From Responsibility to Response: Assessing National - Brookings

the government of Afghanistan undertake the comprehensive
national assessment and profiling of IDPs.
On the basis of the RSG’s recommendation, UNHCR,
under the auspices of the National IDP Task Force and
in close cooperation with the Ministry of Refugees and
Repatriation, profiled IDPs based on surveys that had
been undertaken, in particular those by UNHCR offices
in the field, by provincial Departments of Refugees
and Repatriation, and by the UN Assistance Mission
in Afghanistan (UNAMA). The MoRR endorsed
the report, entitled the National Profile on Internally
Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Afghanistan, in November
2008. The profile identified the number of IDPs,
cause of displacement, location of displacement and
assessed protection and assistance needs. The report
did not profile IDPs displaced by recent droughts or
“battle-affected” IDPs displaced by fighting between
the National Army and antigovernment groups. 32
However, given the challenges described above, the
figures in the profile are not fully comprehensive and
accurate.
While not a focus of the research, it is worth noting that
civil society groups often play an important role in the
collection of data on IDPs—and often discrepancies
exist between their data and the data of national authorities.
For example, as noted above, the Observatory on
Human Rights and Displacement in Colombia collects
data that are much broader in scope than those of the
government as it includes those displaced by government
counterinsurgency operations and anti-narcotic
crop fumigations and uses a different temporal cut-off
point than the government. In the case of Myanmar,
civil society organizations have collected and reported
data on conflict-induced IDPs annually since 2002. The
32 OHCHR, “UN Expert Concerned about Growing Problem
of Internal Displacement in Afghanistan,” 20 August 2007;
UNHCR, “Joint Press Release: Ministry of Refugees and
Repatriation and UNHCR, First National IDP Report
Reveals Complex Challenges for IDPs,” 15 December
2008 (www.unhcr.org/49b8e91c2.html); UNHCR,
National Profile on Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in
Afghanistan, December 2008 (www.unhcr.org/49ba33a02.
html).
Benchmark 3 Data Collection on Internally Displaced Persons
51
figures on IDPs reported by Kenyan NGOs are different
from those of the government. 33
Conclusion
It is interesting that most governments seem to rely on
international actors to collect data on internal displacement,
or perhaps it is just that international data are
more likely to be publicly available than data collected
by national governments. Generally speaking, in all of
the countries surveyed, the lack of accurate figures on
IDPs outside of camps and of data on returns—especially
on the conditions of IDPs upon return—and multiple
displacement is also striking.
As this analysis shows, most governments recognize the
importance of collecting data on IDPs, even when they
are not in a position to do so themselves. IDPs have
benefited from the efforts of international actors to work
with governments to collect and report data to inform
protection and assistance responses. In some cases,
civil society actors have contributed to data collection
efforts. However, in all of the countries surveyed, challenges
to data collection and reporting abound, including
lack of resources and capacity, insecurity inhibiting
access to displaced populations, discrimination, the
politicization of IDP data reporting, fear of registering
on the part of IDPs and differences in the definitions “
IDP” that often are more restrictive than the definition
in the Guiding Principles—for instance, the definition
may include only conflict-induced IDPs and sometimes
only certain groups of such IDPs. Despite these and
other challenges, data collection seems to be an area
in which governments should be able to fulfill their
responsibilities through cooperation with international
and civil society actors.
33 See further, Kenya case study in chapter 2 of this volume.