fireplaces with drying racks for firewood (Kimani 1994:5). In Benako, Tanzania 20 animators and 400 'stove advisors' were employed by GTZ to support Rwandan refugees to construct improved stoves as quick as possible (Krempin 1995). The same can be assumed for basic environmental health training as an emergency measure, although no data concerning this are available. A mass campaign to raise awareness, to educate and to train so that refugees themselves can implement simple preventive health measures and thus reduce the occurrence of waterborne diseases could be cheaper, more effective and produce more lasting results than flying in dozens of doctors from Europe. Apart from quick impacts in an emergency situation, training is referred to usually as an intervention with not immediate, but longer lasting effects. 'As one [afforestation] sub-project closed, a survey of refugee women showed the training received was the most helpful aspect of the program as they had acquired skills they could use regardless of whether they return to Ethiopia or resettle in Somalia' (Helin 1990:16).
Refugees & Host Environments
62
Thomas Hoerz
Even though observations like the above are promising, there is a continuing probability that returnee groups leave a refugee situation less capable of fending for themselves than before they went n o it exile. In particular the children of long term refugees never have the opportunity to develop skills to make a living and to utilise their environment in a sustainable manner. Training in relevant, useful skills is one of the few things, refugees can take with them when repatriation or resettlement comes. Enhancement of skills and knowledge can help those who decide to settle in the host country to cope with the withdrawal of aid. But all projects which include training components involve an inherent danger which Smawfield (1994:14) calls the 'credibility gap', that is the time in between the completion of training and the successful start of income generating activities. The longer this time-gap is, the more likely the result will only be frustration and non-use of the acquired skills. This can arise, when the (vocational) training iso o t narrowly focused on production skills: 'Vocational training is, for the most part , a supply side intervention, yet the problems of putting newly acquired skills o t use and establishing viable income generation activity are mainly to do with the demand side' (Smawfield 1994:22). Focusing on women as a target group, The OXFAM Gender Training Manual' (Williams et.al. 1994) was not specifically designed for refugee situations, but it contains case studies of women refugees in Bangladesh (ibid:281), Mozambican refugees in Transvaal (ibid:343), Sudanese refugees (ibid:361) and refugees from El Salvador (ibid:395). Questions of certification should not be disregarded. Certificates which indicate meaningful skills are not only an incentive in themselves, they may help refugees to find employment in the host country or after repatriation (Smawfield 1994:40). Certificates symbolize the 'portability ' of the benefits refugees should be able to obtain. A certificate is often the only paper, which lifts the holder out of the anonymous masses of refugees. If possible, certification should be streamlined with regulations in the host country o t make them a more helpful tool for finding employment and to remove the stigma of a 'second class refugee certificate '.
Refugees & Host Environments
63
Thomas Hoerz
8.
Resource Protection and Income Generation The refugees we are concerned with [...] have come from a poor country and they are in a poor country, almost certainly adding other problems for their hosts. [...] They are not now in need of emergency relief, they are awaiting a solution and while they wait, it is hoped that they may generate some income, but that is not ideal. The real solutions are political ones. It may be that in alleviating the immediate problems, those solutions are made less urgent. Perhaps agencies and individuals, as well as helping to solve these immediate issues, should also seek ways to help the refugees seek a long term answer, as their assistance may delay solutions to the problem. (Roife et. al. 1987:125)
The concerns of Roife et.al. (see above) were not shared by Ask et.al. (1993:8) who concluded for Afghan refugees in Pakistan 'that the [income generating] programs have not had any significant impact on the refugees' decision on whether or not to return. Repatriation was basically a function of the general political situation [...] and a collective (tribal) decision'. In the absence of durable solutions in many refugee situations such as voluntary repatriation, integration in the host country or resettlement in third countries, humanitarian assistance has to look for '"flexible " solutions, which are developmental in approach, but accept constraints as to the uncertainties of time of stay, acceptability of their hosts and the availability of resources' (Roife et.al. 1987:4). Promoting income generation for the population of refugee affected areas should not be seen as a stop-gap in the absence of a durable solution. Acquiring skills, experience and income is not only of psychological benefit, it is also an important preparatory step for a better future solution. As has been suggested in the previous section (see 7.), income generation is inseparably linked with training. The main difference between income generation for local population and for refugees seems o t be that locals build up their activities for a rather secure future here, whereas the refugees need to build up their business in a way that can adapt o t an uncertain future wherever. Roife et. al. (1987:57) call this the ' Portability of Assistance ', referring to infrastructure, tools, knowledge and skills . Many of the constraints refugees face can be summarized as 'inadequate and irregular income' (Zetter 1995b:45). Refugee time, however, is not free of opportunity costs. Many authors stress the fact that refugees with a basic supply of foodstuffs and in a desperate situation where they will work for almost nothing can undercut locally current wages (Cambers 1986:251). But refugees value their time as well and have to set priorities on how to use this time best (Hoerz 1995b:9).
Refugees & Host Environments
64
Thomas Hoerz
'Attention must also be paid to the immediate and urgent need of women refugees to earn a regular cash income. Even where food rations are regularly provided and other basic needs are met, families require essentials not included in the "aid basket". [...] Women must often sell or barter a part of their rations o t buy these necessities and therefore face lean days before the next ration distribution' (Hall 1990:94). Forbes Martin and Mends-Cole (1992) discuss this issue in more detail. There are several ways o t address environmental degradation; ones which only appeal to 'goodwill' and environmental awareness, others which use authority to enforce rules for environmental protection and finally ones which combine direct, immediate benefit to the participants with protection for the environment. Out of the eight types of income generation projects identified by Roife et. al. (1987:10), most environmental activities fall under 'Development Investment - these projects aim o t provide services, facilities or equipment to assist the development process, rather than helping refugees or refugee businesses directly.' While this approach is suitable for the rehabilitation of degraded lands (erosion control, afforestation, dams and pans), short term or medium term income and resource protection can be combined (see Examples of Income Generating Resource Protection below). Even though a cash-for-work programme including the local population can make aproject extremely popular and give it a good start , wherever possible, environmental rehabilitation projects should strive to promote income rather than salaries. As discussed above, demand side interventions are as important as those on the supply side (Smawfield 1994:14). If goods and services provided by refugees are to create lasting income, the demand for these goods needs to be stimulated or, where demand exists, effective marketing channels explored. As an example, the 'haybox cookers' (see 9.2.3) may be mentioned here: once the training to produce them and skills to obtain raw materials are provided, it can only be sold to the potential users if a campaign makes this little-known energy-saving technology attractive. Every potential income generating activity a resource protection project undertakes should be carefully screened along the following questions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Can it be done by refugees or local population as a private or group enterprise? What kind of support in terms of capital, training, marketing does the enterprise need in order o t take off? What kind of over-support would make the enterprise dependent on outside support ? What are the major existing constraints for refugee and local enterprise? Do they differ? How can they be (separately) addressed? What will likely happen to the enterprise if the project withdraws support or leaves the region? How can the markets for goods and services be sustained or new markets be developed?
Refugees & Host Environments
65
Thomas Hoerz
7.
8.
If the market for an enterprise depends on outside funding, have the entrepreneurs gained sufficient confidence and knowledge to access other funding sources? Last, but not least: does the activity provide income to refugee women, particularly single heads of household?
Income Generating Resource-Protection
In the following some examples of successful income generating resource protection are provided. In presenting such examples it must be remembered that successful projects are those which take into account the specific situation on the ground. Individual cases cannot be seen as replicable blueprints for all situations. Milk vendors in refugee camps buy milk from producers, boil it and sell it in smaller quantities. The fuelwood for this enterprise and for restaurants and tea stalls is usually bought. Supporting the owners in saving fuelwood can increase their income considerably. Experience shows, that the commercial users of firewood are the first and most enthusiastic respondents to fuel-saving technologies and advice. The problem of deforestation in a charcoal burning area can be addressed by offering free tree seedlings to replace the felled trees combined with an awareness campaign about the effects of deforestation. A direct-benefit approach would be to offer assistance to erect improved kilns to reduce the wastage of firewood and thus increase the income of charcoal burners. The distribution of seedlings may come in at a later stage and be then more acceptable to charcoal burners. Another income generation project which aimed at resource protection in refugee hosting areas of Pakistan was the support to 600 bakeries in erecting fuel efficient ovens. Some of this bakeries existed already with conventional stoves, others took the opportunity and started business. The benefits for income and environment were twofold: The reduced fuelwood consumption enabled bakery owners to raise their incomes and lower their prices and reduced baking charges led many housewives to abandon the practice of home baking; more fuelwood could be saved by the economies of scale. (Usinger 1995) One of the most successful income generation projects with environmental goals among Afghan refugees in Pakistan was a 'traditional house construction project'. Masons, who mastered the a r t of dome construction out of clay bricks were paid to construct the dome, if refugees prepared the vertical walls. The traditional houses quickly became more popular than those provided by UNHCR which consisted of a wooden structure and tin roof, as the clay brick houses were cooler in summer and warmer in winter. For the aid providers, the wooden constructions were 18 times more expensive than the payment of the dome mason.
Refugees & Host Environments
66
Thomas Hoerz
In addition, considerable amounts of fuelwood for space heating and 1 mt of timber per house could be saved (Usinger 1995). Still in Pakistan, Roife et.al. (1987:75) describe a household-stove production project by GTZ. A total of 90 producers were creating a steady income out of the stove production. In addition, over 28.000 refugee families could save firewood in the range of US$ 170.000 per year. The success in this instance is 'complicated' by the fact, that the same amount of money could be lost o t the refugee wood sellers. Care (1987:9) reports about seed collection in a refugee afforestation programme. Refugees were so successful in seed collection, that the refugees' nurseries had an oversupply and could sell seeds o t afforestation projects in the region. In planting activities of live hedges for security around camp blocks in Dadaab/Kenya hundreds of refugees and locals could be employed by UNHCR to harvest cuttings . As the planting of cuttings was the responsibility of refugees, the more wealthy among them agreed to pay the poorer refugees to do the job , thus redistributing their (relative) wealth (Thiadens et.al. 1995).
Refugees & Host Environments
67
Thomas Hoerz
9.
Household Energy and Fuel Supply To most of us, fire is magical, it has life of its own. Using fire is a link with our earliest days of being human; the hearth is the centre of home and family. [Any change], however simple, is a giant step, both technical and social. It changes far more than just cooking habits; the basic relationship between [Wo]Man and one of the Four Elements has been altered. The hearth , the place where cooking is done, is a place of great ritual significance, surrounded by taboos and customs which have (Aprevecho 1984:15) accumulated over the millennia.
The following section on household energy and fuel supply has a crucial place in this review. The reason is, to a certain degree, 'market-orientation': if environmental concerns lead agencies to undertaking a mitigation project in a refugee situation, it is the link between household energy and deforestation which is usually addressed first. But the interrelation of woodfuel gathering and deforestation is not in fact well established and examined (see 2.3.1). It takes extreme scarcities or severe access-problems to make people abandon the collection of dead wood and start chopping green branches or even trees for fuel. In Somali refugee camps in Kenya, for example, it took two years until the first trees were felled for fuelwood, even though the population density increased thirty fold with the arrival of refugees.
9.1
Fuel Consumption Data
Many stove programmes are operating in virtually total ignorance of whether or not they are meeting their fuel saving objectives. [...] One often hears about the total number of stoves built by this or that project. It would be more useful to know how much wood is actually being saved as a result of these stoves. Surprisingly, most project managers do not know and many do not seem very interested. (Foley 1984:75) Fuelwood consumption is not static (Muchiri and Owens 1994:2). People respond to fuelwood scarcities or abundance in many ways. Frequency of cooking or drinking tea is altered, fires are attended to more or less carefully, lower grade fuel supplements the scarce high-grade fuel, pots are shared among families . Baseline consumption data, even if carefully collected, can therefore only give a snapshot of prevailing usage. In fact 'woodfuel consumption is a function of the cost of obtaining it' (Dewees 1989:1161). Despite this fact, most of the energy needs assessments still base their planning on static figures (eg Finkel 1994, Kamara 1992). Nevertheless , the decision maker on the ground needs an idea on consumption levels, if only to prove savings achieved by various interventions.
Refugees & Host Environments
68
Thomas Hoerz
Joseph (1990:24,52), in the framework of a handbooko rf 'planning, monitoring and evaluating cookstove programmes' gives practical guidelines how to collect baseline and impact data.
Consumption Levels with Traditional Equipment Despite the limitations of baseline data, every project or activity addressing the fuel situation must have a fairly exact idea of present levels of fuel consumption. For comparative reasons the fuelwood consumption per person and day in kg has been widely agreed upon in the literature. Non-comparable figures like bundles per family and week are for obvious reasons useless. Forsbach et.al. (1986) operates in Gigajoule (GJ) per person per year, a unit of measure which is helpful if different types of fuels are compared. It is, however, unrealistic to convert energy requirement directly into firewood or other fuels, as this fails to account for the impact of the efficiency of the equipment. There is surprisingly little accurate data available on the fuel(wood) consumption levels of refugees and what data is available is so inconsistent as to be useless as abasis for policy formulation or project design (see table below).
Author, Year
Host Country (Refugees from )
Zieroth (1985:5)
Measurement or Estimate
Malawi (Mozamb.)
kg/person/day
estimate
0.6 - 1,5
CARE/ODA (1994:30)
Tanz. (Rwanda)
measurement
2.23 - 3.06
CARE/ODA (1994:30)
Tanz. (Rwanda)
estimates of other agencies
0.68 - 5.86
estimate
2.0
Caminada (1992:4)
Nepal (Bhutan)
Forsbach et.al. (1986)
Pakistan (Afghan.)
Kamara (1992)
Sierra L. (Liberia)
Klingshirn et.al.. (1992)
Kenya (various)
?
1.1
measurement
2.13
estimate
0.7
Sparrow (1993)
Zimbabwe (Mozamb.)
Ross (1995)
Burundi (Rwanda) measurement
Refugees & Host Environments
measurement
69
1.69 2.2
Thomas Hoerz
Factors that can influence and alter consumption levels are: climate (mean and minimum temperatures: space heating; rainfall: drying of clothes and housing); the prevailing season: winter-summer, dry-rainy season; availability of warm clothing and blankets; levels of stove technology and cooking practices; quality of fuel and changes of fuel quality; availability of other sources of light than the open fire; availability of alternative entertainment to social fires; types of food commonly cooked food eg ground maize vs whole maize;
Present consumption levels not only reflect the needs of the population; they are also affected by levels of scarcity. This might be an explanation for rising consumption levels if access to firewood improves or stagnant consumption levels after the introduction of improved stoves and efficient cooking practices. In these cases, previous fuelwood availability was simply inadequate. To draw the line between 'adequate' consumption and luxury 'consumption' is difficult and requires careful consultation with the participants . If a mix of different fuels is common, the substitution of one fuel by another is possible but only within limits, as for example Kerosene cannot adequately replace firewood for baking (Forsbach et.al. 1986:19). Consumption Levels with Improved Equipment One of the most common mistakes in the evaluation of consumption levels after the introduction of improved stoves is multiplying the saving potential of stoves by the number of stoves which were distributed: '...distributed up to now: 10.000 metal stoves double efficiency, so 10.000 families by now save 50% of their energy needs for cooking' (Forsbach et.al. 1986:124). Those who claim to have measured the saving impact of improved stoves often do not provide a description of the method of measurement and leave it therefore difficult to judge the validity of these figures. Stewart (1987:17-44) describes in detail the steps used in measuring consumption data and provides useful data sheets, which can be adapted to local situations. Only field tests in the households of participants can give final information on consumption and savings levels. This again will only give a reliable figure on the overall savings of the project target area if the dissemination figure is corrected by the user rate: what percentage of households use the improved stove to what extent? From stove dissemination projects in non-refugee situations it has been established that stove programmes can and usually do save firewood. Two studies are mentioned here, which use reliable and detailed methodologies. Joseph (1990a:122) reported savings of 15.7% to 63% on the household level in stove programmes of 7 countries with sample sizes of 50 - 751 households.
Refugees & Host Environments
70
Thomas Hoerz
Habermehl (1994a, 1994b) provides evidence for achieved savings in o fu r stove programmes of four countries. In addition she shows not only that the procurement of improved stoves was a viable investment on the household level but that the overall costs for the stove programme was a worthwhile investment on the macroeconomic level of the respective countries. For stove programmes in refugee hosting areas, only Le Breton (1995) and RESCUE (1995) documented savings of 22% and 29% respectively. All other stove projects in refugee situations did not measure a statistically relevant random sample or did not publish those results. This suggests that it is the absence of data rather than the saving potential of stove programmes, which still leaves doubt on the viability of such programmes.
9.2
Energy Saving Devices and Methods
One of the most frequent mistakes in energy projects is the initial narrow focus on acertain technology. As a rule of thumb, the closer the new technology is to traditional technology, the more reliable the success of its dissemination. However, this need not always be a sensible solution. When, for example, fuelwood scarcities reach catastrophic dimensions, and a fuelwood supply from outside is unaffordable, a 20% saving offered by improved stoves is not a good enough solution. In the initial stages of project appraisal, decision makers must have the time and courage not to fix on a strategy immediately but to consider a wide range of appropriate technology (AT) solutions. Besides their own experience basic AT handbooks can offer valuable ideas. Darrow (1993) provides an exhaustive overview of AT literature, many in fields related to environmental interventions. Kimani and Walubengo (1993) have edited contributions specifically dealing with renewable energy technologies (RETS) in the East African region. To design a package of energy saving devices and methods does not require foreign experts on 10-day missions but local experts with intimate knowledge and long term commitment. Caminada (1992:8), for example, identified a USAID and a World Bank project, whose Nepalese experts could be engaged in designing an appropriate package of energy saving interventions for Bhutanese refugees. The RESCUE project developed its strategy and packages for Somali refugees solely based on the expertise available in Kenya, including one private entrepreneur, two consultant groups and employees of six other NGOs working in the field of environment and household energy (Hoerz 1994:25). Green (1994:6) proposed CAMARTEC, a Tanzanian technology group with a decade of experience as the lead agency in a fuel conservation component for Rwandan refugees. Drawing on local and national know-how is not only cheaper, but a developmental responsibility to integrate refugee hosting areas into national and regional development initiatives.
Refugees & Host Environments
71
Thomas Hoerz
9.2.1 Improved Stoves and Utensils
Don't start with the idea that [improved] stoves would be good for them. (Aprevecho 1984:15)
Improved stoves do not necessarily save wood. They have advantages as well as disadvantages and the despised three stone open fire does have, besides the all too well known disadvantages, some definite advantages over most 'improved' stove types. With some exceptions, literature on improved stoves often takes their superiority over traditional hearths for granted. 'There is no doubt, that "improved" stoves can be thermodynamically more efficient than traditional stoves and open fires, when tested under controlled conditions. [...] The question is whether stoves [...] can save fuel in the villages and cities of the Third World' (Foley et.a. 1984:75). Micuta (1985:78-86) and Stewart (1987:17-44) describe the various steps in testing improved stoves for energy efficiency and field performance , while FAO (1993) puts stress on the design development, with reference o t Asia. Nystrom (1988) gives an overview of improved stoves as an integral part of kitchen management. Prevailing cooking or baking habits must determine the range of energy saving devices considered for dissemination. They can be different for refugees and locals and differences can also exist within both groups. Determinants include the most common staple foods, the kind of food supplied by the donors - often WFP (see 9.4), whether communal cooking or baking is acceptable (see 9.5) and what needs besides cooking are addressed by the fireplace (lighting, space heating, social gathering function). Usinger (1988:32) for example quotes Afghan refugee women, who decided on an improved stove type not because of the fuel efficiency (which was not always evident), but because it had a separate water heating device, which considerably enhanced their living standards; more hot water was used for washing children and clothes than before. A comprehensive sociocultural and technical checklist is provided in Aprevecho (1984:28-31). For Afghan refugees in NW Pakistan, Forsbach et.al. (1986:13) state that the traditional staple food is nan, a bread of wheat flour, baked in earth ovens (tandoori) or chapatti, a thin wheat flour bread baked in a pan. Several families in acompound may bake their bread together; buying bread is common practice. Under these conditions, simply transferring stove technology developed in India or Tanzania would not have the desired impact. Once a set of utensils or energy saving devices has been designed, tested and test implemented, the dissemination strategy can have decisive impact on its success, both in terms of the numbers of stoves disseminated and on their impact. Caceres et.al. (1989) present 8 case studies and 24 country reports which reflect on the range of options for the implementer.
Refugees & Host Environments
72
Thomas Hoerz
In an emergency like the Somalia or the Rwanda crisis such an elaborate strategy may be too time consuming and more immediate results are needed. In an IFRC energy project in Rwandan camps in Burundi, the strategy involved building mud stoves as quick as possible and as many as possible at no costs for the household. This required a large number of animators who had to undergo a short , intensive training (Ross 1995). In Rwandan camps at Goma, Zaire, several options for improved stoves were considered. Import of prefabricated stoves from Tanzania, Uganda or Kenya was eliminated on financial and logistical grounds. A production centre for improved stoves made from scrap metal was not implemented as it would have taken too long to produce a sufficient number. The most practical and quick energy-saving solution was an energy saving training programme combined with a simple wind protection around the hearth built with heaped stones (Kimani 1994:4). In Somali camps in Kenya simple stoves built from mud and waste material like tent pegs and tins provided a 'beginners model' for families who had not decided o t invest in a portable , prefabricated stove. Once the experience of cooking on a 'new' stove has been positive, three days labour were readily invested to obtain an even better stove. Owner-built stove models can be an intermediate solution to be replaced later by optimised models or they can form the backbone of the stove programme in the long run. This has to be decided by the rate of saving and general success of the owner-built stoves compared with the advantages of prefabricated stoves. Guiding questions include: Do the users accept a stationary stove or is a portable model preferred? Are the higher demands of repair and maintenance acceptable to users? Is the saving potential of prefabricated stoves replicable in field tests? Are the field savings of these stoves superior to those of owner-built stoves and if yes, does this justify the more expensive option of prefabricated stoves? As mentioned above, refugee and host populations are not homogenous. The answer as to which stove models are optimal is probably a mix of two or three models which have proven both efficient and user friendly. Stove programmes must not repeat the mistakes of many other refugee interventions which do not address individual needs, but deal with refugees as a collectivity.
9.2.2 Solar Cookers
Very few documents are available on solar cooker programmes in refugee hosting areas. There is, however, a wide range of solar cooker literature dealing with developing countries. Kuhnke et.al. (1990) provides an overview of solar cooker types, basics of technology and some case studies of Pakistan, India, Kenya, Sudan, China and Mali. Of interest for adaptation to refugee situations is the chapter on conditions of acceptance for solar cookers (ibid:62-116) and the case Refugees & Host Environments
73
Thomas Hoerz
study of the SERVE refugee project in Pakistan (ibid:46) (see below). Kuhnke reports that the promotion of the rectangular solar box was encouraged by subsidy, reducing the price from about.. 60 US$ to only 18 US$. Although 70% of those who received the boxes used them regularly, less than 3,000 boxes were actually distributed, leaving the impact of the programme rather limited (ibid:47). Acomparativesurvey (ibid:209-213) lists 24 solar stove types and reveals one of the 'empirical' shortcomings of this technology: mass dissemination hardly ever happens. Only 4 models can show a dissemination rate of over 1.000 pieces. The survey also contains a helpful bibliography with 196 documents and a detailed description of 37 stove models together with reference addresses. Forsbach et.al. (1986:76,127) mention the SERVE solar stove project for Afghan refugees in Pakistan but does not offer any detail. The authors report overall savings of up to 60% by the SERVE solar stoves. In the economic comparison, saving one energy unit of fuelwood is much more expensive than with improved stoves, but cheaper than with kerosene supply (see 9.3.3 Kerosene).
9.2.3 Haybox Cookers Haybox cookers are thickly insulated boxes or containers, in which the pot, once brought to the boiling point, is inserted . The fire can then be extinguished, while the food is simmering without extra fuel input. These 'fireless cookers' have the additional advantage of not needing any attention, unlike an open fire. Especially for farming communities, where women are often under considerable stress to prepare food in time after farmwork, the device can save valuable time. Despite the advantages, haybox cookers have only been successful in areas and times of extreme fuel shortages (eg in Europe during World War II). One reason for the limited success might be the fact , that cooking is strongly linked with fire, and without it, 'it is not real cooking'. Amoderate success with scope not only for energy saving, but also for income generation are the haybox cookers in the RESCUE project (Thiadens 1995:6). It was estimated by Muchiri and Owens (1994:3) that the consequent use of haybox cookers or fireless cookers could save as much as 60% of the fuel in Rwandan camps in Burundi. (See also Micuta 1985:25). 9.2.4 Kitchen Management
Most of the above mentioned authors dealing with household energy stress the fact, that proper kitchen management can save as much, if not more energy as improved stoves (see, inter alia: Aprovecho 1984; Bellerive Foundation 1989; Joseph et.al. 1990; Joseph 1990 and Nystrom 1988). Measures proposed are: Refugees & Host Environments
74
Thomas Hoerz
Using only dry firewood and/or encouraging drying of firewood. Splitting firewood into small pieces. Preparing the food o t be cooked before lighting the fire. Using not more water than necessary for boiling. Not overfeeding the fire , especially when the food or water has reached boiling point. Regular emptying of the firebox. Using lids for every pot. Soaking beans and grain overnight before cooking. o ti smaller pieces. Chopping large foodstuffs n Shielding open fire against wind. Extinguishing the fire with sand (not water) after cooking. It would be harmful to believe that housewives do not apply energy some fuelsaving kitchen management. If participants do not adopt well-meant advice they have a reason, which should be understood and discussed. As in many other fields of extension, an optimal set of replicable recommendations is not readily available, it has to be designed with those who are intended to use it. For refugee situations, kitchen management is only mentioned as an important contributor to energy saving in Hoerz (1994) and Thiadens et.al. (1995). An example of a curriculum for household training and training for catering staff in kitchen management was developed by GTZ in Goma (Kimani 1994:18ff) with striking examples of potential savings (in brackets): using properly dried firewood (23%); windshielding of fireplace and pot (40%); pre-soaking of beans and maize (40%); cutting food in small pieces (35%); simmering long cooking food (60%); using lids (20%); extinguishing fire after cooking (18%).
9.3
Fuel Supply
Not every refugee settlement , camp or hosting area and not every affected family, refugee or local face the same degree of scarcity. Nor is the damage done to forests of the same severity or irreversible nature everywhere. Supplying fuel from outside the refugee hosting area is expensive and will not be possible everywhere. Prioritizing groups within the target population is a vital first step in the design of fuelwood supply policies (Wilson 1989:89). This was in the emergency situations of the Rwandan crisis in Burundi (Ross 1995) and Tanzania (Krempin 1995) not always possible. The supply was delivered to the blocks and responsibility for (fair) distribution e l ft with refugees. What can be expected under 'normal' circumstances, namely that beneficiaries take care of vulnerable groups, might not always be the case if needs are desperate and the social fabric severely damaged. In some situations a mix of fuel-providing activities can make sense if target populations differ in their needs and cooking cultures considerably.
Refugees & Host Environments
75
Thomas Hoerz
The starting point for the decision-making is the prevailing fuel supply; how refugees and local population obtain their fuel, what limits the supply - security? distance? general scarcity? conflicts between local population and refugees? What resources are available and how do they relate to possible improvements in the prevailing fuel supply system. If support to local fuel collection activities is not possible or cannot be made sufficient, a further option is fuel supply from distant areas, where fuelwood is planted or standing stocks abundant. Only if this is not feasible should alternative fuels be investigated. The production of fuelwood by means of plantations on site should be considered irrespective of present supplies as harvesting in meaningful quantities cannot start , even under favourable conditions, until two to three years after planting. 9.3.1 Fuel Collection Support and Fuel Supply from Camp Surroundings Often the immediate surroundings of a refugee camp are badly deforested, while further away, out of reach for a day's journey on foot, underexploited areas of forest or bush still exist. It is tempting for assistance agencies to facilitate the collection by providing lorries, bringing the collected wood to the settlement and distributing it like food on a ration card. Besides the enormous costs in lorries and labour, it reduces the participants to mere recipients as well as ignoring the need for sustainability. Little literature is available on projects which do not supply fuelwood from outside the area, but instead support the refugees' and the local population's own initiatives in collecting fuelwood. There are numerous reasons why fuelwood collection may need support : 'Channelling' the collectors to designated areas. Rather than simply restricting certain protected or vulnerable areas, incentives are given to collect fuelwood from less exploited areas. Widening the collection radius, which in turn reduces stress on the areas close to large settlements. This can be combined with restrictions on collecting fuel in the close proximity of settlements. Reducing exposure to banditry and sexual harassment. If, by means of incentives, refugees collect in certain areas during certain periods, protection can be arranged easier. Alleviating a situation where refugees, particularly women, are overloaded with fuel gathering if distances are getting too long. Channelling collection to those areas, where agreements with local population and/or forest authorities have been made.
Refugees & Host Environments
76
Thomas Hoerz
The fuelwood collection support system must make sure that firewood remains a scarce commodity. Over-support may lead o t unnecessarily high levels of consumption. In the case of Benako camp, Tanzania, the need for firewood was that grave, that fatal casualties occurred while refugees were climbing the lorries. This need not be the case if discipline, on a first-come-first save basis, for example, is enforced. The support system must give priority to vulnerable groups among the participants . Elderly people and mothers with small children may not be able to jump on overcrowded lorries, special transport arrangements for the latter may be necessary (Krempin 1995). The interventions which support the fuelwood collection can be: Providing a 'shuttle service' for refugees which takes them out to the collection points or areas. If lorries to do so are scarce, refugees may walk back with the fuelwood. Providing stacks of wood at a distance from the camps. Trained and supervised cutters collect dead wood, fell trees and prepare stacks of certain sizes. This way the fuel collection can also be quantified. Supporting commercial fuelwood transport like lorry owners, donkey cart owners or hand cart operators with fuel, loans or spare parts . Incentives to host government police can encourage them to provide increased security at the designated collection areas. Providing simple ropes for house construction and the bundling of firewood can be acheap alternative to prevent the damaging practice of debarking trees to use the inner bark for making ropes. (CARE/ODA 1994:46). Where the practice of debarking is used to dry up trees, because harvesting is easier or because of the fear of being punished for felling live trees (Finkel 1994:5) ropes will, of course, not be a solution. Supporting the existing system of fuelwood collection needs careful investigation and a discussion process with all actors involved: refugees, especially refugee women, local population, especially farmers and pastoralists who have a stake in the areas concerned, those whose business ito is t supply fuelwood, both locals and refugees and range and forest authorities. Without a secure funding base for at least two years, no such operation should be started . Any fuelwood collection support should aim to provide income for the affected local and refugee population. An armada of oxen or donkey carts may be more difficult to control, but a lot more income can remain in the area compared with the use of lorries.
Refugees & Host Environments
77
Thomas Hoerz
9.3.2 Fuelwood from Plantations
Identifying commercial or state owned plantations as sources of fuelwood, poles or timber can have three benefits for long term planning. The most obvious is the ability to make realistic estimates regarding the supply potential of those plantations and to arrive at realistic costs for making use of those plantations including the price for wood, loading and unloading costs, transport rates, drying, splitting or chipping costs and distribution costs (see CARE/ODA 1994:50,64). Secondly it is important to learn from previous experience of producing wood products on a medium to large scale in certain ecological zones and thirdly to establish contacts with potential contractors for fuelwood-, timber- and pole plantations closer to the refugee affected area. If state owned plantations are to be exploited, a system needs to be developed in cooperation with the relevant authorities - to make sure that the payments are reinvested in forestry or further afforestation, preferably closer to the demand areas. A first step in establishing fuelwood supply capacities is making an inventory of private and public woodlots (Kamara 1992:17) within an accessible distance. Prices for forest products must be high enough to stimulate replanting but in the range of 'normal' local prices in order not to disrupt fuelwood and timber markets. For the GTZ fuelwood supply in Goma, costs of US$ 30/m3 were indicated, US$ 15/m3 for both purchase and transport over a distance of 60 - 120 km (Kimani 1994:2). For Rwandan refugee camps in Burundi, where firewood was purchased from farms in the surroundings, Ross (1995) indicated costs of US$ 2.5/m3 to purchase and US$/m3 16 for transport . An important advantage of a more organised fuelwood supply, either from the surroundings or from plantations, is the possibility of giving time for the wood to dry. Refugees often do not dare to store firewood to let it dry for fear of theft . But under extreme pressure to supply firewood to desperate refugees, agencies might find themselves unable to store firewood for drying (Ross 1995).
9.3.3 Alternatives to Fuelwood
Kerosene The only in depth study of a kerosene supply programme for refugees was undertaken by Forsbach et.al.(1986). The authors concluded that the kerosene provision programme undertaken in Pakistan for Afghan refugees did save some firewood, but also raised the overall energy consumption. It was, however, not possible to quantify the firewood substitution effects . The introduction of kerosene partly substituted firewood and partly raised living standards. Refugees & Host Environments
78
Thomas Hoerz
A withdrawal of kerosene supplies, on the other hand, was assumed to have only income effects: refugees had got used o t the convenient use of kerosene and would spend part of their income for kerosene (ibid:51). A dominant problem being the waste and losses of kerosene in storage and use, the authors concluded that to optimise firewood substitution effects of kerosene supply, high quality equipment (stoves and containers) was the single most important factor (ibid:78). An important aspect of kerosene supply is the costs involved. As the main goal is not to supply the cheapest possible fuel, but to substitute fuelwood in as costeffective a way as possible, the study (ibid:75) ranked the possible options in order of effectiveness: 1. 2. 3. 4.
energy saving stoves and ovens solar stoves harvest residue briquettes kerosene supply programme
Unlike fuelwood or even charcoal, kerosene is a fuel for which refugees would entirely rely on the aid agencies' capability o t deliver the needed amounts regularly and in sufficient quantities . It was ruled out as an option by Ketel (1994a:23), Muchiri and Owens (1994:3) and questioned by Caminada (1992:8), CARE/ODA (1994:58) and Helin (1990:13) for the following reasons: high level of dependency on outside funding and - organisation; inappropriate level of technology (separate stoves, difficult quality control of stoves, heavy investment in storage and individual containers); fire and health hazard (many refugees don't have experience with kerosene); logistical constraints for delivery and distribution; high costs and price fluctuations of kerosene itself, kerosene might be the first thing to be dropped when funds are scarce; high likelihood of creating a grey market for kerosene, thus reducing positive environmental impacts; the possibility of additional frictions with the local population, when refugees receive a high grade fuel, while local population has to depend on firewood; continued demand for firewood for space heating, lighting, social fires etc; kerosene is used to conveniently start the fire. The supply of kerosene remains a tempting option, probably the only one which could in theory replace the firewood consumption completely. But since refugees sold part of their kerosene and the stoves were of poor quality Caminada (1992:9) showed that in Nepal that firewood continued to play a major role for household energy among Bhutanese refugees. For Pakistan, Helin (1990:13) noted that kerosene did reduce the fuelwood use but that the kerosene distribution has since been discontinued due to budgetary constraints.
Refugees & Host Environments
79
Thomas Hoerz
Forsbach et.al. (1986:49), contradicting common belief that large amounts of kerosene distributed to refugees are sold, concluded that actually very little kerosene was sold by Afghan refugees in Pakistan: nearly all interviewed families bought additional kerosene. Usinger (1995) questions the validity of these findings pointing out that it mattered a great deal where the data was collected; refugees living near a big city might not need the keroseneo rf income generation as the urban centre provides alternative means of income. But in remote villages kerosene might be one of the few options to gain access to cash income. Even though the majority of authors were sceptical about kerosene as an appropriate fuel for refugee situations, there might nevertheless be specific situations where kerosene can be appropriate as a firewood replacement: where refugees are mainly from urban areas and used to kerosene; in areas with extreme scarcities of fuelwood; in (urban) refugee hosting areas, where kerosene supply systems are established or transport is uncomplicated and cheap; if standard kerosene stoves of high quality can be produced in sufficient number within a reasonable time; where indoor cooking is obligatory due to low temperatures, strong winds or for cultural reasons. Verhoeven (1989) provides a highly technical report , dealing mainly with the engineering aspects of the kerosene provision which is of limited assistance to those interested in kerosene provision. An interesting insight is provided, however, in an appendix letter by E. T. Ferguson: ' In the Sahel, substituting LPG or Kerosene for fuelwood and charcoal is an important way of reducing deforestation due to fuelwood consumption. However, no really practical stoves for kerosene are yet available (added emphasis)' (ibid:97). Verhoeven then continues with a checklist of how a kerosene stove should perform . This list can help implementers when field testing stove models for wider dissemination. Floor (1991:30) in a paper to UNDP and the World Bank comes to the same conclusions, namely that kerosene does have potential to alleviate fuelwood shortages , but that there remain unsolved technical and non-technical problems.
Charcoal Both Ketel (1994:23) and CARE/ODA (1994:56,58) rule out charcoal as a viable alternative to fuelwood for the following reasons: Production and use of charcoal, though cheaper o t transport per energy unit, needs more wood than direct use as firewood which leads to even more deforestation. Charcoal is more expensive per energy unit. Only if fuelwood has to be trucked for more than 100 km does charcoal become economically viable. Refugees & Host Environments
80
Thomas Hoerz
Traditional charcoal production, and even more so modern efficient kilns do not have the necessary production capacity; this would require time to set up. Long distances from charcoal-producing areas o t refugee hosting areas lead to high transport costs. The need to disseminate large numbers of charcoal stoves . Creation of grey markets through the sale of charcoal . Charcoal is produced from felled green trees, not from selectively harvested dry branches thus further adding to the speed of deforestation unless the source of charcoal is fuel plantations. Experience from Kakuma refugee camp (Northwest Kenya) shows that it is extremely difficult to maintain even a 50% supply of charcoal, especially in the rainy season, when supply markets are empty and prices rocket (Finkel 1994:33). In addition, the camp administration had to face protests from authorities in the charcoal producing areas, who were concerned about adverse ecological impacts. Acharcoalsupply programme for Somali camps in Kenya never took off. While thousands of improved charcoal stoves were distributed to refugees, hardly any charcoal reached the refugees. Costs and logistics had been totally underestimated. As the charcoal stoves are not appropriate for firewood, most of them went straight back to the cities, where stove producers then complained about a flooding of the market with dumping-priced stoves from the camps. Other stoves can still be admired in the camps, used as flower pots, stools or potrests. For refugees in urban areas where there are established charcoal markets, charcoal provision could well be an option. Charcoal is, however, a highly marketable asset, particularly in urban surroundings. Large scale sale of charcoal provided for refugees or its exchange for firewood cannot be ruled out. The charcoal provision would then only affect the income of refugees but would have no positive environmental effect. If the 'subsidized' charcoal reaches the market in large quantities it can lead to an overall substitution of firewood by charcoal and hence an acceleration of deforestation. Helin (1990:13) adds the concern that the supply of charcoal can violate laws, for example in Malawi, which restrict the burning of charcoal in indigenous forests. The supply of charcoal to refugees in Kenya is complicated by the fact that charcoal burning is illegal, while the use is not. If charcoal is the chosen option it should be the responsibility of the supplier of fie i nt kilns fuel to refugees to ensure that the producers are supported in using ec and in careful harvesting the wood. As with firewood and kerosene, improved charcoal stoves can reduce consumption considerably. Cooperation with local government authorities and NGOs to achieve this is essential. Two handbooks can give the person in charge an idea of what is technically possible (Hollingdale et.al. 1991 and FAO 1987).
Refugees & Host Environments
81
Thomas Hoerz
Harvest Residues Harvest residues can be either burnt directly like cotton and pigeon pea stalks, they can be briquetted like rice husks, coffee-parchments or straw and they can be carbonized, a process similar to producing charcoal. All of these options have one major advantage over the use of fuelwood or charcoal, they are not forest resource based. Unfortunately, there remain a number of question to be answered, before a fuel provision policy based on harvest residues can be considered: Are large quantities of harvest residues available in the region or country? Are the places of availability close enough to offset transport costs? What are the costs for the fuel itself, its collection, processing and distribution? What are competing or alternative uses of residues? Is it just a matter of prices or is the competition interfering with livelihoods of other resourcepoor rural people? If the harvest residues are to be carbonized, is the production capacity in the host country sufficient or can it be built up? What are the costs ex producer or what are the costs for setting up and running a carbonizing plant? Eriksson (1990:108,115) suggests capital costs of 9- 12 US$ per tonne annual throughput and another 11 - 25 US$ per tonne for the production of briquetted harvest residues. Forsbach et.al. (1986:67-70) have investigated the possibilities of using sugar cane bagasse, cotton stalks (briquettes or charcoal) and rice husk briquettes for the supply to Afghan refugees in Pakistan. None of the options seemed convincing to him, main reasons being the competing uses, the transport costs and technical problems with briquetting . In an overview of briquetting of agricultural waste (Eriksson 1990:17,35) points out that, as a general statement for developing countries, briquettes cannot compete in price with fuelwood, but ' there are also countries, where it seems likely, that deforestation must cause a rise in prices in the not too distant future. In such circumstances, briquetting of agro-residues can have a legitimate economic role without any need for subsidy'. A project whose main aim is to stop deforestation cannot treat fuelwood as a 'free good', therefore the calculation can look very different. If green wood is already being harvested and thus afforestation costs have to be added to the collection, transportation and distribution costs for firewood (which would be basically the same for briquettes) briquetted harvest residues can become an economically viable option if the area of production is not too far from the refugee hosting area.. Competing uses for harvest residues are mainly the use as fuel for local demand, as feed for livestock and as organic material for agricultural soils. On this last use Dewees (1989:1165) remarks that 'some agricultural residues which make perfectly good woodfuels cannot be dug back into the soil in a way which improves the soil structure or fertility .
Refugees & Host Environments
82
Thomas Hoerz
Stalks from cotton, cassava, pigeon peas and chick peas [...] are much too woody to decompose quickly, and in many areas they are used as a valuable fuel.' But where agricultural residues are considered as free livestock feed, attaching a monetary value to the residues can have disastrous effects on the livelihood of resource-poor livestock owners. An overview of the issues related o t harvest residues, albeit not referring to refugee situations is provided in Barnard and Kristofferson (1985). Peat and Papyrus were used in the Rwandan emergency in Benako, but according to CARE/ODA (1994) the available quantities will provide only a temporary solution.
9.3.4 Fuel Production on Site
An approach which is promising in its logic is the on-site production of firewood in intensive woodlots. It is a distinctly different approach to afforestation (see 12.) insofar as its aims are not the establishment of a natural forest or bush cover but the production of high quality fuelwood. A policy involving a combination of afforestation and fuelwood plantation is possible but the main goal of massive and fast production gets more diluted, the more afforestation or rehabilitation components are included. Bottlenecks in such a fuelwood plantation approach might be: Atimegap between establishment and harvest of several years (Helin 1990:13, Finkel 1994). Lack of sufficient land or conflicts arising with customary users of allocated land. Absence of sustainability without outside input, if based on irrigation with pumped water. The approach might be unsustainable without the refugee market (supported by aid providers), unless urban markets are accessible and unless the selected tree species can produce tree products of higher quality like fruits, poles or timber. Natural constraints like topography, soil quality and precipitation. Regarding the time gap between planting and harvesting it should be mentioned that careful selective harvesting of branches can start in many climates as early as two years after planting. This might be a good opportunity for training courses in appropriate fuelwood harvesting techniques where refugees, locals and agency experts can exchange techniques and learn from each other. Bradley (1991) provides information on fuelwood plantations and their role for women in rural areas of Kenya, but does not refer to refugee situations. Shepherd (1992:7) warns, that fuelwood plantations, unless irrigated, are economically not successful in areas below 800 mm rainfall.
Refugees & Host Environments
83
Thomas Hoerz
This may be different in a refugee hosting area, when aid providers compare costs for fuel plantations with the costs of trucking in fuelwood from distant sources . For questions of institutional and economic sustainability, in particular ownership and user rights questions, see 12.1.
9.4
The Food Basket
The most immediate positive impact on the fuelwood consumption could certainly come from a change in the food basket provided or in supplying processing facilities which reduce cooking times. Besides the wasting of fuelwood, unmilled (yellow) maize and long cooking beans, in the absence of enough fuel for proper cooking, can lead to reduced nutritional value (Waldron and Hasci 1995:35) or health problems, especially for small children, elderly or sick persons. Cooking times Wilson (1989:1,29), who wrote the most comprehensive case study on the food basket in a refugee situation reported of cooking times of up to 12 hours for Rosecoco beans, and a minimum of 2 hours for unsoaked other beans. In deliveries to a GTZ famine relief project in Wajir , Kenya 1992, WFP rations contained beans that could not be cooked at all and had to be eaten hard, even after a full day cooking, causing stomach upsets in children and the elderly. WFP or other food suppliers need not only to look at the variety, but also at the particular shipment. Cooking tests are necessary; for example some consignments of Rosecoco beans can also be cooked in one and a half hours. Supplying mixed beans is probably the worst thing to do; separating them is a very time consuming activity, insufficient cooking of the longer cooking varieties can cause health problems or else adequate cooking is a waste of energy (Wilson 1989:29). The selection of bean varieties should of course be based mainly on their nutritional value such as essential amino acids and variety in diet. But their respective energy requirements must be taken into consideration. In situations where the value of firewood exceeds that of the beans to be cooked (for Rosecoco in Malawi the fuel value was up to four times the beans value!), refugees have to sell some of their beans thus reducing protein in their diet. The other option in such a situation would be to pre-cook large amounts, which can lead o t bacterial contamination and diarrhoea (Wilson 1989:30). Pounding and Milling Pounding or milling whole grain and beans remains one of the most promising interventions in order o t reduce fuelwood costs and increase digestibility. This can be done on a central level by means of large milling facilities in the capital or port of entry, on a local level in village based mills or on the household level by hand mills, pestle and mortar or grinding stones (UFA GROUP 1988). Refugees & Host Environments
84
Thomas Hoerz
All of these options can be combined in a way which suits the situation on the ground best. Pounding and milling requires energy either as diesel for engine powered mills, animal power or human energy. It only makes sense if the process uses less energy than that gained by the increased digestibility. For small children and elderly this calculation cannot be applied as they might not be able to digest unmilled maize, other grains and beans at all. Different varieties of maize provide different results when pounded by traditional means of pestle and mortar . The efficiency , measured as the percentage of dehulled maize compared to original weight, of pounding varied in Mozambican refugee settlements in Malawi between 57% and 73%, the energy requirements of the pounder from 0.6% to 2% of the energy value of the maize (Wilson 1989:14). Besides the savings of firewood, which is undoubted, the question remains still open if the energy input in terms of human labour is justified by the increased digestibility. While the handling of traditional pounding equipment is widely known, and the energy required for pounding seems acceptable, the purchase of such equipment is prohibitively expensive for most refugees and the production of pestles and mortars , though a sensible income generating activity is usually hampered by the lack of appropriate timber. The authors of UFA GROUP (1988:8) did not recommend a wide distribution of mortar and pestle for environmental concerns. The production of this equipment on a large scale would threaten standing stocks of forest . Grinding stones were ruled out by Wilson (1989:15) aso t costly for mass distribution. WFP, recognizing the wasteful whole maize distributed in Rwandan camps in Burundi where ground maize is actually preferred, distributed pounders and set up central milling facilities with little impact: the pounders were made of soft wood and became unusable in as little as a week, while the central rf 10% of the total needs of refugees (Muchiri milling facility could only provideo and Owens 1994:2). Commercial maize millers are often unable o t meet the demand of a large refugee population and might be hesitant to invest large sums in expanding their capacity, not knowing for how long refugees are going to stay or receive whole grain maize. The decision of the food supplier (usually WFP) to supply whole maize should not be made before the grinding capacity of the concerned area is assessed and improved. Bottlenecks in the milling facilities can easily lead to rocketing grinding charges, again affecting the poor local population worst (Wilson 1989:17). Another reason why grinding of maize was recommended are the reduced transport costs (CARE/ODA 1994:65). Aguidefor programmes which want to promote small scale milling has been produced by Jonsson et.al. (1994), which introduces in the technology, the economics and the management of small scale milling enterprises. Very useful is alist of country contacts throughout the developing world.
Refugees & Host Environments
85
Thomas Hoerz
9.5
Communal Organization
It is an established fact that fuel savings in community kitchens are far above those of individual cooking after the introduction of improved stoves or ovens. This results not only from the economies of scale, but also because stoves and pots can be better harmonized, fuelwood can be stored to dry and workers more intensively trained. Estimates of savings in bakeries indicate up to 80% using improved community ovens as compared to only up to 50% savings with individual equipment (Forsbach et.al. 1989:61). Trying to convince any population to alter their cooking habits radically will always lead to stiff resistance. Cooking and eating habits are central to cultural identity and have implications for spheres of life beyond nutrition. Organizing parts of the cooking communally should, however, not be ruled out automatically. Communal stoves, where women can bring beans to simmer for some time in their own pots might be possible. What refugee assistance in general can do, is to support existing trends towards commercial and community cooking and baking, which leaves the basic family cooking intact and even supports it.
Refugees & Host Environments
86
Thomas Hoerz
10.
Shelter Construction and Fencing Shelter and settlement programmes give greater consideration to environmental impacts through improved assessment and monitoring procedures. (Recommendation No. 14 of the 1st International Workshop on Improved Shelter Response and Environment for Refugees (UNHCR 1993:5))
Unlike victims of natural disasters like earthquakes , floods or cyclones, who usually rebuild their homesteads at or near the previous site, refugees cannot salvage destroyed houseso rf building materials. They start rebuilding their houses (and lives for that matter) from scratch (OXFAM 1995:916). Refugee shelters impact on the environment in two ways: they need material for their initial construction, maintenance and replacement after a given time and shelter quality, especially in cold climates, determines the need for space heating (Forsbach et.al. 1986:63). The re-introduction of traditional building technologies can improve construction techniques and housing quality and save on both building material and fuelo rf space heating (Usinger 1995). One tonne of timber per house could be saved with the mud brick dome construction in Afghanistan and less space heating was necessary in winter (see 8.). For further reading on shelter and environment see Housing Corporation UK (1994); Nagel (1987); UNCHS (1987); UNCHS/UNEP (1994); UNDRO/UNDP (1990) and UNHCR (1993).
10.1 Plastic Sheets, Beams, Poles and Thatching Material
The provision of prefabricated houses may be a lasting solution, but the costs are usually prohibitive and often only considered for agency staff . Tents are, considering their limited lifespan, also expensive and provide only limited space and privacy. Both options however have the advantage of not involving any negative impact on the host environment. For reasons of cost, but also to encourage refugee initiative and allow for culturally acceptable housing, self construction by refugees with the support of plastic sheeting is widely practised (eg Zetter 1995b:38f ). Little concern has been paid to the source of the material issued or collectedo rf supporting structures, in most cases timber from nearby forests . The impact on the environment is aggravated by the folowing factors : The need for building material is sudden and does not allow delay, if large refugee influxes occur. Transport facilities are not in place or have other priorities: refugees concentrate on a rather small area which they exploit for building material.
Refugees & Host Environments
87
Thomas Hoerz
The need arises at a time, when a whole region is in upheaval and control mechanisms like forest patrols widely fail. The need concurs with a peak demand on assistance agencies to provide essentials like water, food and medical care, leaving them little time to provide timber on an ecologically sound base. Unlike firewood, construction material is extracted from the forest when still green because it needs to be both flexible (for thinner rods) and last a long time. In the absence of the organised supply of building materials, this is the main contributor to deforestation in the first months of refugee settlements. UNHCR, abandoning its former practice of providing simple housing to refugees, expects refugees to construct the wooden frame and walls. This approach is certainly cheaper, easier to administrate and leaves more responsibility with the refugees. But if woody vegetation in the surroundings of the camp is sparse or hardly existing, the outcome can be disastrous in two ways. First, refugees end up with inappropriate housing which lacks privacy and leaves them vulnerable to the climate and banditry. Secondly, the demand for timber can strip large areas of trees. The provision of timber, bricks or other building material is vital in situations of large influxes. If timber is used, provision for binding material like sisal ropes is important as otherwise refugees have no choice but to extract bark from trees. Simple treatment of beams and poles with old oil or approved insecticides can extend the lifespan of these building materials considerably. A central place in a camp, where poles could be carried for supervised treatment, might be a low cost intervention which would significantly reduce the felling of timber for construction. Identifying sources of timber for shelter construction needs to be part of contingency planning on a national level (UNHCR 1993:26). The costs of transporting building material are small in comparison to firewood, as there is no daily recurring need. Care has to be taken that refugees are familiar with the type of building material offered. It is not always the men who need to be consulted on what kind of building material is appropriate. Somali women, as is the case for many pastoralist people, are responsible for house construction. They use long flexible rods to build hemispherical 'tukuls'. Strong, short poles would be useless for them. Alonger lasting solution, with effects beyond the immediate benefit could be the production of rods, poles and beams on site. This option has similar advantages and drawbacks to the production of fuelwood. But unlike the production of firewood, which has hardly ever succeeded as an economically viable undertaking , the production of building material is successful in many developing countries. The use of timber for the construction of latrine slabs, pit reinforcements and superstructures as a cause for deforestation has rarely been discussed. Given the limited lifespan of wooden components as compared to concrete slabs and pit reinforcements , the latter are in most cases not only the technically better, but also the cheaper solution and even more so, when afforestation costs are taken into consideration (Rakotomalala 1990:3).
Refugees & Host Environments
88
Thomas Hoerz
10.2
Shade and Windbreak In the refugee camps planting trees for shade was successful. In each household interviewed at least two trees were planted in the compound. [...] Few households mentioned that in the future they would use them for fuelwood and building material. CARE (1987:26)
The most common reason why participants in Somali refugee camps in Kenya had planted trees in their home compounds waso rf shade. Particularly in camps, where the original vegetation had been cleared for the erection of a camp, and houses are 'roofed' with plastic sheets, heat can become unbearable and shade is very important for the well-being of camp dwellers (Thiadens et.al. 1995:9). The value of home compound trees for windbreak will be initially only small. The impact will be felt only when home compound trees are combined with greenbelts in the close surroundings of the camps. This will improve the conditions in two ways. Firstly, wind speeds are slowed down and secondly, open areas where wind can take up dust and fine sand will be covered with vegetation (CARE 1987:15). Shade trees near houses need not necessarily be of the hardy type that are used in afforestation sites. At a homestead, there is usually some waste water and additional protection through the presence of inhabitants. Experience shows, that shade trees are the more favoured, the quicker they grow, the less stems they have, the more they keep their leaves during the dry season and the less thorny they are, all these not exactly qualities of a hardy desert shrub.
10.3
Fences for Security
In nomadic societies, the fence around a kraal or homestead has a vital function in demarcating temporary residential territory and protecting humans and livestock. These fences consist of freshly cut thorn branches which are heaped around the homestead, sometimes with an inner fence for the animals. As they disintegrate after several months, the fences have to be rebuilt twice or three times per year and present a major cause of deforestation. Refugees will o try t continue fencing if only symbolically - to maintain a minimum of 'territory ' in a situation of anonymity and overcrowdedness. In larger refugee camps, the fencing requirements of agencies are not to be underestimated. In addition o t the usually 'imported ' poles and wire material thorny branches are used o t protect the former from theft . As agencies have funds to pay for daily labour, they are even less likely than refugees to use fencing material economically.
Refugees & Host Environments
89
Thomas Hoerz
One of the most successful activities carried out in the Dadaab area of North Eastern Kenya was the planting of live fences with Commiphora ssp. (Thiadens et.al. 1995:8). This thorny tree is very common in the area and can tolerate careful pruning. Initially planted to provide protection against bandit attacks at night around blocks of approx. 100 families, it now provides other positive impacts besides the improved security such as windbreak, increased privacy, social cohesion of block groups, source of starter -firewood and fodder for goats. The idea of live fencing has now been taken up by local residents, aid agencies and for afforestation sites (Hoerz 1994:21).
_ I • | • |
Concerns were raised by the local population when it became apparent that the harvesting of the 1.5m high Commiphora cuttings was not done in the proper way to ensure survival of the source-tree. Thiadens et.al. (1995:15) recommended regular meetings with local leaders, refugees and agencies to transmit local knowledge in the correct harvesting methods of cuttings and to jointly develop a supervision system for the harvesters who were paid on a daily basis.
• |
Baseline surveys on natural resources should therefore include an assessment of thorny tree species for live fences around refugee compounds and blocks, agency compounds and afforestation or rehabilitation sites. Small field trials to establish the viability of the planting material in combination with an assessment of the standing stock of the preferred species is one condition for a successful strategy. The other condition is consultation with the local population on possible sideeffects and/or additional benefits of the various tree species for fencing and the appropriate harvesting methods.
_
Refugees & Host Environments
90
Thomas Hoerz
_
—
11.
Water Provision and Sanitation Water is an absolute need. A supply of sufficient clean, safe water is vital to people's health and well-being. When water and sanitation facilities break down, public health is immediately at serious risk. The availability of adequate water supplies is one of the essential criteria in determining sites for displaced persons or refugees. (OXFAM 1995:919) Water management and water treatment in the Western World is a field dominated by men, but in tropical developing countries women were the actual pace-makers for traditional water purification. So far, where aid organizations have given any thought at all to the role of women in the context of new water supply projects, they have only been concerned with the time wasted and the hardships endured in fetching water from distant sources. (Jahn 1981:13)
Besides the provision of food and basic shelter the provision of water and sanitation to refugees are usually the first interventions in a refugee situation. The primary aim is less concerned with sustainable solutions than with avoiding disaster. This report cannot deal with the wide field of (mainly technical and organizational) literature on emergency water supply, but restricts itself to longer lasting solutions, while the immediate crisis is contained.
11.1
Water Purification
Refugees do not have always access to clean water. Often they live scattered, unregistered among the local population and put considerable stress on existing water supplies in terms of quantity and quality. As for camps, once the big, agency-run water purification plants are no longer there, local people and settled refugees have to turn to other means of purifying water Refugee camp based water purification plants are usually not planned as a sustainable solution manageable by the local population or settled refugees after the aid agencies have withdrawn. Jahn (1981) provides a wide range of traditional methods of purification collected during extensive field research mainly in Sudan, but also in India and other West - and East African countries . Morgan (1989) provides some practical solutions for water treatment at village level while OXFAM (1995) concentrates on simple purification methods in emergencies, some of which could be adapted to sustainable, low-input systems.
11.2
Latrines
While latrines are a necessity in a situation of high population density, for thinly populated rural areas, they can, if not planned and managed properly, pose more public health dangers than they alleviate.
Refugees & Host Environments
91
Thomas Hoerz
In areas of high groundwater tables, pit latrines are unsuitable and other systems like bucket latrines or septic tanks must be considered, (see also Rakotomalala 1990 and Rakotomalala and Male 1993). OXFAM (1995:919ff ) proposes a minimum of 30 m distance between a latrine and aborehole or well and makes other practical recommendations for emergency sanitation. In the absence of a latrine system on household level (which is the case in emergencies and in many rural villages) simpler solutions that work in emergencies should also be considered for discussion with the local population. rf defecation, trenches to avoid These include defecation areas, areas bannedo seepage into rivers and ponds and others. Cairncross (1988) gives an overview of 'small scale sanitation' with useful details for sustainable solutions.
11.3
Sustainable Water Sources
Water is a renewable resource and competition or conflict over water is a typical 'environmental conflict' (Libiszewski 1992). As it is a much more immediate (survival-) need than any other renewable resource, access to water is often ranked as the top priority by the affected population (Le Breton 1994:29). Even though the drinking water supply at times improves in quantity and quality when boreholes have been sunk for refugees, rivers, ponds and surface water collection in dams or pans may suffer with the arrival of large numbers of refugees through a number of adverse effects (see 2.3.5). The pull-effect of refugee water sources for herds of local people has been often described. It increases the pressure on natural resources over and above the intensive pressure already in existence. Supporting local initiatives to improve water availability several kilometres away from the refugee settlement may be the cheapest 'technology' of area conservation, as this will lead to a dispersal of grazing animals. Close cooperation with the local population and water authorities is essential in siting these improved water sources if costly failures are o t be avoided. Refugee aid providers may be unable to undertake such projects but can provide information and offer assistance to development agencies or NGOs dealing with water in the area. Commoditising water has been advocated since the 1980s as a means to sustain water supply. The basic idea is for water to become an economic good and no longer be a free resource to everybody. It is often forgotten, however, that water use is usually regulated by customary law. In refugee situations and situations of rural poverty , commoditisation of water can not only marginalise the lower economic strata but marginalises women by not recognizing the value of women's work and their limited access to cash. In combination with the 'false division between domestic and productive water' (Cleaver and Elson 1995:7) it deprives the domestic sector and its productive role, which is rarely quantified, of the necessary water input.
Refugees & Host Environments
92
Thomas Hoerz
In addition, attaching money value to water without recognizing the health implications and health costs will inevitably marginalise health issues (ibid:4).
Assessment and Planning The local water authority should be approached as a source of valuable information and resources. People in nearby settlements, particularly women, may also be able to identify water sources, such as springs and surface sources, in addition to wells and boreholes. Members of the affected population may also be technically skilled in water and sanitation: these people and new trainees should be actively involved as much as possible in the design, construction and maintenance of the water system.' (OXFAM 1995:921)
Assessment of water supply requires not only a survey of the practical needs, but also a discussion with representatives of the affected population. Women generally carry the principal responsibilityo rf household water management and must therefore be consulted and involved in planning. The 'waterpoint analysis', suggested by Cleaver and Elson (1995:12) is a practical tool to achieve this goal
Construction and Management Improving and building surface water catchments and shallow wells offers an ideal opportunity to provide labour and income o t refugees and local population. Not only does this repair the damage caused by the refugee influx, conditions can be improved to standards above those in existence before the refugees arrived. A wealth of experience has been gained in dry area development projects regarding small projectso rf water improvement. In planning water management projects for refugee hosting areas the following factors need to be taken n o it account; technology level (shovels, wheelbarrows, donkey- or camel scoops, engine powered belts, caterpillars); compensation / incentives (tools, food for work, cash for work, income through water sale); management system for sustainable use (dam/well/pump committees , individual-, family- or clan ownership); rights of use, responsibilities and financing of maintenance. Anumber of proven technical solutions for sustainable water sources (shallow wells, handpumps, gravity supply etc are provided in Morgan (1989) and OXFAM (1995:6.6.3). Focusing on emergencies UNHCR (1982), UNHCR (1992a) and UNICEF (1986) add valuable information.
Refugees & Host Environments
93
Thomas Hoerz
12.
Afforestation and Area Rehabilitation
12.1 Overriding Considerations: Development, Sustainability, Efficiency
Afforestation for societies, whose livelihood is closely linked with the forest involves a complex set of demands and usages. There is no single type of afforestation which can fulfil the various and sometimes conflicting demands placed upon it which may include: Providing an opportunity to participate in and to learn and experience tree planting for large parts of the population. Producing a variety of tree and bush (food) products important to the livelihood of the population. Surviving and even expanding after the support of agencies has ceased. Providing effective protection for erosion prone areas. Producing timber, poles, fuelwood and fencing material as quick, as much and as sustainable as possible.
Institutional Issues o f Sustainability On the national, the district and the local level existing government bodies are responsible for forest issues. Depending on the size of the afforestation project all or some of the three levels must be approached and involved in the project cycle. This would facilitate planning and implementation in conformity with government policies as well as coordination with activities undertaken by the technical government departments and other agencies and afforestation measures could benefit from the technical knowledge of government foresters. Involvement of the government would also facilitate the participation of local population in the project and therefore enhance the Sustainability of some of the project activities after the phasing out of refugee assistance (Thiadens et.al. 1995:15). Caminada (1992:14) proposes three sub-projects of a refugee hosting area rehabilitation project with considerable funds for reinforcing the role of the Forestry Department of Nepal (see also UNHCR n.d.b) in the following areas: planning capacity, operational capacity and forest protection and management. Forestry networks on a national or regional level, which involve churches, NGOs, research institutions and forest initiatives may be approached, not only for information exchange and advice, but also for their active involvement in planning, implementing and fundraising.
Refugees & Host Environments
94
Thomas Hoerz
Economic Issues of Sustainability Afforestation is a long term undertaking and the funding for managing the afforested areas must be secured through external or government funding or by returns from the forest itself. Even for the initial setting up of an afforestation project, four years is the minimum time which the participants need to gain enough knowledge, confidence and institutional structure to manage the project themselves. As in any income generating activity, the demand side needs consideration in addition to the supply- or production side. The key question is: are there viable and accessible markets for forest products? An example from Rwandan refugee camps demonstrates the problems that can arise, if sustainable markets are not built up: 'A year after the project began, the refugees returned to Uganda. However, plantation efforts were continued and 2,500 hectares were established, areas that now need to be managed. [...] it is unlikely, that nearby markets will be found o t recover a significant proportion of the costs. The use of trees for markets in Kigali is also questioned, therefore the future of the plantations is a problem in itself (Helin 1990:15). 'Tree planting was an activity that could not be sustained unless the areas had been proven o t be economically productive. Natural regeneration occurred on protected sites, but after international funding stopped, there was no possibility of government financing and no desire by refugees or local people to sustain the block plantations through local initiatives' (ibid:16). Local population or long-term refugees will not participate in afforestation programmes if they provide no other income or benefit than wages. The resistance of local population to participate in afforestation programmes around the Ukwimi settlement housing Mozambican refugees in Zambia was first, because they had no control over the trees planted (they were 'government owned') and secondly, because the exotic species were only of limited use (Lassailly-Jacob 1994:15).
Ownership of Afforested Areas Closely linked with questions of income from afforestation is the question of ownership, either of individual trees or of reforested land. It is vital to understand the prevailing tree ownership systems in the area concerned as well as their economic significance in particular for the poor among the host population. Joint discussions of refugees, local population and foresters to make these ownership systems transparent o t all actors are necessary to avoid frictions during an implementation of afforestation activities. Patches of land, formerly communal grazing land, now planted with trees and even fenced, gain considerably in value. If no solutions are found in collaboration with the participants and authorities, more powerful groups will assume 'ownership'. Postponing a resolution on ownership will in almost all cases mean supporting an ultimate solution which will exclude the vulnerable.
Refugees & Host Environments
95
Thomas Hoerz
Questions of ownership of land which has received afforestation input is linked with contributions in terms of work, kind or cash from the owner to be. The same applies o t ownership or user rights of individual trees. A realistic scenario is a 'tripartite agreement' between local authorities, the potential owner or rightful user and the supporting agency. Outright ownership by refugees will in most situations be difficult to arrive at, but security in rights of use may well be achievable this way. One of the lessons learnt in community forestry has been that no sustainable, communal forestry works without clearly defined user or ownership rights (Spitteler 1993:20). Important is not only the ownership of land or trees but the ownership of projects which can only be achieved when all participants take fully part in the project cycle and all related decisions. An outstanding publication in questions of community involvement in forestry are the newsletters 'Forests, Trees and People' published by FAO, Rome. The method widely advocated here which is not only used for forest issues is PRA (Participatory Rural Appraisal) (see for example Chambers and Guijt 1995). Participation is advocated on all levels of an afforestation project and practical toos l provided for 'participatory assessment, monitoring and evaluation' in Case (1990). Assessing why the local population would want to plant trees and why refugees would want o t join in the effort , or in many cases what kind of trees should be planted is part of the baseline survey which needs to be conducted (Spitteler 1993:18, Le Breton 1994).
The Right Species The choice of species for (re-)afforestation is crucial. The question is not so much exotic vs indigenous species, but useful vs less useful species. The preferences of local population and refugees must guide the selection (Wilson 1989:91). The most accepted trees will usually be local species, but for certain needs (shade, fruits, beautification) and with some protection (home and school compounds) well established exotics can play an important role. For badly deforested camp areas, the immediate impact of shade and beautification can have a higher priority than the long-term tree survival and part of the planting by less hardy exotic species can be justified , provided minimal watering is possible (Thiadens et.al. 1995:9). The wish o t put emphasis on fruit trees, which was mentioned in Ukwimi refugee settlement, (Spitteler 1993:19) reflects on the need to provide direct benefits over and above the abstract objective of 'rehabilitation' to the participants in afforestation projects (see also CARE 1987:10). In areas, where exotics like Eucalyptus, Casuarina, Grevillea or Pinus have been planted for decades, an attempt to only work with indigenous species would overload many projects, at least in the initial phase (Muchiri and Owens 1994:4). Diversification should be encouraged while leaving full control over the choice of species to plant to the participants .
Refugees & Host Environments
96
Thomas Hoerz
A remarkable example of local tree species appraisal is provided in various charts of Le Breton (1994:17,26,43,61). Even though the selected species do not serve as reference, as no botanical names are given, the method shows an impressive indigenous knowledge about local tree species. The method used is one of dual ranking. First the main criteria of tree use are identified and ranked, eg 1. fuelwood 2. construction 3. fruits 4. medicine and so on. Secondly the trees are valued according to their being useful for identified and ranked criteria. The higher ranked tree species are then given priority in seedling production. This does not exclude introducing unknown species on a small (test-) scale. The acceptance of species will be influenced by the existing land use of the area in question. 'We have to distinguish the woodland management practised by the herder from that of the farmer. [...] For the mobile herder, the forest is his farm. For the farmer, [...] it provides resources complementary to primary economic activities [...]. Many management practices form a seamless continuum from management in the forest through to management on the farm' (Shepherd 1992).
12.2
Tree Nurseries
The first woman interviewed was crying all the time while she counted the seedlings. When asked why she was crying, she said she was so afraid the seedlings will die, either from too much or too little water, (from an Afghan refugees' tree nursery programme, Ask et.al. 1993) Producing tree seedlings in central nurseries is a skill with few links to traditional agriculture in most parts of the world. Most tree nurseries experience a phase of set-back during the first year and the woman described above had possibly just been through one. As projects are often under pressure to produce a large number of seedlings quick, for example o t meet the next rainy season, nurseries are usually - at least in the initial stages - agency-run production centres with simple output oriented goals like efficiency, quantity and quality; but they can be much more than that. Tree nurseries are the first place where planted seedlings reach a reasonable size to be seen and discussed by participants . It is the place which is always shown to visitors and thus one of the main PR tools, at least for short term visitors . It is the tree nurseries, where there is often shade, water and enclosure for trainings, workshops and meetings. Making tree nurseries attractive places does not necessarily mean producing a showpiece, they can also serve as models for the home compounds of participants . Central or semi-central tree nurseries are the nucleus of any afforestation project. But to widen the training impact and to render participants more independent from project inputs, smaller decentralised tree nurseries are necessary (Kerkhof 1990:208ff, Utting 1993:131).
Refugees & Host Environments
97
Thomas Hoerz
Tree nurseries, located in a decentralised pattern in the refugee hosting areas, are ageneral second-step-recommendation by many authors (Wilson 1989:91; Le Breton 1994), although scarcity of water is a limiting factor in the success of private nurseries. Often it is schools, where tree nurseries are recommended to form the nucleus for environmental education, environmental clubs leading to efforts to 'green' the school compounds and school surroundings (Le Breton 1994:14, Talbot 1995). If a monetary value is attached to tree seedlings, private tree nurseries can be encouraged and supported to respond to the market demand (Woodrow 1989a:216,223). But in contrast to the practice of development projects, seedlings for refugees are rarely sold, for fear that selling seedlings would slow down the distribution rate. The afforestation project, however, should consider handing o t private entrepreneurs and buying seedlings rather than seedling production over producing them. Taking into account the training effect and the step towards sustainability, even slightly higher costs per seedling for the project could be justified . Practical advice on tree nursery set-up and management are provided in Weber (1985:57ff). Nurse et.al. (1992) gives 'operation guidelines for establishing nurseries and plantation through user groups' in Nepal.
12.3
Compound Tree Planting
The planting of trees around homesteads of both local and refugee population can only be successful if trees respond directly to one or more of the expressed needs of the participants concerned which include shade, preferably by evergreen trees, privacy, especially important in densely settled refugee camps, windbreak and beautification, fruits, leaves, twigs and firewood. Wilson (1989:92) suggested that 'a general trend towards increasing fruit tree planting by both refugees and Malawians, which should be encouraged'. Fruit trees, even though not contributing to the firewood or timber supply in the first years could be an ideal entry point o t interest the participants in tree planting. Quick fruit bearing papaya varieties, even though they are not able to survive in semi-arid climates without watering, provide the most immediate encouragement. Observations by Helin (1990:16) in Somalia encourage home compound plantation: Tens of thousands of trees were established around homesites in camps throughout Somalia - proof that people would plant, tend, and maintain trees if they could see tangible benefits.' Forsbach et.al. (1986:57) warn against attaching wrong goals (like fuelwood supply) to compound tree planting: The planting of fast growing trees in the living compounds [...] does not directly relate o t forests. However, it seems to have a number of advantages as it improves the local environment. For energy supply and reduction of market firewood demand, it
Refugees & Host Environments
98
Thomas Hoerz
cannot contribute much.' In the absence of land ownership among refugees, the few trees around the dwelling provide the only chance of direct benefit to refugees out of tree planting. If training in tree planting is to have any meaningful and lasting impact, it must be experienced 'by doing'. For children, this experience can be provided in the school compound. For adults the only place is often the home compound.
12.4
Area Afforestation
It is widely recognised that area protection alone is the most economic way of rehabilitating degraded lands and that in terms of fuelwood alone, afforestation is usually not economically viable. However the rather short time horizons of agencies and participants in refugee hosting areas require faster results in reforesting denuded areas even at higher costs. Any appropriate input to a protected area in addition to the protection provided will speed up recovery. Afforestation has the objective of supporting the development of a sustainable tree cover and to supply a maximum variety of important forest products. Plantations, on the other side, have the objective of supplying the maximum output of certain tree products. Common practices are the transplanting of tree seedlings, direct sowing of tree seeds or the planting of cuttings. Where low or unreliable rainfall hamper tree survival, water harvesting structures have proven successful in dry areas worldwide. Other measures o t increase water infiltration rates are contour bunding, grass reseeding or mulching. All these additional measures are well suited for refugee hosted areas: they speed up recovery and provide income to refugees and local population. The more intensely an area is supported in its recovery, the more productive it will be thereafter , hence giving the owner(s) incentives to continue protection and sustainable use. The literature on sustainable forestry in developing countries is vast, but cannot replace the indigenous knowledge of refugees and locals and cannot replace expertise of foresters. Important problems and possible solutions of forestry in refugee hosting areas have been addressed earlier in this chapter. Rather than trying to condense the wide area of 'afforestation' in a few pages, some highlights on experiences with afforestation in refugee situations are provided and a short , by no means comprehensive list of literature added. Weber (1986) offers practical advice for the practitioner but concentrates on dryland afforestation . Kerkhof (1990) has collected encouraging project experiences with agroforestry in Africa. Two volumes of ICRAF (International Centre for Research in Agroforestry), both by Nair (1993, 1994) deal with agroforestry in the tropics worldwide.
Refugees & Host Environments
99
Thomas Hoerz
12.5
Rainfed vs Irrigated Plantations
The review of irrigated forest plantation programs in many countries emphasizes the needo rf a high degree of professionalism and skill in planning, designing, implementing, managing and organizing such schemes' (Armitage 1985:55). Irrigated forestry, because of its high technology and input level is either a last resort if all other options of supplying essential tree products are not viable or the option of choice under specific and rare conditions such as abundance of water and the technical and economic viability to make it available; the institutional support and the degree of community organisation that makes a sustained operation likely; an economic value of tree products (fruits, timber , firewood etc) which justifies the inputs; infrastructure and accessible demand that make the marketing of plantation products viable. Irrigated tree plantations, unlike rainfed plantations or afforestation, are not an appropriate means for environmental rehabilitation; their main purpose is production. If the production of poles, fuelwood, fruits and other tree products is economically evaluated (Armitage 1985:129), it has to compete with either agricultural production or the cost of fuelwood and timber supply. In some refugee hosting areas the actual cost of fuelwood (transport , distribution, afforestation elsewhere) has become so high that an agency might consider planting trees on irrigated lands. Rainfed plantations make use of natural precipitation. In arid and semiarid areas, water harvesting structures may increase the available water per tree and boost its growth and survival rate. By increasing the infiltration rate, in particular on slopes, arecovery of the vegetation is encouraged and erosion greatly reduced. Shaping the surface of a plantation or an afforestation plot by means of water harvesting structures is very labour intensive and therefore not cheap. On rather sandy soils an average of 100 man days per hectare is required, on laterite soils the labour required may be twice as much. Like the erection of water harvesting structures for human and animal consumption, those for plantations offer good opportunities for food for work and cash for work programs in refugee situations. Water harvesting structures for plantations in refugee situations have been described by Finkel (1994) and Hoerz (1994).
Refugees & Host Environments
100
Thomas Hoerz
12.6 Area Rehabilitation and Soil Erosion Control Perhaps the most impressive environmental rehabilitation observed was the natural regeneration of native vegetation after effective site protection was established (fencing and guarding). [...] The advantages of natural regeneration rest on its relatively low cost and practicability. Furthermore it is only those woody species that have the inherent ability to survive on a specific site that become established. (CARE 1987:14) Little has been written so far on the protection and rehabilitation of refugee hosting areas. Where this has been done, it was usually rather under the somewhat narrow definition of rather 'afforestation' than 'rehabilitation'. The latter can, but does not necessarily have o t include an afforestation component. In very general terms, area rehabilitation could be defined as: Reducing the exposure of an area to degrading factors and providing inputs to that area, which allow the productive capacity in terms of vegetation, fauna and water absorption to recover. By definition, area rehabilitation can be done only with the local population, relevant government authorities and refugees. The basis of such efforts must be the prevailing forest or range management practices. There is abundant literature on indigenous management practices relating o t developing countries. Remarkable is Shepherd (1992), who summarizes the main features of indigenous management systems of Africa 's tropical dry forests and provides an annotated bibliography on the subject. Helpful for the planners and implementers is also a country index of the reviewed literature. The Earlier the Better - the Closer the Better One of the macro-projects the UNHCR environmental guidelines (1994:10) propose 'large scale redevelopment actions requested by the host country for the rehabilitation of the refugee-affected area and its surroundings after the departure of the refugees (added emphasis).The main purpose of such projects should be the restoration of environmental resources (such as forests ) and/or the provision of alternative development benefits to the district o t compensate for irreversible environmental damage.' Rehabilitation of abandoned refugee sites is an important , yet often neglected issue. Various reports stress the responsibility of humanitarian agencies ot rehabilitate the environment of the abandoned refugee camp in Liboi, Kenya (Finkel 1994:39, Thiadens 1995:16). Yet, no donor has been identified and it is likely, that the rehabilitation of Liboi will gradually move down the priority list of both the host government and UNHCR. In discussing rehabilitation measures, there is a danger of assuming that refugees are per se an environmental disturbance and the damage inflicted on the environment can only be dealt with after their departure .
Refugees & Host Environments
101
Thomas Hoerz
Experience has shown, however, that refugees' presence, workforce and creativity are a crucial factor in large scale rehabilitation measures. Other reasons why preventive protection should be given priority over curative rehabilitation are: Previously degraded areas need immediate protection to avoid irreversible degradation. Vulnerable surroundings can be stabilised and productivity increased by means of grass reseeding, erosion control, partial afforestation, controlled harvesting and various degrees of negotiated access restriction. Income generation by means of large preventive rehabilitation activities can partly offset losses of environmental resources and agricultural yields incurred by the local population. Hostilities between local population and refugees can be reduced through cooperative and participatory processes during early implementation. Funds for large scale rehabilitation projects are more likely to be released if they are included in (or even form an alternative to) care and maintenance programmes, once it has become clear, that immediate repatriation is not the most likely solution. Prevention is cheaper, more efficient and more likely to succeed than repair.
There are a number of reasons why area rehabilitation in very close proximity to a refugee camp or settlement should be given priority. First, such a practice corresponds with traditional management systems: 'Sedentary farmers manage their woodland most intensively nearest their home base, and with decreasing intensity, in a series of concentric circles as one moves outward from this base. Such a 'graded' management needs to be understood since it is very different from a forest reserve management with equal intensity throughout' (Shepherd 1992:11). Secondly the degree of deforestation is often more pronounced, and the potential for natural regeneration usually reduced, near a large settlement. In addition are rehabilitation measures complementary to protection agreements in proximity of the refugee settlements. Thirdly, since refugee and local participants are living closer to the work site, rehabilitation areas can function better as demonstration sites. Greenbelts in proximity to residential areas improve the microclimate and protect from (sand) storms.
12.7
Protection Measures Experience has shown that [...] no punishment, no fence can avoid the exploitation of forest products if there is a need. The most promising approaches had been achieved through a real participation of the local population. (Klingshirn et.al. 1993:21)
Refugees & Host Environments
102
Thomas Hoerz
The best protection measure for an area is the social agreement of all concerned parties . Fences for protecting a rehabilitation area which are erected without this consent will have only a short lifespan. The poles and the fencing material itself are expensive investments for the agencies and valuable commodities for the poor among refugees and locals. If fences o t protect a certain area have been erected without forming a base of common understanding with opinion leaders, the annoyance over this will add o t the temptation to dismantle the fence. In the context of high levels of insecurity in Somali camps of Kenya, fences for security were desperately needed and therefore erected, at least partly , by voluntary refugee labour (Thiadens et.al. 1995). Even though the total length is now over 70 km, the fencing in form of thorny hedges is respected and e l ft intact (see also 11.4). Fencing or generally protecting a rehabilitation area is in the first place a restriction for herders, gatherers and all those who used the area before. If the concerned population is simply deprived of what is within the fence - however little it was - it will be perceived a bad fence. Only if benefits from within the fenced area are obvious can a fence be approved of. There is an inherent danger of adding to existing conflict if fenced areas 'belong' to one group and the other group is e l ft out.
Refugees & Host Environments
103
Thomas Hoerz
13.
Environmental Education and Awareness Creation 'An awareness/education campaign for adults, particularly women, and extracurriculum education for children on the related environmental matters should thus be included in virtually all of the [environment protection] projects ...' (UNHCR 1994a:8).
Everybody working in this field would agree with the above statement but the only document concentrating on environmental education in a refugee context so far is Talbot (1995). Environmental education for refugees must address the special features of the situation and combine the provision of background knowledge with the joint development of solutions that work. Environmental education 'cannot be defined without taking into account each society's actual economic, social, cultural and ecological circumstances and the objectives established by that society for its development' (added emphasis) (UNESCO/UNEP 1990:5). Refugees and local population are directly affected by the degradation of the environment in many ways. Especially those whose task is the collection of firewood, water and bush resources realize that the resource base is dwindling. Awareness does not have to be created, it is there, but probably not among those who are speaking up in meetings. The more vulnerable groups need avenues to express themselves and to link their concerns to possible actions (Talbot 1995:14).
13.1 Other Programmes as an Entry Points
Primary and sometimes secondary education form a routine component in many refugee camps which are past the emergency phase. As in other formal education systems in rural areas, there is a danger that the curriculum is disconnected from the day to day reality of the students. Issues of the environment and environmental health are among the very tangible topics which can connect formal education to the realities of the refugee hosting areas (see Woodrow 1989a:218, Talbot 1995 and Thiadens 1995:6). Four major objectives of an environmental curriculum in village schools of Mali are described in Schneider (1993:160), which rf refugee situations: could also act as a guidelineo Stimulating the curiosity of young schoolchildren about their physical, biological, cultural, spiritual and social environment. Helping people o t understand, know, appreciate and protect their environment. Providing means of improving their knowledge about environmental resource management techniques so that they can participate in concrete development actions. Making young people the "spokespersons" for the environment in their family and village communities.
Refugees & Host Environments
104
Thomas Hoerz
Agencies working on the field of environment are usually ill-prepared to disseminate information and skills in schools. The training of teachers, and the development of teaching aids is essential for success. Recommendation No, 1 of a UNHCR mission on environmental education in Kenya was: 'An environmental education kit should be produced for refugee primary school children.' (Talbot 1995:5) Such a kit should contain typically: asufficient number of pupil booklets cloth flip charts materials for practical / experimental activities aguide for the refugee teachers ateacher training guide The Bellerive Foundation (1989) has developed an excellent curriculum in seven lessons with numerous comic illustrations for upper primary level. Even though this was developed for rural Kenya, the basic structure of the lessons and the messages of the illustrations can provide an important guide for local teachers and artists of a refugee community. UNESCO provides a sourcebook for environmental education (1985), guidelines for the development of non-formal environmental education (1986), a strategy paper (1988) and a directory of institutions working in the field of environmental institutions (1989), which might be helpful if cooperation partners are sought for a refugee situation. Schneider (1993) provides a range of interesting case studies from developing countries dealing with environmental education. Unfortunately none of these sources refer to working with displaced populations. In many refugee settlements and some refugee camps agricultural extension activities are undertaken . This service provides another entry point for very practical environmental messages in the area of agroforestry, soil conservation and wind protection. 'An appropriate manual, dealing with environmental principles in agriculture, should be acquired for the farmers' classes [...]' (Talbot 1995:9). Basic health programmes need to incorporate education in environmental health. Reducing smoke in the kitchen through improved stoves might be a stronger argument than saving the forests of the region. Reducing the health risk for children are more likely to convince mothers to engage in sanitation activities than the abstract objective of keeping water sources clean (see also Kuntz 1990; Mears and Chowdhury 1994; RPG 1991; Sims 1994).
13.2
Refugees' Responsibility for Host Environments
One of the most d c fiu tl tasks for environmental education will be to get the idea across, that besides the rights refugees enjoy (or should enjoy), certain responsibilities are naturally placed upon them. One of these responsibilities, referring to the host environments, is to avoid unnecessary damage to the natural Refugees & Host Environments
105
Thomas Hoerz
resources at stake and to cooperate with the local population in a sustainable common property resource (CPR) management. Virtually nothing has been written on the 'environmental responsibility' of displaced people, the literature dealing with the wider topic concentrated so far on control mechanisms imposed by the local population on (mostly self settled) refugees (see 2.3.3, 5.). Awareness creation by agency staff alone is unlikely to prove successful, it can all too easily be interpreted as another rule, another restriction on the refugees' endeavour to improve their situation. A promising avenue, though hardly ever described, could be through facilitating, even moderating the communication between local population and refugees. Lessons in CPR Management In every refugee hosting area, there is an accumulated traditional knowledge among the local population how to reduce adverse environmental impact. Many failures of government policies and outside interventions have shown that it is not easy to improve these systems in regard to their long term, sustainable productivity . The conclusion for refugee situations would be to make optimum use of this know-how. 'Newly displaced people often cope by clinging to the familiar, and they may try to transfer land-use practices from their own experience that are inappropriate to their new environment. Under the right circumstances and particularly if it is backed by official assistance, the host community can impart local knowledge and information to the refugees how best to utilize available resources and adapt to the local ecology' (Jacobsen 1995). Local knowledge of trees and other plants, for example, and the sustainable use of those could be harnessed through training courses run for refugees by locals (Thiadens et.al. 1995:15). These courses could also communicate the system of ownership and user rights prevailing in the area thus leading to a reduction of tension and resource conflicts .
Refugees & Host Environments
106
Thomas Hoerz
14.
Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) of the Project Impact Evaluation can be undertaken by programme staff, outside consultants, personnel from the donor agency, users and producers [...]. External evaluators can take a fresh look at the programme, and since they are not closely involved with its success or failure they can be more objective in their assessment. However, external evaluators may misinterpret the information they collect from the programme staff, producers and users, especially if the local staff find the external person threatening. Evaluation is most effective when a team comprised of external agents, programme staff, users and producers work together. (Joseph 1990:12)
14.1 Who 's Evaluating Whom? Aproject's performance can only be evaluated by assessing the benefits for local and refugee population. If these benefits have not been stated in the initial project objectives, the objectives need to be revised. The participants, both refugees and locals have o t play the decisive role: they must decide what a 'benefit ' is for them. The task for project managemento is t develop measurable indicators for objectives rather than to define them. Indicators such as 'nursery output' (CARE 1987:8) say nothing about the success of an afforestation component. Not even the 'number of seedlings distributed' or 'planted' can measure success. If the objective has been o t plant x hectares of woodlots, only the percentage surviving trees (after one year or after the first dry spell) in these woodlots can be meaningfully measured. The question remains open, however, whether a certain number of trees was the objective of the participants or if it was for example, rather the improved fodder base from within protected areas. Accountability of a project to the participants is not a new idea, but so far hardly practised in development work and absent in relief and refugee operations. Projects are usually held financially accountable to the donors. To evaluate project impacts, participants are at best questioned and their opinion then considered among other sources of information. If the participants play the dominant role in defining the objectives of a resource protection project, it is only logical that they are the main evaluators of the project. By doing so, they evaluate not only the performance of the project personnel, but also their own involvement. Case (1990) provides some practical o to s l for involving participants in the assessment, monitoring and evaluation of community forestry. But lessons from 'FAME' (Participatory Assessment Monitoring and Evaluation) (ibid:4 f ) can be transferred to other environmental activities o t ensure that the participants are those who decide on the success of a project.
Refugees & Host Environments
107
Thomas Hoerz
14.2 A Permanent Research Team
The M&E of a project is usually undertaken by the project (staff ) itself, preferably along an M&E plan, or by short term outside experts , whose terms of reference are written in the headquarters . These two approaches both have weaknesses: organizational blindness of the project staff . Data can be generated quite reliably, but picking up new challenging questions is not likely to happen; bias, i.e. unwillingness to (radically) question the prevailing approaches and methods; participatory research methods seem to be too time consuming for pressurized implementing staff ; proposals from short term consultants do not take certain long term experiences into consideration and cannot be counterchecked with small scale test implementation; short term consultants do not have sufficient time for participatory research methods or participant observation; trends over time and according to seasons and drought cycles are neglected, instead a static 'snapshot' is portrayed with short term consultancies. An alternative approach to monitoring and evaluating is contained in a report to OXFAM (Harrell-Bond 1994:27). The report called for a permanent research team for action research, in this case not limited to environmental projects. Such a research team would be independent from the project but in much stronger feedback contact than outside short term consultants. It should be mostly based on in-country expertise , probably led by a University of the host country. The advantages would include: strengthening of local research capacity; flexibility, ie the team could respond to immediate research needs of the implementing project or potential donors on request; access to the pool of local experts ; being able to show and address the dynamic nature of problems. The intimate knowledge of the present situation and its changes due to population movements, seasons, security developments and the permanent contact with target groups, participants and implementers would make unrealistic proposals (eg Finkel 1994:15: 'All harvesting of wood from a 20 km radius around the camps must stop.'), less likely. Both independence and a strong information feedback system between the research team and refugees, local population, host government and implementing agencies are vital. Simultaneously, the research team can have a networking function and be a catalyst and backstopper for an Environmental Task Force similar to the one established in refugee camps of Kagera region, Tanzania Refugees & Host Environments
108
Thomas Hoerz
(CARE/ODA 1994:43; Environmental Task Forces for Ngara and Karagwe Districts 1994). Overly academic and too technical/simplistic findings and recommendations can be avoided this way as the research team would bear ongoing responsibility for their proposals. The costs for such a permanent research team should be shared by the relevant organisations working within the region. To guarantee the independence and impartiality , the environmental research team could be under the supervision of a joint body of host government and international organisation, eg the Ministry for Environment and UNEP, the Refugee Secretariat and UNDP or what ever combination seems feasible and practical under the specific conditions. The terms of reference of the research team must cover two main areas: First, the analysis part with both rapid assessments where problems are most pressing and indepth studies of the wider implications, the medium term dynamics and underlying causes of environmental degradation. Secondly, the action part , where in consultation with all actors short - medium- and long-term mitigation measures are designed, tested and implemented. All research must be based on three basic ideas: The responsibility for environmental degradation and protection in refugee hosting areas is systemic and lies not with one single group. There is no single issue solution to environmental degradation. Environmental protection and rehabilitation can not be solved in isolation from other humanitarian and developmental objectives.
Refugees & Host Environments
109
Thomas Hoerz
15.
Bibliography
ADIIN-YAANSAH, E. and B. HARRELL-BOND (1995) Regulating the NonGovernmental Sector: The Dilemma, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. AHMAD, Y. J. and G. K. SAMMY (1985) Guidelines to Environmental Impact Assessment in Developing Countries, Hodder and Stoughton, London. ANDERSON, M. B. and P. J. WOODROW (eds) (1989) Rising from the Ashes Development Strategies in Times of Disaster, UNESCO, Paris and Westview Press, Boulder. APROVECHO INSTITUTE / GATE (1984) Fuel Saving Cookstoves, GTZ/GATE, Eschborn. ARMITAGE, F. B. (1985) Irrigated Forestry in Arid and Semi-Arid Lands: A Synthesis, International Development Research Centre, Ottawa. ASK, K., A. KNUDSEN and A. SHURKE (1993) Socio- Economic Effects of Training Programs for Refugees, Norwegian Refugee Council, Oslo. BACHLER, G. (1994) Desertification and Conflict. The Marginalization of Poverty and of Environmental Conflict, Centre for Security Studies and Conflict Research, Zurich and Swiss Peace Foundation, Bern. BARBIER, E. (ed) (1993) Economics and Ecology : New Frontiers and Sustainable Development, Chapman & Hall, London. BARDHAN, P. (1993) Symposium on Management of Local Commons, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 7 No. 4. BARNARD, G. and L. KRISTOFERSON (1985) Agricultural Residues in the Third World, Earthscan, London. BASCOM, J. (1993) The Peasant Economy of Refugee Settlement in Eastern Sudan, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 83 No.2, Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge MA and Oxford. BELLERIVE FOUNDATION (1989) Cooking to Conserve - Energy Conservation Lessons for Upper Primary School, Bellerive Foundation, Nairobi. BENNETT, J. (1994) NGO Coordination at Field Level, Refugee Participation Network No. 17, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. BENNETT, J. (1995) The NGO Code of Conduct: NGO Obligations Towards Governments, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford BENNETT, J., M. DUFFIELD, J. BORTON (et.al.) (1995) Meeting Needs: NGO Coordination in Practice, Earthscan, London. BENNET, 0. (ed) (1991) Greenwar - Environment and Conflict, Panos, London. BENYASUT, M. (1990) The Ecology of Phanat Nikkom Camp, Institute of Asian Studies, Bangkok. BEYANI, C. (1995) Personal Communication, Oxford. BLACK, R. (1994a) Environmental Change in Refugee Affected Areas of the Third World: The Role of Policy and Research, Disasters Vol. 18 No. 2.
Refugees & Host Environments
110
Thomas Hoerz
BLACK, R. (1994b) Forced Migration and Environmental Change, Journal of Environmental Management 1994, 42. BLACK, R. and V. ROBINSON (eds) (1993) Geography and Refugees - Patterns and Processes of Change, Belhaven Press, London. BOGE, V. (1992) Proposal for an Analytical Framework to Grasp "Environmental Conflict", Centre for Security Studies and Conflict Research, Zurich and Swiss Peace Foundation, Bern. BRABANT, K. v. (1995) NGO Legislation: The Sri Lanka Case, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. BRADLEY, P. H. (1991) Woodfuel, Women and Woodlots, Volume 1 and 2, MacMillan, London. BRAIDOTTI, R., E. CHARKIEWICZ, S. HAUSLER and S. WIERINGA (1994) Women, the Environment and Sustainable Development - Towards a Theoretical Synthesis, INSTRAW, Santo Domingo and Zed Books, London. BROMLEY, D. W. (ed) (1995) The Handbook of Environmental Economics, Blackwell, Oxford. CACERES, R. (1989) Stoves for People Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Stoves Dissemination, Intermediate Technologies Publication, London and Foundation for Woodstove Dissemination, Nairobi. CAIRNCROSS, S. (1988) Small Scale Sanitation, Ross Institute, London. CAIRNCROSS, S. and R. FEACHAM (1993) Environmental Health Engineering in the Tropics, John Wi ley & Sons, Chichester. CAMINADA, L. (1992) Nepal - Consultancy on Environmental Protection and Rehabilitation in Refugee Hosting Areas, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. CAMPBELL, B. M. (1987) The Use of Wi ld Fruits in Zimbabwe, Economic Botany, Vol.41 No.3 . CARE (1987) Hiran Refugee Reforestation Project - Final Evaluation, CARE. CARE / ODA (1994) Refugee Inflow into Ngara and Karagwe Districts, Kagera Region, Tanzania - Environmental Impact Assessment, CARE International and Overseas Development Administration, London. CASE, D. D. (1990) The Community's Toolbox - The Idea, Methods and Tools for Participatory Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation in Community Forestry, FAO, Rome. CHAMBERS, R. (1982) Rural Refugees in Africa: Past Experience, Future Pointers, Disasters. Vol. 6 No. 1, London. CHAMBERS, R. (1986) Hidden Loosers? The Impact of Rural Refugees and Refugee Programs on Poorer Hosts, International Migration Review Vol. xx No. 2, New York. CHAMBERS, R. (1992) Rural Appraisal : Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton. CHAMBERS, R. and L GUUT (1995) PRA - Five Years later: Where are we Now? Forests, Trees and People Newsletter No. 26/ 27, FAO, Rome. CHOUCRI, N. and R. C. NORTH (1990) War, Peace, Survival, Westview Press, Boulder. CHRISTENSEN, H. (1985) History and Field Study of a Burundian Settlement in Tanzania, UNRISD, Geneva. CLARK, L. (1987) Promoting Refugee Participation, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC.
Refugees & Host Environments
111
Thomas Hoerz
CLARK, L. and S. LEWIS (1987) Refugee Participation Case Study: Karkora Settlement in Eastern Sudan, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. CLEAVER, F. and D. ELSON (1995) Women and Water Resources: Continued Marginalisation and New Policies, International Institute for Environment and Development, London. CUNY, F. (1987) Refugee Participation in Emergency Relief Operations, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. DALEY, P. (1993) From the Kipande to the Kibali : The incorporation of Refugees and Labour Migrants in Western Tanzania, 1900 - '87 in: Black, R. and V. Robinson (eds): Geography and Refugees - Patterns and Processes of Change, Belhaven Press, London. DANKELMAN, I. and J. DAVIDSON (1988) Women and Environment in the Third World, Earthscan Publications, London. DARROW, K. and M. SAXENIAN (1993) Appropriate Technology Sourcebook, Volunteers in Asia, Stanford CA. DAVIDSON, J. and D. MYERS (1992) No Time to Waste - Poverty and the Global Environment, Oxfam, Oxford. DE WAAL, A. (1993) The Nightmare Continues ... Abuses Against Somali Refugees in Kenya, African Rights, London. DEMEKE, T. and M. LEMMA (1993) Evaluation of OXFAM 's Water Supply Scheme in Hartisheik Refugee Camp, Eastern Ethiopia 1988 - 1992, Internal Report to OXFAM, Oxford. DENNIS, J. V. (1993) Research for the Preparation of Environmental Assessment Guidelines, UNHCR / PTSS*, Geneva DEWEES, P. A. (1989) The Woodfuel Crisis Reconsidered: Observations on the Dynamics of Abundance and Scarcity, World Development Vol.17 No.8, Pergamon Press, Oxford. DEWOLF, S. C. (1994) Practical Aspects of UNHCR-NGO Partnership , Refugee Participation Network No. 17, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. DUFFIELD, M. (1995) NGOs and the Sub-Contracting of Humanitarian Relief, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. ECA (1984) Refugee and Displaced Women in Africa, Economic Commission for Africa , Addis Ababa. ENVIRONMENTAL TASK FORCES FOR NGARA AND KARAGWE DISTRICTS (1994) Short Term Environmental Action Plan, Ngara and Karagwe. ERIKSSON, S. and M. PRIOR (1990) The Briquetting of Agricultural Wastes for Fuel, FAO, Rome. FAO (1987) Simple Technologies for Charcoal Making, FAO, Rome. Bur ing Cookstoves: A Development Manual, FAO (1993) /mproved So/id Bfomass n FAO Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia, Bangkok. FINKEL, M. (1994) Environmental Impact of Refugee Camps in Kenya and Options for Rehabilitation Through Water Harvesting , UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. FLOOR, W. and R. van der PLAS (1991) Kerosene Stoves: Their Performance, Use and Constraints, UNDP / World Bank (ESMAP), Washington DC. o t ws and Trees, Earthscan, FOLEY, G., P. MOSS, L. TIMBERLAKE (1984) S International Institute for Environment and Development, London and Washington DC. FORBES MARTIN, S. (1991) Refugee Women, Zed Books, London.
Refugees & Host Environments
112
Thomas Hoerz
FORBES MARTIN, S. and J. MENDS-COLE (1992) Refugee Women and Economic Self-Reliance, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. FORSBACH, H. H., H. G. HUHN, M. REUBER, P. H. SLIDING (1986) Energy Survey on Family Level in Afghan Refugee Tentage Villages in Pakistan, GTZ, Koln and Frankfurt .
FOSSELDORF, H. and C. MADSEN (1994) Refugee Repatriation - A Selected and Annotated Bibliography, Danish Refugee Council Documentation Centre, Copenhagen FREUND, P. F. and K. KALUMBA (1986) Spontaneously Settled Refugees in Northwestern Province, Zambia, International Migration Review, Vol. xx No. 2, IOM, Geneva. GAO (1991) Refugees - Living Conditions are Marginal, United States General Accounting Office, Washington DC. GHIMIRE, K. (1994) Refugees and Deforestation, International Migration, Vol. xxxii, No. 4, IOM, Geneva. GIZEWSKI, P. and T. HOMER-DIXON (1995) Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict: The Case of Pakistan, University of Toronto, Toronto. GORMAN, R. F. (1986) Beyond ICARA II Implementing Refugee Related Development Assistance, International Migration Review, Vol. xx No. 2. GOSLING R. (1992) The Experience of Mozambican Women in Ukwimi Refugee Settlement, unpublished thesis, Liverpool. GREEN, R. H. (1994) That They Maybe Whole Again - Offsetting the Refugee Influx Burden in Ngara and Karagwe Districts, Report to UNICEF, Ngara and Dar-esSalaam. GTZ RESCUE (1995) Evaluation of Project's Performance, GTZ, Nairobi. GURMAN, S. (1992) Defining Appropriate Environmental Systems for UNHCR, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. GURMAN, S. (1991) Refugees and the Environment - A Discussion Paper, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. HABERMEHL, H. (1994) Micro- and Macroeconomic Benefits of Fuelwood-saving Stoves in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, GTZ I HEP, Eschborn. HABERMEHL, H. (1994a) Micro- and Macroeconomic Benefits of Household Energy Conservation Measures in Rural Areas of Kenya, GTZ / HEP, Eschborn. HAFIZ, M. A. and N. ISLAM (1993) Environmental Degradation and Inf ra/ Interstate Conflicts in Bangladesh, Centre for Security Studies and Conflict Research, Zurich and Swiss Peace Foundation, Bern. HALL, E. (1990) Vocational Training for Women Refugees in Africa, International Labour Review, Vol 129, No. 1, International Labour Organisation, Geneva. HANSEN, A. (1990) Refugee Self- Sufficiency Versus Settlement on Government Schemes. The long Term Consequences for Security, Integration and Economic Development of Angolan Refugees ( 1966 - 1989) in Zambia, UNRISD, Geneva. HARRELL-BOND, B. (1986) Imposing Aid : Emergency Assistance to Refugees, Oxford University Press, London. HARRELL-BOND, B. (1994) The Ikafe Refugee Settlement Project in Aringa County, Report to Oxfam, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford.
Refugees & Host Environments
113
Thomas Hoerz
HASCI, N. (1994) Bricks, Biscuits and Barrels of Pigs' Feed: Liberian Women Refugees and Credit Schemes, Refugee Participation Network No. 17, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. HELIN, W. (1990) Refugees and Forestry, Forestry Support Program, Washington DC. HELIN, W. and S. TAMONDONG-HELIN (1991) Migration and the Environment: Interrelationships in Sub-Saharan Africa, Field Staff Reports No. 22, Natural Heritage Institute, Sausalito CA. HENRY, J. (1995) Personal Communication, Oxford HOERZ, T. (1994) RESCUE First Year Report, Project Report , GTZ, Nairobi HOERZ, T. (1995a) The Environment of Refugee Camps, Refugee Participation Network No. 18, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. HOERZ, T. (1995b) Holy Stove - Why Stove Programmes Have to Adapt to Refugee Situations, unpublished Paper, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. HOLLINGDALE, A. C., R. KRISHNAN and A. P. ROBINSON (1991) Charcoal Production - a Handbook, Commonwealth Science Council, London. HOMER-DIXON, T., P. GIZEWSKI, P. HOWARD, V. PERCIVAL (1995a) Environmental Security Briefing Book: Key Concepts and Cases, University of Toronto, Toronto. HOMER-DIXON, T., P. GIZEWSKI, V. PERCIVAL (1995b) Social Adaptation Under Environmental Scarcity, University of Toronto, Toronto. HOUSING CORPORATION UK (1994) Refugees and Housing Need, The Housing Corporation, London. HUDSON, N. W. (1987) So/7 and Water Conservation in Semi-Arid Areas. FAO Land and Water Development Division, Rome. IOM/RPG (1992) Migration and the Environment, International Organization for Migration and Refugee Policy Group, Geneva. JACOBSEN, K. (1994) The Impact of Refugees on the Environment: A review of the Evidence, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. JACOBSEN, K. (1995) Refugees' Environmental Impact: the Effect of Patterns of Settlement, Journal of Refugee Studies, forthcoming Volume, Oxford. JACOBSEN, K. with S. WILKINSON (1993) Refugee Movements as Security threats in Sub-Saharan Africa, in: Weiner, M. International Migration and Security, Westview Press, Boulder. JACOBSON, J. L. (1988) Environmental Refugees: A Yardstick of Habitability, Worldwatch Institute, Washington DC. JAHN, S. A. (1981) Traditional Water Purification in Tropical Developing Countries, GTZ, Eschborn. JONSSON, L-0,, D. A. V. DENDY, K. WELLINGS and V. BOKALDERS (1993) Small Scale Milling - A Guide for Development Workers, Intermediate Technology Publications, London. JORDAN, J. W. (1993) Sudanese Refugees' Settlement Programme, Uganda Environmental Assessment, Energy Supply and Forestry, GFA, Frankfurt JOSEPH, S. (1990) Guidelines for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluating Cookstove Programmes (Community Forestry Field Manual 1), FAO, Rome. JOSEPH, S., K. K. PRASAD and H. B. van der ZAAN (eds) (1990a) Bringing Stoves to the People, Foundation for Woodstove Dissemination, Nairobi.
Refugees & Host Environments
114
Thomas Hoerz
KAMARA, S. S. (1992) S/'en-a Leone - Domestic Energy Assessment Waterloo Camp, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva KERKHOF, P. (1990) Agroforestry in Africa - A Survey of Project Experience, Panos Publications, London. KETEL, H. (1994a) Tanzania - Environmental Assessment Report of the Rwandese Refugee Camps and the Affected Local Communities in Kagera Region, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. KETEL, H. (1994b) Zaire - Environmental Assessment Report of the Rwandese Refugee Camps and the immediate Surroundings in North and South Kivu, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. KIBREAB, G. (1993) The Myth of Dependency Among Camp Refugees in Somalia 1979 - 1989, Journal of Refugee Studies Vol. 6 No. 4, Oxford University Press, Oxford. KIBREAB, G. (1990) The State of the Art Review of Refugee Studies in Africa, Uppsala University, Uppsala. KIMANI, M. J. (1994) Energy Conservation Training Programme in the Goma Refugee Complex, Kahindo Refugee Camp, Final Report GTZ, Goma. KIMANI, M. J. and D. WALUBENGO (1993) Whose Technologies? The Development and Dissemination of Renewable Energy Technologies (RETS) in Sub-Sahara Africa, KENGO Regional Wood Energy Programme for Africa (RWEPA), Nairobi. KLINGSHIRN, A., C. SEPP, P. WAGNER and A. H. CHAVANGI (1993) ProFeasibility Study on Possibilities of Reforestation in Refugee Hosting Areas in Kenya, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. KREMPIN V. (1995) Personal Communication KRUGER, F. (1991) The Legacy of Homeland Policy in: Mamphele R. (ed), Restoring the Land - Environment and Change in South Africa , Panos, London. KUHLMANN, T. (1990) Burden or Boon? A Study ofEritrean Refugees in the Sudan, VU University Press, Amsterdam . KUHLMANN, T. (1994) Organized versus Spontaneous Settlement of Refugees in Africa, in: Adelman, H. and J. Sorenson (eds) African Refugees: Development Aid and Repatriation, Westview Press, Boulder. KUHNKE, K., M. REUBER and D. SCHWEFEL (1990) Solar Cookers in the Third World, GATE/GTZ, Eschborn. KUNTZ, D. (1990) Ensuring the Health of Refugees: Taking a Broader Vision, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. LAING, R. (1995) The Role of Voluntary Agencies in Development: a Recipient's Perspective, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. LANE, C. and R. MOOREHEAD (1994) Who Should Own the Range? New Thinking on Pastoral Resource Tenure in Drylands Africa, International Institute for Environment and Development, London. LASSAILLY-JACOB, V. (1994) Scheme-Settled Refugees and Agro-Ecological Impact on Hosts' Environment, Toronto. LE BRETON, G. (1994) An Assessment of the Environmental Damage in the Areas Surrounding the Mozambican Refugee Camps in Zimbabwe, Fuelwood Crisis Consortium , Zimbabwe.
Refugees & Host Environments
115
Thomas Hoerz
LE BRETON, G. (1995) Stoves, Trees and Refugees: The Fuelwood Crisis Consortium in Zimbabwe, Refugee Participation Network No. 18, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. LEACH, M. (1991) Environmental Impact of Refugees from Liberia in Sierra Leone, Refugee Participation Network No. 11, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford LEACH, M. (1992) Dealing with Displacement: Refugee-Host Relations, Food and Forest Resources in Sierra Leonean Mende Communities During the Liberian Influx 1990-91, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton. LEACH, G. and R. MEARNS (1988) Beyond the Woodfuel Crisis, Earthscan Publications, London. LEURS, R. (1994) A Resource Manual for Trainers and Practitioners of Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), University of Birmingham, Birmingham. LIBISZEWSKI, S. (1992) What is Environmental Conflict? Centre for Security Studies and Conflict Research, Zurich and Swiss Peace Foundation, Bern. MARKYANDA, A. (1992) The Value of the Environment: a State of the Art Sun/ ey, in: Markyanda, A . and J. Richardson (eds) The Earthscan Reader in Environmental Economics, Earthscan Publications, London. MARKYANDA, A. and J. RICHARDSON (eds) (1992) The Earthscan Reader in Environmental Economics, Earthscan Publications, London. MCDOWELL, C. (1995) Resettling the Displaced: Development Affected People and Refugees, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. MCGREGOR, J. (1993) Refugees and the Environment, in: Black, R. and R. Vaugham (eds) Geography and Refugees - Patterns and Processes of Change, Belhaven Press, London. MCGREGOR, J., B. HARRELL-BOND and B. MAZUR (1991) Mozambicans in Swaziland: Livelihood and Integration, Report to World Food Programme and EEC, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. MCKAY, K. L. and D. GOW (eds) (1990) Enhancing the Effectiveness of Governmental and Non-Governmental Partnership in Natural Resources Management, Energy/Development International, Washington. MEARS, C. and CHOWDHURY, S. (1994) Health Care for Refugees and Displaced People, OXFAM, Oxford. MICUTA, W. (1985) Improved Stoves for All , Intermediate Technology Publications, London and Bellerive Foundation, Geneva. MORGAN, P. (1989) Rural Water Supplies and Sanitation, Blair Research Institute Harare, Macmillan, London. MUCHIRI, L. and M. OWENS (1994) Energy Conservation in Refugee Camps in
Burundi, Report for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Bellerive Foundation, Nairobi. MUKHERJEE, N. (1993) Participatory Rural Appraisal : Methodology and Applications, Concept Publisher, New Delhi. MUNSLOW, B. with Y. KATERERE, A. FERF and P. O'KEEFE (1988) The Fuelwood Trap - A Study of the SADCC Region, Earthscan Publications, London. MUSSE, F. (1994) Women Victims of Violence - Rape in Kenya's Refugee Camps, Refugee Participation Network No. 16, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. MUTAMBUKI, K. (1995) Refugee Women and the Environment: Continued Marginai ization, unpublished paper, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford.
Refugees & Host Environments
116
Thomas Hoerz
MYERS, N. (1993) Environmental Refugees in a Globally Warmed World, BioScience Vol. 43 No.11. NAIR, P. K. R. (1993) An Introduction to Agroforestry, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht and ICRAF, Nairobi. NAIR, P. K. R. (ed) (1994) Agroforestry Systems in the Tropics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht and ICRAF, Nairobi. NEEDHAM,R. (1994) Refugee Participation, Refugee Participation Network No. 17, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. NEEFJES, K. (1993) Participatory Environmental Assessment and Planning for Development, Oxfam, Oxford. NEEFJES, K. (1995) Personal Communication, Oxford. NEMBRINI, P. G. and Y. ETIENNE (n.d.) Water, Sanitation and the Environment in Conflict Situations, Comite International de la Croix-Rouge, Geneva. NIAMIR, M. (1990) Herders' Decision Making in Natural Resources Management in Arid and Semi-Arid Africa, FAO, Rome. NURSE, M. C., A. G. BARTLETT, H. B. SINGH and M. NEOPANE (1992) Operation Guidelines for Establishing Nurseries and Plantations through User Groups, Nepal - Australia Forestry Project, Kathmandu. NYSTROM,M. (1988) Kitchen and Stove, Lund University, Lund. 0'CONNELL, H. (ed) (1993) Women and Conflict, Oxfam, Oxford. OAU (1993) 23"' Ordinary Session of the OAU Coordinating Committee on Assistance to Refugees in Africa, Addis Ababa and Arusha. ODA (1992) Manual of Environmental Appraisal. ODA, London. ORNAS, A. H. af (1990) Pastoral and Environmental Security in East Africa , Disasters Vol. 14 No. 2. OSTROM E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. OXFAM (1995) The OXFAM Handbook of Development and Relief Vol 1-3, Oxford. PEARCE, D. W. and R. K. TURNER (eds) (1990) Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment, Harvester Weatsheaf, London. PEKNY, W. and F. MARTONE (1993) Protecting Environment is Protecting People, Greenpeace Discussion Paper to the UN Conference on Human Rights, Vienna, June 1993. PERCIVAL, V. and T. HOMER-DIXON (1995) Environmental Scarcity and Violent Conflict, University of Toronto, Toronto. PRESTON, R. (1995) Is there a Refugee-Specific Education? The Courier No. 150 3./4. 1995. RAKOTOMALALA, C. (1990) Malawi: Rapid Assessment of the Sanitation Sector in Mozambican Refugee Camps, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. RAKOTOMALALA, C. and S. MALE (1993) Ghana - Health, Nutrition and Environmental Sanitation Sectors, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. RAPPORT (1991) Special Edition on the Environment, UNHCR/PTSS, Geneva. REARDON, G. (ed) (1993) Women and the Environment, Oxfam, Oxford. REFUGEES (1995) Special Edition on Refugee Women, No. 100, 11- 1995, UNHCR, Geneva. RODDA, A. (1991) Women and the Environment, Zed Books, London.
Refugees & Host Environments
117
Thomas Hoerz
ROGGE, J. R. (ed) (1987) Refugees - A Third World Dilemma, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa. ROLFE, C., C. ROLFE and M. HARPER (1987) Refugee Enterprise: It Can Be Done, Intermediate Technology Publications, London. ROSS, B. (1995) Personal Communication, Oxford. RPG (1991) A Selected Bibliography on Refugee Health, Refugee Policy Group, Washington DC. RPN (1994) Partnership - Issues of Coordination and Participation, Refugee Participation Network No. 17, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. RPN (1995a) Burning Issues [Special Edition on Refugees and Environment] Refugee Participation Network No. 18, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. RPN (1995b) NGOs and Host Governments - Who's Overstepping the Mark? Refugee Participation Network No. 19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. SCHELHAS, B. (1986) Ukwimi Agricultural Settlement: Assessment and Recommendations for the Settlement of Mozambican Refugees, Report to UNHCR, Lusaka. SCHNEIDER, H. (ed) (1993) Environmental Education - an Approach to Sustainable Development, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris. SCOONES, I. (1988) Sustainable Pastoralism in Africa, Annotated Bibl iography, International Institute for Environment and Development, London. SCOONES, I., M. MELNYK and J. N. PRETTY (1992) The Hidden Harvest: Wild Foods and Agricultura l Systems, Annotated Bibliography, International Institute for Environment and Development, London. SEPP, C. (1984) Fuelwood Conserving Stoves in Refugee Camps in Pakistan, GTZ, Eschborn. SHEPHERD, G. (1992) Managing Africa 's Tropical Dry Forests - a Review of Methods, Overseas Development Institute, London. Indigenous SHIVA, V. (1989) Staying Alive - Women, Ecology and Development, Zed Books, London. SHIVA, V. (ed) (1994) C/ose o t Home - Women Reconnect Ecology, Health and Development, Earthscan Publications, London. SIMMANCE, A. J. F. (1987) The Impact of Large-Scale Refugee Movements and the Role of UNHCR, in Rogge, J. R. (ed) (1987) Refugees - A third World Dilemma, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa. SIMMONDS, S., P. VAUGHAM and W. GUNN (eds) (1983) Refugee Community Health Care, Oxford University Press, Oxford. SIMS, J. (1994) Women Health and Environment, WHO , Geneva. SMAWFIELD, D. (1994) Vocational Training Handbook - A Practical Guide to the Planning and Implementation of Vocational Training Programmes with Refugees in a Developing country Context, Norwegian Refugee Council, Oslo. SMYKE, P. (1991) Women and Health, Zed Books, London. SONTHEIMER, S. (ed) (1991) Women and the Environment: Crisis and Development in the Third World, Earthscan Publications, London. SPARROW, A. (1993) Indigenous Woodland Resources: Chambuta Refugee Camp, Zimbabwe. SP1TTELER, M. (1993) Balancing Woodland Resource Use Needs with Environmental Needs - A Case Study of Ukwimi Refugee Settlement, Zambia, unpublished paper, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford.
Refugees & Host Environments
118
Thomas Hoerz
STAHL, M. (1990) Environmental Degradation and Political Constraints in Ethiopia, Disasters, Vol.14 No.2. STEVENS, Y. (1993) UNHCR and Environmental Issues, paper presented to the conference 'Refugees and Environmental Change', King's College, London, UNHCR/PTSS, Geneva. STEWART, B. (1987) Improved Wood, Waste and Charcoal Burning Stoves, Intermediate Technology Publications, London. SULIMAN, M. (1992) Civil War in Sudan - The Impact of Ecological Degradation, Centre for Security Studies and Conflict Research, Zurich and Swiss Peace Foundation, Bern. TALBOT, C. (1995) Environmental Education Mission to Kenya, UNHCR, Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs, Geneva. THIADENS, R., H. WITTRIN, H. KETEL and S. MALIK (1995) Rational Energy Supply, Conservation, Utilization and Education (RESCUE) Project in Refugee Hosting Areas of Kenya, Joint UNHCR/BMZ/GoK mid-term review, UNHCR/PTSS, Geneva. THOMSON, M. C. (1995) Disease Prevention Through Vector Control - Guidelines for Relief Organisations, OXFAM, Oxford. TROLLDALEN, J. M., N. M. BIRKELAND, J. BORGEN, P. T. SCOTT (1992) Environmental Refugees - A Discussion Paper. World Foundation for Environment Development, Oslo. UFA GROUP (1988) A Study of Maize Milling and Distribution to Mozambican Refugees in Malawi in Eight Affected Districts, Save the Children Fund Malawi. UNCHS/UNEP (1994) Human Settlements and Environment Strategies for Action in the Continuum from Relief to Development, International Workshop Proceedings, UNCHS/UNEP, Nairobi. UNCHS (1987) Refugee Women and Shelter under UNHCR Assistance Programmes, UNCHS, JUNIC/NGO Programme Group for Women , Paris. UNDP (1990) Refugees and Displaced Persons - Present and Future Role of the UNDP in the Field of Refugee Aid and Development, UNDP, Geneva. UNDRO/UNDP (1990) Shelter after Disaster: Guidelines for Assistance, UNDRO, New York. UNESCO (1985) Living in the Environment: A Sourcebook for Environmental Education, UNESCO, Paris. UNESCO (1986) Procedures for Developing an Environmental Education Curriculum, UNESCO, Paris. UNESCO (1988) International Strategy for Action in the Field of Environmental Education and Training in the 1990s, UNESCO, Paris. UNESCO (1989) International Directory of Institutions Active in the Field of Environmental Education - Revised and Enlarged Edition, UNESCO, Paris. UNFPA (1991) Population, Resources and the Environment, United Nations Population Fund, London. UNHCR (n.d.a) EM3: Emergency Needs and Resource Assessment, UNHCR, Geneva. UNHCR (n.d.b) Briefing Notes on Inter n ational Aid to Nepal for the Care and Maintenance ofBhutanese Refugees and Asylum Seekers and for Environmental Protection and Rehabilitation of Refugee-Affected Areas, UNHCR, Katmandu. UNHCR (1982) UNHCR Handbook for Emergencies, Geneva.
Refugees & Host Environments
119
Thomas Hoerz
UNHCR (1989) Guidelines for Environmental Health Services for Afghan Refugees in Pakistan, Geneva. UNHCR (1992a) Water Manual for Refugee Situations, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. UNHCR (1992b) Refugees and the Environment, Refugees No. 89, Special Feature, UNHCR, Geneva. UNHCR (1993) First International Workshop on Improved Shelter Response and Environment for Refugees, Summary of Proceedings, UNHCR, Geneva. UNHCR (1994a) Interim Guidelines for Environment-Sensitive Management of Refugee Programmes, UNHCR, Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs, Geneva. UNHCR (1994b) Manual for Environmental Surveys and Studies, UNHCR, Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs , Geneva. UNHCR (1995) UNHCR & NGOs - Directory of Non-Governmental Organizations, UNHCR, Geneva. UNICEF (1986) Assisting in Emergencies: A Resource Handbook for Field Staff, UNICEF, New York. UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (n.d.) Assessment Report of the Impact of Refugees on the Local Communities in Kagera and Kigoma Regions, Office of the Prime Minister and First Vice President, Dar-es-Salaam. UNRUH, J. D. (1993) Refugee Settlement in the Horn of Africa: the Integration of Host and Refugee Land Use Patterns, Land Use Policy / January. UNRWA (1993) Annual Report, Department of Health, UNRWA, Vienna. USCR (1995) World Refugee Survey 1995, U. S. Committee for Refugees, Washington DC. USINGER, J. (1988) Modification of Clay Heating Stoves in the Domestic Energy Saving Project in Peshawar / Pakistan, GTZ, Eschborn. USINGER, J. (1995) Personal communication, Eschborn. UTTING, P. (1993) Trees, People and Power - Social Dimensions of Deforestation and Forest Protection in Central America, Earthscan Publications, London. VERHOEVEN, N. A. (1989) Kerosene Stoves and Single Wick Fuel Burning Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven. WAHNING, S. (1991) Technical Follow-Up Mission for the Planning of Ifo and Walde Camps for Somali and Ethiopian Refugees, UNHCR/PTSS*, Geneva. WALDRON, S. and N. HASCI (1995) Soma// Refugees in the Horn of Africa - a State of the Art Literature Review, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet , Uppsala. WALKER, B. (ed) (1994) Women and Emergencies, Oxfam, Oxford. WEBER, F. R. (1986) Reforestation in Arid Lands, VITA, Arlington. WHO (1992) Indoor Air Pollution from Biomass Fuel, World Health Organisation, Geneva. WIJBRANDI, J. B. (1986) Organized and Spontaneous Settlement in Eastern Sudan: Two Case Studies on Integration of Rural Refugees, Free University, Amsterdam . WILLIAMS, S., J. SEED and A. MWAU (1994) The OXFAM Gender Training Manual, OXFAM, Oxford. WILSON, K., F. SHUMBA and D. CAMMACK (1989) Food Provisioning amongst Mozambican Refugees in Malawi, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. WINPENNY, J. T. (1991) V alues for the Environment - A Guide to Economic Appraisal, Overseas Development Institute, London.
Refugees & Host Environments
120
Thomas Hoerz
WOODROW, P. J. (1989a) Kordofan Agroforestry Extension Project, in Anderson, M. B. and P. J. Woodrow (eds) (1989) Rising from the Ashes - Development Strategies in Times of Disaster, UNESCO, Paris and Westview Press, Boulder WOODROW, P. J. (1989b) Qua/a en Nahal Refugee Settlement Proj ect Eastern Sudan, in Anderson, M. B. and P. J. Woodrow (eds) (1989) Rising from the Ashes Development Strategies in Times of Disaster, UNESCO, Paris and Westview Press, Boulder WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE, IIED, IUCN (1993) 1993 Directory of Country Environmental Studies: An Annotated Bibliography of Environmental and Natural Resources, Profiles and Assessments. ZETTER, R. (1995a) Enhancing the Capacity of Local NGOs in Refugee Assistance: Experience from Malawi and Zimbabwe, Refugee Participation Network No.19, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford. ZETTER, R. (1995b) Shelter Provision and Settlement Policies for Refugees, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet , Uppsala. ZIEROTH, G. (1988) Fuel Supply for Displaced Persons in Malawi, Report to World Bank and Office of the President, Malawi, Frankfurt .
Note:
UNHCR/PTSS reports are restricted in circulation and cannot be obtained from UNHCR, Geneva.
Most of the listed references, including the UNHCR/PTSS reports are lodged in the Documentation Centre, Refugee Studies Programme, Oxford.
Refugees & Host Environments
121
Thomas Hoerz